Loading...
6/27/1988iso MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA June 27, 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order at the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, by Mayor Murdock on Monday, June 27, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: PRESENTATION Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh, Mayor Murdock Councilman Pernell (excused) Councilwoman Swanson (arrived at 7:37 p.m.) Terrence L. Belanger Larry Courtright Betty Volkert Stuart Axelrod Capt. Dennis Gillard Michael Smith Ann Johnson Anne La Jeunesse Doreen Heater Jeffrey .Klain Scott Probst SCE INFORMATION PRESENTATION, City Manager City Treasurer Deputy City Clerk BFI District Manager Sheriff's Lomita Stn. Southern Calif. Edison Los Angeles Times Palos Verdes News Resident Resident Resident Mr. Mike Smith made a presentation to the City Council regarding two issues: (1) the Edison Company's concern regarding the dry weather and fire hazard areas; and, (2) the restructuring of electrical rates. With regard to the fire hazard issue, Mr. Smith informed the Council that the Edison Company is maintaining constant tree trimming activities and has hired a contractor to perform brush clearing in a ten (10) foot radius around the base of power poles in high fire hazard areas, in an effort to lessen the potential for a fire hazard caused by an electrical situation. Regarding the restructuring of electrical rates, Mr. Smith presented to the Council, using visual aids, the reasons for the restructuring of the rates and the related impacts. Mr. Smith explained that the reason the rates were restructured was to return to a cost based pricing system for all customer categories. The results of the rate restructuring was a slight increase in rates for residential customers and no increase or a slight decrease for commercial and industrial customers. The reason for this was to encourage commercial customers to remain with the Southern California Edison Company instead of seeking another energy supplier, since the commercial and industrial customers provide the majority of the revenues. In addition, the cost to serve residential customers is significantly greater than to serve commercial and industrial customers. Councilwoman Swanson asked Mr. Smith if the Edison Company has considered the conservation measure of using peak period pricing. Mr. Smith stated that the rates are time based rates, such that a customer pays a significantly higher price during on -peak hours. A number of industrial and commercial customers are moving more of their energy requirements into the mid -peak and off-peak hours. Mr. Smith explained that, currently, residential customers do not get a price break for using energy during off-peak hours. However, off-peak hour rates for residential customers are scheduled to become effective in the next two to-ahree months. Councilwoman Swanson suggested that a public information program be undertaken to make residents aware of the time periods during which energy can be used at a lesser cost, and asked that the cities be informed when this becomes effective so that they can also inform their residents. CONSENT CALENDAR' The City Manager advised the Council that the minutes of the regular City Council meeting on June 13, 1988, should be amended to read as follows: On page 1, under "ALSO PRESENT", Steve Axelrod should be changed to Stuart Axelrod. On page 3, under "ZONING CASE NO. 35311, the last sentence of the first paragraph should read "At the last City Council meetinq a field trip ..." 00 Councilwoman Swanson moved that the Consent Calendar be approved, subject to the above corrections. Councilman Heinsheimer seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. (n APPROVAL OF MINUTES Q The minutes of an adjourned meeting of the City Council held on June 7, 1988, were approved and accepted as written. The minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council held on June 13, 1988, were approved and accepted as amended. PAYMENT OF BILLS Demands Nos. 2955 through 2978, in the amount of $23,777.26, were approved for payment from the General Fund. Demand No. 2954 was voided. FINANCIAL STATEMENT The Financial Statement for the month of May, 1988, was accepted as presented. OLD BUSINESS RESOLUTION NO. 576: RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ZONING CASE NO. 353 The City Manager explained that Resolution No. 576 is a resolution memorializing the Council's action at their June 13, 1988, meeting, at which the Council voted to deny Zoning Case No. 353, a request for a variance for encroachment into the front yard to allow for the construction of a garage, porte-couchere, and a retaining wall, which would have provided for the expansion of the driveway area. The resolution before the Council reflects the findings and action of the City Council at their meeting on June 13, 1988. The City Manager indicated a couple of minor changes to the resolution, as follows: Section 6, sub -paragraph 1, the fourth line should read "a paddle tennis court ..." Section 6, sub -paragraph 2, the last sentence should read "The plan also entails construction of a new circular driveway, with a retaining wall which will extend 49 feet into the rectuired front vard; Section 6, sub -paragraph 3, the eleventh line should read "residence with attached garage, a paddle tennis court and ..." The City Manager informed the City Council that the applicant, Mr. Probst, has requested an 'opportunity to address the Council before they take action on the resolution. - 2 - 162 Mr. Probst addressed the Council, and expressed his feeling that at the last City Council meeting the Council focused their attention primarily on the garage. Mr. Probst wished to address a component of the plan, the retaining wall, which would permit circular and turn -around access on the property. He asked if it would be possible to consider the retaining wall separately, and if it could be approved as a separate item. Mr. Probst also remarked that the retaining wall would actually encroach approximately 36 feet instead of the 49 feet as stated by staff. Some members of the City Council had concerns regarding the procedural issues, and asked the advice of the City Manager. The City Manager explained that in actuality, the Council took their final action on this matter at their last meeting and this resolution simply memorializes that action. If the Council so desires, they could postpone adopting the resolution until they receive an opinion from the City Attorney. Councilman Heinsheimer asked if the Council were to take final action would there be any restrictions or obstacles to an applicant submitting a considerably revised plan and beginning the process all over. The City Manager explained that, pursuant to the Municipal Code, an application substantially the same as one that has been denied is prevented from being considered again for a period of one year after denial. Councilman Heinsheimer asked who would make the determination as to whether or not a revised plan is substantially different from one previously acted upon, and the City Manager commented that that determination would best be left to staff. Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh expressed her concern that the Council might be trying to be too accommodating; that the applicant has continually been allowed to submit revised plans, which is not standard practice. Councilwoman Swanson commented that in the course of the Council's review, there has been no indication that any portion of the proposed plan would be acceptable. Usually, such an opinion would be expressed if that were indeed the case. Mr. Probst explained in more detail the possible revisions to the plan that he would like the City Council to consider. Councilwoman Swanson explained to Mr. Probst that variances are exceptions to the code and are granted only when hardship is demonstrated. In the opinion of Councilwoman Swanson, Mr. Probst has not demonstrated a true hardship. Mayor Murdock explained to Mr. Probst that the only course of action that the Council can take is to adopt the resolution or, if the Council so desires, get a ruling from the City Attorney as to when the City Council's action is final. Any consideration beyond that would be inappropriate. Councilman Heinsheimer remarked that staff had satisfactorily addressed his concerns regarding the options available to the applicant, proceduraly. It appears that the applicant can submit a new plan and if that plan is determined to be substantially different, can begin the process again immediately. Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh moved that Resolution No. 576, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A VARIANCE IN ZONING CASE 353" be adopted as corrected by staff, and that reading in full be waived. Councilwoman Swanson seconded the motion. The City Manager, after making some calculations, reported that the retaining wall would indeed encroach 49 feet, as previously stated. There were no objections, and the motion carried unanimously. - 3 - 163 OPEN AGENDA Mayor Murdock invited comments from the audience. The Mayor requested that comments be limited" --to five (5) minutes, and explained that any comments would be taken for information purposes only and that the Council would not and could not take action on any item not on the agenda. Mr. Jeffrey Klain, 1 Flying Mane Road, addressed the Council regarding a dog attack upon himself by a dog at 28 Eastfield Drive. This attack occurred on June 17, 1988. Mr. Klain flagged down a police officer, Officer Johnson, Employee Number 222024, of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, and reported the incident. Mr. Klain filed a formal report with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, Report Number 188-03380-1761-440, and subsequently sought medical treatment. Mr. Klain informed the Council that he has filed a case against the owners of the dog, Mr. and Mrs. Joel Hollingshead, with the Superior Court and Small Claims Court. During his investigations, Mr. Klain learned that there had been three previous attacks by and four complaints on the same dog. Consequently, Mr. co Klain feels that the City should consider a leash law before, possibly, a child is seriously injured or killed. Councilwoman Swanson requested that the City Manager contact the 7 Animal Control Office and the Sheriff's Department, and report back Co at the next meeting why this dog had not been quarantined and if the Q dog has been removed from the City. Mayor Murdock reported that the dog is no longer in the City. Councilwoman Swanson commented that this type of serious situation should not be allowed to happen more than twice without appropriate action taken. Councilman Heinsheimer noted that a petition had been received from Mr. Yu -Ping Liu, in support of a tennis court application at 39 Crest Road West. This petition was received by the City Council for the file. There being no further comments under "Open Agenda", the Council returned to the normal sequence of the Agenda outline. OLD BUSINESS ORDINANCE NO. 219: AN ORDINANCE REGULATING VIEWS AND PROVIDING FOR ABATEMENT OF VIEW IMPAIRMENTS Councilwoman Swanson moved that Ordinance No. 219 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS REGULATING VIEWS AND PROVIDING FOR ABATEMENT OF VIEW IMPAIRMENTS AND AMENDING THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE" be adopted and that reading in full be waived. Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS COUNCILWOMAN SWANSON ELECTED PRESIDENT OF RTD BOARD Mayor Murdock announced that Councilwoman Swanson has been elected President of the SCRTD Board of Directors. The Council extended their congratulations, and Mayor Murdock presented Councilwoman Swanson with a bouquet of flowers. ALLOCATION OF PROP A FUNDS The City Manager reviewed the various options, which were presented to the Council in a staff report. Councilwoman Swanson commented that, due to time constraints, she feels the best way to allocate these funds would be as follows: 1. Replace the three sets of bike racks at the entry gates. - 4 - RN 2. Give the balance of the FY 1988 Prop A monies to the City of Rolling Hills Estates so that the monies can be exchanged for FAU monies to be used for improvements to Palos Verdes Drive North. 3. Direct staff to begin preparations now for implementation of the City's participation, with its next appropriation of monies, in the graffiti clean-up program. Councilwoman Swanson moved that the Fiscal Year 1988 Prop A funds be allocated as specified in numbers 1 and 2 above. Councilman Heinsheimer seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. BFI AGREEMENT The City Manager reviewed the status of the BFI Agreement and the various options available to the City Council, as outlined in the staff report. The City Manager explained that the Council has before them two proposals: (1) a five year contract extension proposal which would commence on September 1, 1988, and run through August 31, 1993; and, (2) a two year contract extension which would commence September 1, 1988, and run through August 31, 1990. The rates that are proposed in the first two years of both proposals are similar. The advantage of the two year contract extension proposal would be that it allows the City Council some flexibility in terms of other alternatives in the future. Due to the fact that there is a great deal of uncertainty in the area of disposal sites throughout the County of Los Angeles with respect to the existence of the sites and alternatives to sanitary landfill, refuse disposal rates are somewhat uncertain. Both proposals reflect that uncertainty. Councilman Heinsheimer verified that Proposal 1 (the five year contract extension) is exactly the same structure that the City originally had, and that the Council's input had a very positive effect as demonstrated by the proposed rate increase being reduced from 19.5% to approximately 15.7%. Proposal 1 provides for a 5 year contract with guaranteed rates. If there are significant increases in external costs to the contractor, the contractor can then petition the City Council for a rate increase but the contractor does not have an automatic right of adjustment. If the contractor petitions for a rate increase and the City Council does not agree to any changes, the contractor is then locked into the 5 year rate schedule. This is exactly the goal that the Council is seeking. Mayor Murdock commented that, additionally, if the landfill price increase is less than 20%, the City has the option of negotiating with BFI for a reduction in rates reflective of the pro rata landfill price increase. Mr. Courtright asked if the rates for the third, fourth, and fifth year are absolutely guaranteed. The City Manager confirmed that the rates for the third, fourth, and fifth year are guaranteed. The only reason for petitioning the City for a rate increase would be if the landfill price increases exceed 30%, in which case the City would have the option of either granting or denying the petition for a rate increase. Councilman Heinsheimer pointed out that the issue before the Council at the present time is to decide on a proposal as a matter of policy and principle. Subsequently, a contract would be prepared pursuant to the terms of the proposal that is chosen. The City Manager said that, essentially, the only thing that is being proposed to be changed are those sections of the existing contract that relate to rates. In addition, a new section would be added to the contract related to recycling. No other portions of the contract would be changed. - 5 - 1 s�� Mr. Stuart Axelrod, the BFI Representative, confirmed that the City Council has an accurate.,.understanding of the terms of the proposals. ;. Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh asked if consideration had been given to a one-year extension of the contract, followed by a Request for Proposal. The City Manager explained that the Council actually has three options, as follows: (1) a 5 -year contract extension; (2) a 2 -year contract extension; and, (3) a 1 -year contract extension. However, it was staff's recommendation that either the 2 -year or the 5 -year proposal be selected, to allow time for evaluation of refuse service provided by other major companies. The City Treasurer, Mr. Larry Courtright, suggested that the City request whichever refuse company is selected to submit a balance sheet to assure that the company chosen is in good financial standing. Councilman Heinsheimer moved that a contract be prepared, pursuant to the terms of Proposal 1, the 5 -year contract extension. 00 Councilwoman Swanson seconded the motion. LO Councilwoman Swanson asked Mr. Axelrod if it is conceivable that BFI might request a rate increase due to costs for capital coimprovements. Mr. Axelrod stated that there is no provision in the Q contract proposals for consideration of capital improvement expenses. Costs for capital improvements would be strictly the responsibility of the refuse company. There being no further discussion, the motion passed by the following vote: AYES: Councilman Heinsheimer, Councilwoman Swanson Mayor Murdock NOES: Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh ABSENT: Councilman Pernell The Mayor indicated that a final contract would be forthcoming, pursuant to the terms of the 5 -year contract extension proposal. PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 BUDGET The City Manager reported that the City Council has before them the Fiscal Year 1988-89 budget. The City Council conducted a public hearing at their last meeting on June 13, 1988, and continued the public hearing to this meeting. The City Manager suggested one change to the proposed FY 1988-89 budget, that an additional $100.00 be allocated in the "Memberships" fund for administrative costs for the South Bay Cities Steering Committee. Mr. Courtright stated that the approval of the budget would be contingent upon the final year-end results and fund balances. Staff recommended that the City Council favorably consider the approval and adoption of the Fiscal Year 1988-89 Budget for the City of Rolling Hills. Councilman Heinsheimer moved that the FY 1988-89 Budget for the City of Rolling.Hills be adopted. Councilwoman Swanson seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. 166 MATTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ABSENCE DURING MONTH OF JULY Councilman Heinsheimer announced that he would be absent during the month of July. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION, Mayor Murdock reported that a work session was held with the Planning Commission prior to their last meeting. The following were in attendance: all five members of the Planning Commission; Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh; Mayor Murdock; Mr. Mike Jenkins, the City Attorney; and, the City Manager. Hopefully, some issues of concern were resolved. MATTERS FROM STAFF SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM ADVISORY ELECTION This matter is brought before the Council as a follow up to the series of discussions that the Council had earlier this spring. It was proposed, during the discussions last spring, that this matter be put on the ballot as an advisory vote. It was felt that the best date for an advisory election would be in November, 1988, since that will be a Presidential Election and should result in a large turnout. It was Councilman Heinsheimer's opinion that a city-wide election would not provide any additional information. It was the general feeling at their neighborhood meeting (the Johns Canyon area) that it might be better to select regional areas of the City to use as pilot programs and combine the installation of sanitary sewers with other public works projects that are also needed. This way small, neighborhood areas could be evaluated before a commitment is made to proceed with a city-wide project. On the other hand, Councilwoman Swanson pointed out that, although the majority of the comments received during the public hearings were negative, there were many comments made to her privately in support of the project. Some people are hesitant to speak in front of an audience and would feel less intimidated in the privacy of an election booth. Contrary to Councilman Heinsheimer, Councilwoman Swanson feels that an advisory election would provide a better evaluation of the general feelings of the residents. Councilman Heinsheimer remarked that if this matter is put on the ballot, a specific proposal needs to be presented to the residents, specifying the fee structure, etc., so that people know exactly what they are voting on and exactly how much it will cost them. Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh expressed her support of having a city-wide election, and feels that a specific proposal could be prepared from all the information that has been received from the consultants. Mayor Murdock verified with the City Manager that information packets would be mailed to all residents next week. The information packets will include a summary of the discussions regarding the preliminary alternative study which was done by ASL Consulting Engineers. That summary includes many questions and answers that relate to the installation of a sewer system as well as the care and maintenance of the current system. The packets will also include information related to the maintenance, repair, and construction of septic systems. A part of the information that will deal with the question of sanitary sewers will raise and highlight the issue of an advisory election, thereby allowing 2 or 3 weeks to receive feedback from the residents. - 7 - 1.6'7 Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that it might be more beneficial, and less costly,and�,,-time consuming to circulate another questionnaire rather than to hold an advisory election. He believes that the City Council would obtain more valuable information from a questionnaire, and there would be about the same response to a questionnaire as there would be turnout for an election. Since a decision as to whether or not to have an advisory election does not have to be made until the second City Council meeting in July, the Mayor suggested that the Council wait to see what kind of responses are received from the residents after they have received the information packets before deciding on whether or not an advisory election would be beneficial. Councilman Heinsheimer reiterated his opinion that if it is decided to hold an advisory election the voters should know exactly what the fiscal impact will be to them directly, should the City decide to proceed with the installation of a sanitary sewer system. co Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that, once the information packets have been received by the residents, this issue be put on the City Council agenda and that residents be encouraged to attend the meeting to discuss this matter. Mayor Murdock also suggested that an 7 article be published in the newsletter as well. m Q CITY ATTORNEY ON VACATION The City Manager reported that Mr. Mike Jenkins has informed him that he will be on vacation through July 12. Therefore, another attorney from that law firm will be at the first City Council meeting in July, if the agenda warrants it. CLOSED SESSION A closed session was not necessary. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Murdock adjourned the City Council meeting at 9:21 p.m. APPROVED: Mayor City Clerk /j