CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 12, 2002
A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Council on the advice of its legal counsel, based on the below described existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City.
Anticipated Litigation
á One case
Conference with Labor Negotiator
City Negotiator: City Manager Hendrickson
Position: All full-time positions other than City Manager
City Negotiator: City Attorney Colantuono
Position: City Manager Hendrickson
OPENING CEREMONIES
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Millsap called a regular meeting of the La Habra Heights City Council to order on December 12, 2002. She noted that the Council has just returned from a Closed Session and asked City Attorney Colantuono to report.
The City Attorney stated that the City Council took no action on any of the items in Closed Session that requires a report.
Mayor Millsap opened the City Council meeting at 7:30 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
Members present were Mayor Millsap, Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe, Councilmembers Carroll, Engelhardt and Klein. Also present were City Attorney Colantuono, City Manager Hendrickson, Senior Management Analyst Orchanian, Planning Director Brady, Deputy City Engineer Lang, Fire Chief Nielsen, Sheriff Lieutenant Ault and Deputy Poling.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Stan Quade led the flag salute.
4. PRESENTATION
á Kathy Sauble, Emergency Preparedness Committee Chairperson to report on matters pertaining to the CommunityŐs health and welfare.
Kathy Sauble reported on the County wide drill which occurred in November with City participation. Most participants thought that the City should have more than one drill per year. They thought it was good to have the drill out in the field rather than just from a desk. It was decided that there should be a better power generator that covered more areas than just fire dispatch. More volunteers and resident firefighters are needed. Supplies need to be stockpiled. We need to update our purchase order agreements with local businesses. Seven days of food and water are needed for staffing. The notebook needs to be updated on emergency phone numbers and procedures. We need training within our community. She noted that Fire Chief Nielsen is willing to help train community teams for action in emergencies.
David Wilkin stated that he was here to recruit for the Volunteers on Patrol (VOP). March 4, 2002 will be the next Academy for VOP training.
Stan Quade, Encanada, asked the status of the canyon fly study.
The City Manager stated that the study would begin again in April.
Mr. Quade stated that he has measured the lane width in different places on Hacienda Road. He is concerned with the money we have spent on studies and the conclusion to make the lanes 11 feet wide when a lot of the curves are around 10.5 feet and in some areas the lane width is 11.5 feet wide. His opinion was that we should spend some of the Maintenance District funds to repair Solejar. He also thought weed spray should be used along Hacienda Road where asphalt had been dumped. He mentioned that people were using the back of the Park as a dump. Mr. Quade noted that the City does not take care of their property as they require residents to take care of theirs.
Norm Zezula, La Habra Heights resident, spoke about the responsibility the editors of ŇViewpointÓ have for the opinions from anonymous letters they print. He concluded that such radical and angry views can eventually divide the City and fill it with hatred.
5. APPROVAL OF WARRANTS – NOVEMBER, 2002
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to approve the November Warrants in the amount of $192,146.111. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Engelhardt and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. TREASURERS REPORT – NOVEMBER, 2002
The TreasurerŐs Report consisted of:
á Schedule of Cash & Investments
á Schedule of LAIF Investments
á Cash With Fiscal Agent – Bank of New York
á Payments to RKA Civil Engineers /Emergency Fund – Petty Cash
á Payments to City Attorney
á Major Planning Projects
á Balance Sheet
á Monthly & Year-to-Date Revenues Compared to Annual Budget
á Monthly & Year-to-Date Expenses Compared to Annual Budget
Councilmember Engelhardt offered a motion to receive and file. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Klein and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
STANDARD MOTIONS
7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of a Regular City Council Meeting of April 12, 2001 and a Special City Council Meeting of September 19, 2001
Councilmember Klein offered a motion to approve the minutes of both City Council Meetings as presented. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Engelhardt and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
8. It is recommended that items 8a through 8d be acted upon simultaneously by one motion of the City Council unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by a Councilmember or a member of the audience.
City Attorney Colantuono asked that 8.d be pulled from consideration as they will bring this back with more information.
8.a CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COMMITTEE
Consideration of application received on November 14, 2002, from Georgia Drakos to serve on the CityŐs Emergency Preparedness Committee.
8.b HEIGHTS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PROJECT
Status report for the Heights Christian School.
8.c AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 248-U AND 249-U
First reading of an Ordinance to repeal Urgency Ordinances Nos. 248-U and 249-U pertaining to updating and adopting current versions of the Building and Fire Codes.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to approve items 8.a, 8.b, and 8.c. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Klein and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PULLED ITEM:
8.d TAX SHARING RESOLUTION TO ANNEX DEVELOPMENT INTO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 18
9. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS AMENDING ARTICLE V OF THE LA HABRA HEIGHTS MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH SEWER SERVICE FEES
Second reading of an Ordinance regarding sewer services and the fees to be charged for 17 (seventeen) parcels within the Reserve Specific Plan subdivision.
Mayor Millsap opened the Public Hearing.
Mayor Millsap asked the City Manager if the notices have been posted as required.
City Manager Hendrickson answered in the affirmative.
The City Manager gave the staff report on item 9 (nine). He reported that the City received the bill for sewer service from La Habra and the Orange County Sanitation District. He stated that in 1997 the City had entered into an agreement with La Habra and the Orange County Sanitation District to pay for sewer services for this Tract. At the same time we entered into an agreement with the developer represented by the Association of that Tract called the Reserve, that we would bill the residents and then they would pay us and we would pay La Habra and the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The Attorney informed me that we did not have an Ordinance passed at that time establishing the means by which we needed to implement the collection. This Ordinance covers only the 17 parcels in the Reserve tract. The costs of the service can be changed by La Habra or OCSD. We might object to this, but the agreement does not say we can ignore the charges. This Ordinance establishes our ability to collect from the residents in the Reserve for the service they receive. We have been billed for three back years of sewer fees. We have the right to bill the individuals, if they donŐt pay we can bill the Association and they can pay us and bill the individuals. If this does not happen then we can place the charge on their property tax. The City of La Habra Heights does receive a bill from the County of Los Angeles for the maintenance of the trunk line in La Habra Heights.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked for clarification that the City did not force the residents into having the sewer line. This is to make sure the sewer fees are paid as understood from the beginning.
City Attorney Colantuono stated that when the development was approved, the developer asked the City to facilitate sewer service to the tract to make the development possible. The City agreed to do so and that we be held Ňharmless as to costÓ. Mr. Colantuono explained that the purchasers of these homes would have had notice of this through their CC & RŐs.
Councilmember Engelhardt felt that Ordinance 5211 should have a more specific language for who is covered by the CityŐs wastewater collection system.
The City Attorney stated that he would provide the proper language for this.
Alfonso Nahara, representing the Homeowners Association at the Reserve, explained that the Homeowners Association and their lawyer have not had time to discuss this since they received their bill. He requested that this be postponed until the next City Council meeting. There will be several questions, such as some of the residents have been there since the beginning and some have moved in only about two months ago, so there will be questions as to who owes how much. He stated that none that he had discussed this with were aware of this fee. He explained that his next Homeowners Association meeting was on January 15, 2003.
Mayor Millsap stated that the Homeowners Association meeting was after the next City Council meeting.
The City Manager explained that the breakdown of the billing given to the Association does take into consideration who owned the property at the time the billing was due and does coordinate with the agreements we have.
City Attorney Colantuono told the City Council that they have a choice to grant the continuance, not grant the request and move forward or move forward this evening and make it clear to the residents of the Reserve that if they have a concern about the bill, a mistake in our accounting or there is a basis to believe they did not know about the bill, we will take that into account. He stated that they will find that the bills are due and owing.
Councilmember Carroll asked Mr. Nahara if the Homeowners Association could have a special meeting before the City CouncilŐs next regular meeting if the Council postponed action until then.
Mr. Nahara answered that the Homeowners Association could have a special meeting to seek counsel on this matter before the next City Council meeting.
Mayor Millsap closed the Public Hearing.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to continue this item until January 9, 2003 at the next City Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Klein and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS ESTABLISHING RELEASE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES FOR THE RELEASE OF PROPERLY REMOVED-IMPOUNDED STORED VEHICLES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 97-01
A Resolution to consider the increase of the CityŐs fees for impounded vehicles.
Mayor Millsap opened the Public Hearing.
Mayor Millsap asked the City Manager if the notices have been posted.
The City Manager answered in the affirmative.
Nobody in the audience wished to speak on this item.
City Manager Hendrickson reported that at the previous City Council meeting he had recommended a dual fee system. It was pointed out to him by the SheriffŐs Department that we already bill for the officers time on DUI arrests. To add that time to an impound fee would mean a double-billing for the officers time. With further review of the per hour charge from the County, he had agreed with the County figure of $87.10 per hour. The SheriffŐŐs Department estimated that per impound incident it took 125 minutes and this came to approximately $180 per incident.
Councilmember Klein asked why we were lowering this amount from what we had decided before.
The City Manager explained that we can only add on the cost recovery and we are already charging the person at his arrest for the time cost. If we donŐt get paid, we turn it over to our Attorney.
The City Attorney explained that the impound fee needs to be a measure of the cost actually incurred to impound the vehicle. It cannot cover other services. The DUI response fee is based on a statute that authorizes us to recover the cost of emergency response to those whose conduct requires it.
The City Manager noted that it had been recommended to him today that they accept only cash as payment, not checks.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked why this fee does not apply to stolen vehicles or vehicles disabled by a traffic accident.
Sheriff Lieutenant Ault explained that it probably has to do with a vehicle code. When we store a vehicle that has been stolen or in an accident, the owners are the victim and we do not want to penalize them when already a victim. They have to pay a fee to the tow company, but not a City fee. The Sheriff pays for the time involved in this case.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked if the vehicle abandoned on a highway mentioned in the Resolution, covers all of our streets.
The City Attorney answered in the affirmative.
Mayor Millsap closed the Public Hearing.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to adopt the Resolution setting the new impound fee for all vehicles at $180. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Klein and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
OLD BUSINESS
11. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS
Consideration to enter into an agreement with Purkiss Rose – RSI to provide landscape architectural services on an as-needed basis. (This item is continued from the September 12, 2002 Council meeting.)
The City Manager reported that the item was continued for two reasons; 1. There was some concern as to the need for these services and, 2. Whether or not we had gone through the appropriate process to seek architectural services. Mr. Hendrickson stated that he had reviewed the second part and found that the process had been properly handled. As to whether the services are needed he stated that he would leave that to the City Council to debate, as there was a difference of opinion. He explained that he had promised Councilmember Borrowe that he would bring this item back so that this Council could make a decision as to whether this service was needed. He referred this to the Planning Director for comment.
Planning Director Brady stated that Jim Pickel of Purkiss Rose-RSI, is here to answer any questions.
Councilmember Klein stated that he still did not see why it was necessary to hire a landscape architectural service.
The City Manager explained that the Planning Commission had asked for information that was beyond the Planning DirectorŐs expertise when they were reviewing development plans that came before the Commission. The Planning Commission directed that this be looked into and brought before the City Council for approval.
Councilmember Klein asked how often this service would be needed and what is going to be the requirement for needing the service.
Planning Director Brady explained that a landscape plan was needed for all new development and remodels for 1,000 square feet or more. There are certain remodel situations that do not require a landscape plan.
Councilmember Klein asked if there had recently been a change in the Ordinance.
The Planning Director answered in the negative. She stated that the Landscape Architect is needed to review the landscape plan submitted to make sure it will be planted in conformance. She also noted that the City is located in Zone 23 of the Sunset Landscape book and that Zone 23 was not in our Ordinance.
Councilmember Klein expressed his disapproval that we are now telling applicants what they must plant for their landscape plan. He stated that he felt we were going beyond our Ordinances. This requires an additional cost for the applicant also.
Planning Director Brady explained that the Ordinance states that the Landscape Plan is to be reviewed by the Planning Director and due to her lack of expertise in this area she can not approve the plans for the landscaping in the proper manner.
Councilmember Carroll agreed with Councilmember Klein and read excerpts from Ordinance 9206.9. He stated that the Ordinance is very general and vague. This makes it hard to even known what to check. He stated that the Ordinance needs to be tightened up so the applicant knows what is required.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe spoke in favor of the requirement for the Landscape Architect review.
The Council discussed how long an applicant is required to maintain the planting.
Councilmember Klein stated that if the Council wanted more requirements then they should rewrite the Ordinance. At the present time there is a broad Ordinance.
City Attorney Colantuono explained that one issue before the Council is that if you are discontent with your land use policies regarding landscaping, when and how do you wish to change those policies. The second item is, to the extent that you have landscaping policies now, does your staff and Commission require technical assistance to implement them appropriately.
Commissioner Blagden, Planning Commission member, explained that the current tree preservation ordinance does say that you need to keep your trees watered or else it becomes a defacto tree removal. Mr. Blagden agreed that the Ordinance does need to be fixed as it is now open to different interpretations. He explained that the Ordinance is workable now if we have the Landscape Architect come in and look at the plan. Mr. Blagden stated that the Planning Commission after looking at the landscaping on completed houses found the Ordinance to be deficient. We really need a professional Landscape Architect.
Planning Director Brady explained that approved plans at present do meet the minimum requirements.
Mr. Blagden stated that in his opinion a Landscape Architect should be at a Planning Commission meeting to discuss what the Ordinance means and what the Commission is looking for.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that in the Ordinance the Planning Director is given to make the decisions, but according to the Planning Commission there is evidently a difference of opinion and that means the Planning Director has to make decisions as she has done by the book which is quite commonly used. If there is a question beyond this it leaves the Planning Director in a difficult situation.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe stated that if we get a Landscape Architect they will be able to help us with the Ordinance.
Councilmember Carroll asked Mr. Pickel If he had looked at the Ordinance.
Jim Pickel, representing Purkiss Rose-RSI, answered that he had not looked at this Ordinance before. He stated that from what he had heard from the reading of the Ordinance he would be looking at the overall context of the City, what the City looks like from the streets. Being a rural and hilly city, he would be more interested in how the houses blend in with the landscaping and how the landscaping around the homes blend in with the surrounding area. He stated that he would not be locked in to zone 23, but more interested in what is growing in some surrounding areas, as there are small differences in some of the canyons and hillsides here. Irrigation systems have to be considered also.
Councilmember Carroll asked Mr. Pickel how specific Yorba LindaŐs Ordinance is.
Mr. Pickel answered that it was a little more specific than La Habra Heights Ordinance but it gives the homeowner a little more freedom and liberty to plant what they would like. They do have to meet the compatibility of the neighborhood and area where they live.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe offered a motion to accept the proposal to have Purkiss Rose-RSI provide landscape architectural services on an as-needed basis.
Stan Quade, Encanada, commented that the City forces people to spend a lot of money that is not necessary. He felt that the ordinance on landscaping called for larger trees than necessary. He noted that in his opinion people should have some control over what they plant and it should be given some time to grow.
Councilmember Klein asked why Purkiss Rose-RSI was picked rather than Hentzen & Hentzen who was located in the City and had a cheaper rate.
Planning Director Brady answered that there was the fact that one might spend more time on each project and also the fact that there could be a conflict of interest in the one from our City.
The motion presented by Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe was seconded by Councilmember Engelhardt and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Engelhardt and Millsap
NOES: Carroll and Klein
ABSENT: None
12. CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIPMENT PROGRAM (CLEEP) FUNDS EXPENDITURES
City Manager Hendrickson presented a report regarding staff and Sheriff DepartmentŐs recommendations for the expenditure of CLEEP funds. (Continued from the November 14, 2002 Council meeting.)
Mr. Hendrickson noted that the City Council had asked that the Sheriff bring back a priority list of the items from the California Law Enforcement Program Price List. He turned the discussion over to Lieutenant Ault of the SheriffŐs Department.
Lieutenant Ault stated that they have provided a priority list in alphabetical order of what they would like to see purchased. We have also included information requested on durability, technology, maintenance and life expectancy. Some items have been removed, although if you are interested in any of them, we can discuss them as well.
Mayor Millsap explained that the total of the priority list is $46,914.95.
City Manager Hendrickson noted that the amount was well within the budget amount allowed.
Kathy Sauble, Emergency Preparedness Chairperson, asked the Mayor to name the priority list so the Community knows.
Mayor Millsap listed the following:
1. Traffic Safety Equipment:
Prolaser III
2. Emergency Preparedness:
Mobile Command Post
3. Lap Top Computers:
4. HP Printers:
5. Digital Cameras:
6. Digital Camcorders:
7. Night Vision Binoculars:
8. Heat Seeking Thermal Imaging Device:
9. V.O.P. Equipment:
Flashlights, Reflective wind breakers and vests for traffic control, Portable spotlight
10. Emergency Preparedness Equipment: (to be stored inside Mobile Command Post) Folding Tables, Chairs, Sunshade, Storage containers, White boards, 5 gal. Gas can, Caution tape and first aid station.
11. Ham Radios:
The Mayor stated that items 10 and 11 might be taken out if the Mobile Command Post is not purchased.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked why a Mobile Command Post, which is a trailer, is needed for $11,000.
Lieutenant Ault stated that this is a trailer that is commonly used to haul motocross equipment around. It comes equipped with a table and chairs and some cabinetry that things can be stored in. It has some blank walls where boards can be put up for maps or information. In the event of an emergency or disaster, when we can not use our buildings here we can move the command post trailer to a different location and work from there. Its function could also be expanded to a crime scene. The Fire Chief has provided us a protected place to keep the trailer at City Hall.
Councilmember Klein thought the Computers were a little expensive. He stated he would like to see if they could be found with a better price.
Lieutenant Ault stated that she had directed Deputy Poling to find the top of the line equipment that would not be soon obsolete. Lieutenant Ault confirmed that the CLEEP funds did not have an expiration date. We do have to do a report on our spending of the funds.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to approve items 1 through 11 of the expenditures of CLEEP funds priority list. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Klein and Millsap
NOES: Engelhardt
ABSENT: None
13. PRESENTATION OF THE CITY MANAGERŐS PROPOSAL TO GRANT CITY STAFF A COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-03
As part of adopting the FY 2002-03 Operating Budget, the Council requested the City Manager to evaluate a cost-of-living adjustment for the CityŐs staff. (This item is continued from the October 10, 2002 Council meeting.)
City Manager Hendrickson explained that the proposal was for a 3% adjustment in the cost-of-living (COLA) adjustment. He explained that he had done some analysis of the long range effects of that. A thorough analysis will take a longer time than we have had to look at this. There is a lot of concern among the cities as to what the state legislature is going to do with the $32 billion dollar budget. The information that we have at this time that this city relies on for revenues doesnŐt seem to be on the list for the state legislature to trim this year to try to balance the budget. Mr. Hendrickson stated that this year if the COLA took effect July 1, 2002, the cost would be $12,000. If it was not retroactive it would be less. We put 5% into our budget this year to cover raises, 3% for COLA and 2% for merit once the program was fully developed. The evaluation has not been completed at this time so he stated that he does not expect merit raises to be issued yet. He noted that 7 of the 11 employees have reached the maximum level of their salary scale. Under the CityŐs personnel policy the only adjustments he would be allowed to make would be a COLA. He stated that he did not believe the City has a very good evaluation system in place. Mr. Hendrickson stated that other cities around us are giving an average of 3.65% COLA. Our salaries are substantially lower than the average of the cities around us no matter what their size is.
Mr. Hendrickson stated that he was recommending a 3% increase. It is up to the City Council whether they want to make it retroactive or not.
Councilmember Klein stated that they had discussed this in closed session, but had not come to a conclusion that he was comfortable with and he was not ready to go forward on this one way or another. He would like to see more discussion on this with the Council.
Councilmember Carroll explained that they had considered this for several months and he was ready to vote for the 3% COLA adjustment.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to approve the 3% COLA, retroactive to July 1, 2002. The motion was seconded by Mayor Millsap.
Councilmember Engelhardt explained that they do not know how much the employees earn, how much vacation time and sick leave they accrue. We are missing the total picture of the situation or a projection into the future. We need more information.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe expressed his need for further information and a possible discussion in closed session. He stated that we have to consider what the State will do to solve their financial problems. We first need to correct policies, procedures and evaluations that have been neglected too long.
Mayor Millsap stated that they need the staff evaluations which have been neglected. She stated that staff is being penalized for the evaluations and policies that should have been set up a long time ago. Since we can not presently evaluate the employees properly we should give the COLA adjustments. The COLA would not have to be given every year.
Mayor Millsap offered a friendly amendment to the motion to adopt the 3% COLA adjustment retroactive to July 1, 2002, provided that we go forward by June 1, 2003 and have the information available for the changes needed for policies and scales that need changing. The motion failed as follows:
AYES: Carroll and Millsap
NOES: Borrowe and Engelhardt
ABSTAIN: Klein
ABSENT: None
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to add an item, ŇAPPOINTMENT TO THE VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICTÓ, to the Agenda that we find there is need to take action on before the next meeting. Mayor Millsap seconded the motion and the motion was approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
NEW BUSINESS
14. DIRECTION TO STAFF CONCERNING L.A. COUNTYŐS EXPANDED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Guidance for staff with regards to L. A. CountyŐs Expanded General Plan Update including Significant Ecological Area expansion.
City Manager Hendrickson reported that they have received an initial study proposal from the L. A. County for the comprehensive update amendment to the L. A. County General Plan, and it covers a broad spectrum of issues in L. A. County, but also some Specific Plans of some communities plus an expansion of the significant ecological areas (SEAs). The biggest concern that people have focused on is the expansion of SEAs to go into and include cities. We have until December 23, 2002 to respond. There may be a motion to expand that date by 60 (sixty) days, but that may not happen. We answer with the issues or studies we would like to bring up for them to consider in the update of our General Plan. We have asked the consulting planner for our General Plan, Mr. Blodgett, to put together some possible comments we could make on L. A. CountyŐs General Plan. It addresses circulation and land use elements, the SEA and several other areas.
The County Planning Staff will not allow individuals to ask for removal of SEA designations from their property. The request would have to come from the City government.
The City Manager explained that the County Planning Staff noted that the City has four options in responding to the SEA designation.
1. Concur with the boundary designation and adopt it as the CityŐs.
2. Concur with the current boundaries and request removal of the rest of the designation.
3. Submit a map and recommendation in some other form of a SEA area or restriction overlay that the City might provide.
4. Request the removal of the entire SEA boundary designation.
There could be some combination of these options.
It seems that they will look favorably on removing SEA designations if we have good reasons for asking for the removal. They did agree to take the designations as a ŇcollectorÓ road from Hacienda Road from City limits to City Limits. Originally there had been some plan to connect Azusa with Fullerton Road and they did remove that. They indicated that they had not shared with Orange County to look at road trips for Harbor. Aera had not been looked into as part of their analysis of their General Plan. Mr. Hendrickson stated that they asked them to make that part of the studies and what the impact was of such a large development. Diamond Bar, Claremont and Lancaster have all asked that the SEA designations be removed from their Cities. We also asked if they had considered the wildlife corridor tunnel under Harbor Boulevard that is planned. They were unaware of this. They also seemed unaware of plans to build a soccer field planned by the Aera Project. Mr. Hendrickson stated that this would generate a lot of traffic. We should cover that area in our response to L. A. County. They will probably encourage Cities to take over County Islands.
Planning Director Brady added that the L. A. County Planning Staff did state at their meeting that there would be no change in the Circulation system in their General Plan and they would be doing a traffic study.
The City Attorney explained that inclusion of land in the City in the CountyŐs General Plan does not affect anybodyŐs right to use that land except for the County itself. The potential relevance of including land in the City of La Habra Heights in a significant ecological area is more practical than legal. It has the effect of preserving in a fairly visible place the data which justifies the observation that this land is of regionally significant biological value. The Attorney suggested that the Council might want to ask the County to designate the resources in their General Plan, but only to the extent that the land that they are designating is already in open space use, held by a public or quasi-public agency for open space use. Eliminate all the privately held land in the City from the SEA.
The City Manager explained that the County Planning Staff does not expect to have the EIR prepared until summer of 2003 or even December of 2003. He stated that he would like to have the CouncilŐs direction on how Staff should respond, as he can not be sure that there will be a time extension of sixty (60) days.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe asked if the City asks the County to remove the SEA from all private property, would we receive an acknowledgement in writing that they would do that.
The City Attorney noted that they have to acknowledge our letter, but it could take as long as eighteen (18) months.
City Attorney Colantuono explained that Mr. BlodgettŐs comments on the CountyŐs initial study would be sent to the County along with the letter from the Council.
John Beau, Casalero Drive, stated that the SEA overlay covers approximately 30% across the top of La Habra Heights. He continued with other maps to show how much of La Habra Heights is already involved in open space. He was concerned that the restrictions on property would eventually grow larger and larger. He recommended that the Council reject the SEA or request that the County remove the SEA from all private property in La Habra Heights.
The City Attorney explained that CEQA was an information process, not a permit process. There are permits required by some of our zoning ordinances. Single family houses have a categorical exemption associated with them so we rarely have to prepare EIR reports.
Mike Cole, Dorothea Road, stated that the County should have notified the property owners who are covered by the SEA, but they did not. They should have been notified by the City of what the overlay may or may not mean for them. He encouraged the Council to ask that the SEA be removed from private property.
Councilmember Carroll asked for the City AttorneyŐs view of the pros and cons on the overlay of the public land open space.
City Attorney Colantuono explained that one of the pros is the mitigation of the consequences on life in La Habra Heights of intense development of the Aera property to the east. One of the justifications government will use to reduce the intensity of the development of Aera property is the wildlife corridor. So, by supporting some designation of the wildlife corridor in a way that minimizes impact on private property owners in this community preserves that element of our ongoing regional debate. Secondly the CityŐs General Plan, both existing and currently drafted, recognizes the value to the people who live in the Heights of open space resources. The downsides from a lawyerŐs standpoint are not substantial because the information is out there and is likely to be used in the ways that it can be used.
Councilmember Carroll asked how much of the Aera property in L.A. County falls within the SEA?
The City Manager stated that it is almost total.
The City Attorney also noted that substantial portions, but not all of it has the resource values for habitat use that are going to provide the basis for the discussion with the developer. Private property is entitled to be used reasonably. The government can not say Ňno useÓ.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to oppose the inclusion of all private property in La Habra Heights in the County SEA. The motion was seconded by Mayor Millsap.
Councilmember Carroll asked that some of the items on Mr. BlodgettŐs comments be rewritten.
The motion was approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Councilmember Carroll noted that he had received a newsletter explaining that the Buddhist Temple on Hacienda Road in Hacienda Heights is proposing to build a 120,000 square foot building with 550 parking spaces.
The City Manager stated that the City has not received anything on this, but they will look into it.
City Attorney Colantuono asked that if any of the Council has comments on Mr. BlodgettŐs draft comments they be provided to the Planning Director or City Manager so they can be incorporated by Tuesday, December 17.
15. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF WHITTIER
A Resolution to approve agreement with the City of Whittier for exchange of Prop A funds for General funds at a 70 cents-per-dollar exchange rate.
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian explained that we have $76,846 that we will be exchanging at the rate of 70 cents. This will mean we will be receiving $53,792.20 into our General Fund. There are no restrictions on these funds. She stated that the City of Whittier continues to provide Dial-a-Ride service for our seniors and disabled individuals. She explained to Councilmember Engelhardt that Prop C funds pay for maintenance of the Dial-a-Ride vehicles. Prop A money is strictly for fixed routes.
Councilmember Engelhardt offered a motion to adopt the Resolution for the exchange of Prop A money with the City of Whittier for General Fund money at 70 cents per dollar rate. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Carroll and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
16. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS APPROVING THE EXCHANGE OF STP-L FUNDS WITH L. A. COUNTY
A Resolution to exchange federal aid funds with the County of Los Angeles for gas tax funds at a dollar-per-dollar exchange rate.
City Manager Hendrickson explained that the STP-L funds have some restrictions that donŐt lend themselves too well to La Habra Heights. The County has agreed to exchange these funds for gas tax funds which have restrictions, but they have a lot broader application to the Heights. This provides more flexibility for the benefit of the Heights.
Councilmember Engelhardt offered a motion to adopt the Resolution to exchange STP-L funds for gas tax funds at a dollar-per-dollar exchange rate. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Carroll and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
17. AMENDMENT TO THE 457 DEFERRED PART-TIME EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION PLAN
An amendment to the CityŐs Compensation Plan to refund accrued $1,000 (or less) in deferred compensation funds to former part-time employees of La Habra Heights.
City Attorney Colantuono explained that the City maintains a 457 plan which is a retirement savings plan that is obligatory for those positions that you do not provide either a PERS pension or cover by social security. Your pension plan administrator is recommending a minor change to the plan to kick people out of the pool who have small amounts and no longer work here to reduce costs of administering the pool. Your staff recommends the amendment.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked if the money goes back to the employee.
The City Manager explained that the City will direct the administrator to refund the money to the employee and staff will let the past employee know what their choices are.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion to authorize the amendment to the CityŐs Compensation Plan. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Engelhardt and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
18. PROPOSAL FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PLAYGROUND TOT-LOT GROUND TURF
Consideration of proposal for the installation playground tot-lot ground turf at The Park.
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian presented the staff report on the tot-lot ground turf proposed. The present ground cover is wood chips and they are beginning to deteriorate. This is a safety concern. It also can combust and harbor bacteria. It also needs to be raked regularly and replaced as needed. Items can be placed in the wood chips or sand that can be dangerous. She stated that during her investigation she found that many cities are leaning toward installing rubberized material. Ms. Orchanian explained that the initial cost of the rubberized material is between $15,000 and $25,000. She stated that they had JPIA come out, our Joint Powers Insurance Agency, and they recommended that we focus maintenance of playground equipment on protective surfaces. Wood chips do deteriorate due to weather and tends to compact.
Ms. Orchanian stated that she and the City Manager did a breakdown on what the cost would be on maintenance of pour-in-place versus wood chips. She pointed out the difference in maintenance is $1,576 savings with the pour-in-place.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that in the report they received from JPIA, they noted that one of the highest incidences of claims were on playgrounds like this. It leaves us open to liability charges. We did our analysis for a ten year period. He stated that he viewed a playground which had the rubberized pour-in-place and was quite amazed and impressed with the playground. He felt this would be an appropriate investment. He noted that Ms. Orchanian had obtained a price of $18,000 from one company.
Mayor Millsap questioned the 1,400 square feet measurement of the tot-lot.
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian confirmed that it was a correct figure.
Ms. Orchanian answered Councilmember CarrollŐs question that there was an offer for free wood chips. She called the person but did not get an answer at this time.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that Azteca will rake the tot-lot twice a week for $1,380 per year. He noted that the job could possibly be done by the Youth Employment.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked if the Parks and Recreation Commission has expressed their desire for the pour-in-place surfacing.
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Klein noted that the material had a two year warranty, but the analysis was for ten years. He asked if there were any facilities that have had a ten year life.
The Senior Management Analyst answered that the material was warranted for two years, but it was stated that the lifespan was ten years. She stated that the manufacturers recommend they recoat it every two to three years, but that depends on the use.
Councilmember Klein asked the Senior Management Analyst to ask the longest time any of the facilities have lasted that has the pour-in-place surfacing.
Councilmember Carroll asked that the offer for free wood chips be looked into further.
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian explained that the wood chips they have at present are not ADA accessible and they would have to find out if the offer of free wood chips are ADA accessible. This means the chips are treated with some chemical so that they are smoother.
Fire Chief Nielsen noted that two cities in Fullerton and one in Downey had to remove their wood chips due to fires, either fires that were deliberately set or spontaneous combustion from the sun.
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian stated that she has called all the surrounding cities and they are all in the process of updating their tot-lots and almost all of them are replacing them with the pour-in-place surfaces.
The consensus of the City Council was to bring the tot-lot resurfacing item back to the agenda when the Senior Management Analysis receives the information the Council has asked for.
Councilmember Klein asked that they have this subject referred back to Parks and Recreation and get their consensus to make a recommendation to the City Council.
Mayor Millsap asked if in the interim there would be maintenance on the current wood chips.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that he would make a decision about that as he would not want to stop children from playing there in the tot-lot.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that he would also like to get JPIAŐs opinion on this particular material from the brochure he has.
19. EXPENDITURE OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) FUNDING – ARTICLE 3 – PERTAINING TO PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHS
Request authorization to use TDA funds for proposal to conduct a study pertaining to pedestrian and bicycle paths.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that about two weeks ago he was notified that $15,817 of TDA Article lll funds would be lost unless committed for expenditure prior to December 31, 2002 and expended prior to June 30, 2003. These funds may be used only for projects that benefit the use of bicycles and pedestrian non motorized uses. These funds can be used for a study for the planning and engineering of pedestrian and bicycle paths and walkways, this would include where in the City this would or would not be possible. It is even possible that such a study could open the way for further grants from other sources. The General Plan also calls for a Master plan being developed for such trails. One suggestion was that we find in the study if there can be a path connection between East Road and West Road.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe explained that he had heard complaints from bicyclists that the reflectors on the side of Hacienda cause them to fall when they hit them with their tires. He asked if we could use this money to remove the reflectors, as making it safer for the bicyclists.
Councilmember Carroll stated that he has also heard from drivers that live in the community that the reflectors help them to navigate at night.
Councilmember Klein stated that he did not think the $15,817 would go very far in such a study for the City.
City Manager Hendrickson stated that if the study could not be accomplished there were a couple of other things that could be done.
The City Manager explained that we must submit a claim form indicating the project by December 31, 2002. Money not used as scheduled must be returned.
Mayor Pro Tem Borrowe suggested that if we have to work so hard to find a use for this money, we send it back and let some other community use it.
The City Attorney explained that this $15,817 grant actually opens the way to larger grants at a later date. We can send in our claim for a study by December 31, 2002.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked if our Engineer could do the plan.
Deputy City Engineer Lang answered that they could do part of it. He explained that in such a report you also list some places you can go for further grants that would help you implement what you have in the report.
Councilmember Engelhardt asked if the money could be used to make school bus stops safer.
The City Manager stated that he would look into it.
Councilmember Engelhardt offered a motion to submit a claim for a study to be made by Deputy City Engineer Lang. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Carroll and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Engelhardt, Klein and Millsap
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
19a. APPOINTMENT TO THE GREATER L. A COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT FOR A CITY DELEGATE
Mayor Millsap noted that this was an emergency Ňadd onÓ to the Agenda. She stated that we currently have Jim Remington in the position. He was called and agreed to continue for a two or four year term.
The City Attorney explained that once you appoint someone to this position, you lose control of that appointment until the term is up. He noted that they had appointed for a two year term last time.
Councilmember Engelhardt stated that this had not been advertised previously.
Councilmember Carroll offered a motion that they appoint Jim Remington for a two year term. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Klein and approved as follows:
AYES: Borrowe, Carroll, Klein and Millsap
NOES: Engelhardt
ABSENT: None
Councilmember Klein explained that Staff needs to note this and bring it back to the Council in 21 months so we have time to advertise this for the next appointment.
City Attorney Colantuono explained that there is a law in California that the Council be noticed in January of appointments that need to be made during the coming year. Any vacancies that arise on an unexpected basis can not be filled until after 20 days notice has been given.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
20. CITY MANAGERS REPORT
á State Mandated Compliance Requirements (AB 939)
The City Manager stated that we only have 33% diversion in the City when we are required to have 50%. The State of California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) notified the City that it was in a non-compliant situation and needed to institute new policies in order to reach the 50% reduction requirement. By April 2000 City management had submitted a recommended new Solid Waste and Recycling ordinance which was adopted. Mr. Hendrickson explained that the maximum exemption one can get is 2006 for not reaching the 50%, and then CIWMB will have to issue a notice of non-compliance and possibly a $10,000 per day fine.
Mr. Hendrickson explained that The Council would need to amend the ordinance, Title 5400 of the Municipal Code. Actually, there are few changes that need to be made.
Milestones to implement the Plan are:
á January – February 2003 – Amend Title 5400 of Municipal Code
á February – March 2003 – Public Information Campaign
á April 2003 – Approve Franchise Agreements
á July 2003 – Report on Households Using Collection Services.
á July 2003 – Collection Company to provide 64-gallon containers for both re-cycling and green waste services at residences.
á July 2003 – Adopt City Surcharge Fee and Penalty Schedule for Collection Services.
á July 2003 – Adopt Bond Program for C&D Program.
á City to implement Expanded Green Waste program for Public and Landscape Service providers through designated drop points.
á July 2003 – City will review and Report on status of commercial businesses.
á January 2004 – City to evaluate program changes, and if goals are not being met by collection companies, the City will consider adoption of single franchise.
á December 2004 – City will evaluate all programs identified in Plan. If the source reduction goal of 50% has not been reached, City will institute a mandatory collection and source reduction program with a single franchise in January 2005.
The City Manager stated that these are the elements and conditions that were approved by the CIWMB Board. If the City Council wishes to not adopt these changes, the City may be subject to a reinstatement of the Notice of Non-Compliance.
Councilmember Engelhardt offered to look into the 4,701.97 tons for Commercial Yard Waste.
The City Manager stated that the problem is that more waste is going into the landfill that is not being diverted that puts us over the 50%.
21. CITY ATTORNEYŐS REPORT
There was no report.
22. PLANNING DIRECTORŐS REPORT
Planning Director Brady informed the City Council that the Planning Commission has just completed the meetings for December on the General Plan. They are working on the Land Use Element and they have scheduled four (4) meetings for the month of January to discuss the General Plan, plus one regularly scheduled meeting. She noted that the first meeting in January is scheduled for January 7. She also stated that the regular meeting for this month is December 17, 2002. This will have nothing about the General Plan.
23. CITY ENGINEERŐS REPORT
Deputy City Engineer Lang explained that this was just an update. He noted that sand has been delivered to the back parking lot to fill sand bags that can be picked up at the Fire Department.
Mr. Lang noted that they have concluded a speed and volume count on Hacienda Road. The results will be available this next week.
Mr. Lang stated that we had a road failure on Le Flore. We are working on it and it should be repaired Tuesday or Wednesday of next week.
Mayor Millsap asked if they were going to work on the drainage at Reposado and Hacienda.
Mr. Lang answered in the affirmative and stated that that should be done next week also.
24. FIRE CHIEFŐS REPORT
Fire Chief Nielsen gave the Fire Department report for November 2002. He reminded everyone of the danger of connecting more than four (4) strings of Christmas lights from one extension. He also noted that it must be a UL approved extension cord.
Fire Chief Nielsen explained that they will cover fire extinguisher operation, rescue, CPR and first aid and fire hose handling in the Emergency Preparedness meeting.
The Fire Chief mentioned that they actually have two less vehicles than they had in 1971.
25. SHERIFFŐS DEPARTMENT REPORT
There was no SheriffŐs Department Report.
26. COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS
Senior Management Analyst Orchanian reported that the Parks and Recreation Commission will be working on the CityŐs 25th Anniversary celebration in the upcoming year.
Councilmember Klein reported that the Fire Department Committee had a preliminary meeting, and made a basic outline of where we are going. We will have another meeting in January. He stated that he would like to adjourn back to a closed session when done with this meeting for two minutes because he might have a solution for the COLA.
The census of the Council was not to go back into closed session.
Councilmember Engelhardt stated that she was concerned whether the oil company which is taking Crimson OilŐs place is going to follow all the conditions in Crimson OilŐs CUP. She stated that she also has a letter from the Department of Conservation about abandoning oil producing areas and things that should be looked into.
City Attorney Colantuono answered Councilmember EngelhardtŐs concerns by explaining that the City Manager had sent a welcome letter with all the rules to the new oil company, (BSI). We have been doing our own research into BSI. We have confirmed that the surety that the company posted with the City is properly registered with the State and they have an appropriate rating. We have had no complaints as yet.
The City Manager stated that the Fire Department was pleased with their response. He noted that they have had experience in the Los Angeles basin area.
The City Manager stated that he had not seen the letter Councilmember Engelhardt mentioned.
Councilmember Carroll and Mayor Millsap commended Joe Geissinger, Andy and Peter Haeff, Eric Geissinger and Tino Anglade for their time and expertise in taping and preparing the City meetings for the cable broadcast.
CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND NOT ON THE AGENDA
There were no comments.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Millsap adjourned the City Council meeting at 12:35 A. M. to the next regular City Council meeting on January 9, 2003.
ATTEST:
_________________________________
JOHN F. HENDRICKSON, CITY CLERK