HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/22/1996 - Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
INDEX
• CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m. [Refer to separate agenda from City Attorney]
CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None
RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING
ROLL CALL
Present: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover, and Watt
Absent: None
Mayor Hedges explained that the Cultural Arts Grants are established by
Council Policy which appropriates a minimum of $40,000 per year of General
Fund Revenues to organizations, and proceeded to present the 1996 -97 Cultural
Arts Grants to those organizations selected by the City Arts Commission.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Debay to waive reading of the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of June 24, 1996 and Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 8, 1996,
approve as written and order filed. The motion carried by the following roll call
vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes: None
Absent: None
• Abstain: None
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Debay to waive reading of all Ordinances and
Resolutions under consideration, and direct City Clerk to read by titles only. The
motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
• Council Member Glover requested a report from the Planning Department
staff regarding how many new units would come on line downcoast at full
build out (Castaways, Newporter North, Ford and two apartment
complexes).
Council Member Edwards requested a discussion item from the City
Attorney's office explaining limitations in terms of City zoning, and the
restrictions regarding certain State mandates, i.e., health and safety items, so
that the community can have a better understanding.
• Mayor Hedges requested that the Traffic Engineer look at the feasibility
establishing a special traffic zone or speed zone in the area of the Newp
Beach grammar school (14th Street).
Volume 50 - Page 223
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
• Mayor Hedges requested an update on the use of City vehicles
employees, number of vehicles, nature and who is using them, and review
Council Policy with respect to their use.
CONSENT CALENDAR
• ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
1. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION
2. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS
3. RESUBDIVISiON NO. 1021. Approve a subdivision agreement
guaranteeing completion of the public improvements required with
Resubdivision No. 1021 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to
execute the agreement.
4. MCFADDEN PLACE CERTIFIED FARMER'S MARKET. Approve agreement to
allow weekly Certified Farmer's Market in the municipal parking lot at
McFadden Place and West Balboa Boulevard each Tuesday morning from
8:00 a.m. until noon during the summer months, and 9:00 a.m. until 1:00
p.m. during the remainder of the year.
5. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
6. MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING - NEWPORT BEACH CITY EMPLOYEES'
is ASSOCIATION AND THE NEWPORT BEACH EMPLOYEES' LEAGUE
ASSOCIATION. Approve the Memorandums of Understanding between
the City of Newport Beach and the Newport Beach City Employees'
Association and Newport Beach Employees' League Association which
covers the period from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1997.
7. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA - JULY 18, 1996.
8. GUIDELINES FOR CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENT. Adopt guidelines
and direct staff to expedite the adoption of an update to the Circulation
Element.
9. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
10. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
11. Removed from the Consent Calendar.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tern Debay to approve the CONSENT CALENDAR.
except for those Items removed (1, 2, 5, 9, 10 and 11). The motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
.
None
Abstain:
None
Volume 50 - Page 224
INDEX
Resub 1021
(84)
McFadden P1
Certified Farmer's
Market
C -3098 (38)
NBCEA C -2059
NBEL C -2065
(38)
(68)
(68)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
1. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 96 -27 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.50 OF
• THE NBMC PERTAINING TO MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS AND ORDINANCE
NO. 96 -28 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.60 OF THE NBMC PERTAINING TO
HOLISTIC HEALTH PRACTITIONERS, and pass to second reading on August
12, 1996.
George Grove, Jr., 7095 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood, stated that his
comments are the same that he made at the meeting of July 8,
however, he added that he has a matter pending in Superior Court, No.
764231, which presently attacks the constitutionality of existing
Ordinance No. 94-54. He feels that the new ordinance is even more
restrictive, and advised that he has amended the present pleadings in
Superior Court to include the proposed Ordinance regarding Holistic
Health Practitioners. He presented a new Notice of Protest and
Objection to City Attorney Burnham which is very detailed and cited
specific sections of proposed Ordinance No. 96 -27, with objections
regarding language on page 11 (operators testing); page 22 (language
for operators testing being identical to technicians testing, the 500 hours
of completed instruction and effective communication requirement of
the operator speaking English); and page 28 (restrictive hours of
operation). He also raised objections to the proposed Ordinance
regarding insurance and testing requirements for Holistic Health
Practitioners vs. the technicians.
• Testimony from the following in suggort of proper legislation and more
education of Chiropractic Practitioners, Massage Technicians and
Holistic Practitioners:
Dr. Bonnie Berger, D.C., 730 El Camino Real, Tustin, Chiropractor
Vernon Hatch, 17062 Green Street, #83, Huntington Beach
(massage student)
Chris Voltarel, 7291 E. Drake Dr., Anaheim Hills, (Government
Relations Chairman for the Orange County Massage Technician
Therapy Association)
Paul Musser, Holistic Practitioner, 56 Deerfield, Irvine
Testimony from the following in opposition to existing and proposed
Ordinance 96 -27, citing inequities in requirements for hours of training,
insurance and testing for Massage Technicians and Holistic Practitioners,
and hours of operation:
Jonathan K. Golden, Attorney, 1900 Avenue of Stars # 190, Los
Angeles (suggested tabling proposed Ordinance 96 -27)
John M. Graham, 1848 W. 17th Street, Santa Ana (requested
• information from Police Department regarding Vice Operations
and the Massage businesses)
Carolyn S. Stevens, 19692 Matsonia Ln., Huntington Beach,
Massage Therapist/Teacher
Volume 50 - Page 225
INDEX
Ord 96 -27
Massage
Ord 96 -28
Holistic Health
(27)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
INDEX
Shirley Henderson, 3847 Birch Street. Newport Beach
Barry Rubin, Resident Massage Technician, Newport-Costa Mesa
YMCA
Scott Duncan, Massage Technician at 4- Seasons Hotel and the Balboa
• Bay Club, 116 Buckingham Drive #14, Costa Mesa, expressed that Gail
Lowery of the Detective Division is doing a very good job with the
licensing. He feels that the proposed Ordinance is intended as a fix on
prostitution, but, in reality, these very some people are the ones who
have the time and money to devote to the education. He stated that
the legitimate massage technicians are struggling to make ends meet,
and the City ordinances give the prostitutes a bigger mask to hide
behind while generating a bigger profit for the already overpriced
schools in the area. He added that he doesn't have a problem with the
additional hours of training requirement, but the legitimate massage
technicians who generate revenue for the City are taxed approximately
$1500 for the additional 200 hours of training. He suggested that the City
not spend any more time and money pursuing the problem of
prostitution in such a round about manner but face these people head
on as the Police Department would for any crime in the City, and leave
the legitimate people "out of the loop." In response to the hours of
operation, he has many customers who come in at 9:00 p.m. for
massages, especially at the Hotel.
In response to Council inquiry, Deputy Attorney Daniel Ohl proposed
changes regarding the following issues: the operators will not be
required to take a different test from that which they take now, but
based only on the ordinance portion of the examination; the 500 hours
• proposed is based on consultation with some of the individuals speaking
tonight and what appears to be standard practice across the boards:
requirement that the business have someone who can effectively
communicate with health /fire officials; and the insurance coverage and
hours of operation will be addressed, as well. Mr. Ohl added that copies
of the revised Ordinance will be available from the City Attorney's office
and the Police Department upon request before the August 12 Council
meeting.
Irvin C. Chapman, 2782 Bayshore Drive, advised that he was
experienced in municipal government, serving as Planning Commissioner
and Mayor of the City of Fullerton years ago and Is sympathetic with the
task before the Council. He was here to speak about the sports clubs
such as the John Wayne Tennis Club, which is now the Palisades Club
where massages have been available for 22 years. He added that
health clubs would not be employing people unless they were
satisfactory, and questioned the additional 200 -500 hours of education,
as in his estimation the human anatomy has not changed. He urged the
City to not impede the legitimate massage technicians with trying to
solve a police problem.
John Black, owner of A Place to Relax, 4001 Birch Street, Suite D,
Chairman of the Legal Issues Committee, California Federation of
Massage, stated that he has been licensed for 10 years. He referred to
• massage defined in the City Ordinance as covering a broad umbrella of
touch therapies, such as reflexology, rolfing, and trigger work, and stated
that a written test such as the City is proposing to use in the future, is not
appropriate here, but a hands on test is needed. He supports the
contents of the Associated Bodywork and Massage Professionals' letter
presented tonight, and in particular where it mentions that, "Establishing
Volume 50 - Page 226
Massage/
Holistic Health
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
a 500 hour Holistic Health Practitioner ordinance alone would simplify the
regulation to practitioners and for the City...," as the word "nonprofit" in
the proposed ordinance is for the benefit of special interest groups.
Deputy Attorney Ohl stated that based on the foregoing testimony,
• consideration would be given to increasing the hours of operation from
9:00 to 10:00 p.m., as well as removing the portion of the ordinance
requiring effective communication.
•
� J
INDEX
Motion by Council Member Glover to introduce Ordinance 96-27 and
pass to second reading on August 12, 1996, (revised): Section 5.50.025
B.3, last sentence (strike out) "All operators and /or on duty managers
must be able to communicate effectively with City regulatory officials;"
and Section 5.50.050.10. Hours of Operation (change) "No person shall
operate a massage establishment or administer a massage pursuant to
an off - premises massage permit .... between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7
a.m." "A massage begun anytime before 10 p.m. must ... terminate at
10 p.m.. "; introduce Ordinance No. 96-28 and pass to second reading
on August 12, 1996; and commit to the Legislative Committee the
remaining changes for consideration, i.e., insurance, grandfathering,
sports clubs, and any other issues.
Substitute motion by Mayor Hedges to refer the proposed changes to the
Legislative Committee was voted on and failed by the following roll call
vote:
Ayes:
Edwards, Hedges
Noes:
O'Neil, Debay, Cox, Glover and Watt
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
Motion by Council Member Glover was voted on and carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
Edwards
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
2. SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1996 TO PLACE
MEASURE ON THE BALLOT RELATED TO REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL.
City Manager Murphy advised that in 1959 Newport Beach voters
approved an initiative ordinance requiring that the City use ad valorem
tax revenues to pay for refuse collection and disposal costs. Since that
time, the City has provided weekly refuse collection service without
charge, provided that the refuse is placed in curbside refuse containers.
The City has never provided refuse collection services for commercial
properties or residential properties that use trash bins. The proposed
amendment to Municipal Code Section 6.04.170 clarifies that the City is
only responsible for providing refuse disposal for dwelling units using
curbside containers and addresses future City annexations by
designating that only dwelling units within the City boundaries as of
November 1, 1996 are eligible for City residential refuse service. Any new
residential dwelling units or areas annexed to the City after this date must
pay for their residential refuse service.
City Manager Murphy explained that with the proposed amendment,
the City would not be responsible for any residential refuse service in the
Volume 50 - Page 227
Massage/
Holistic Health
Election /Refuse
Initiative
(39)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7.00 p.m.
Newport Downcoast area, should the City pursue annexation. At this
time, Waste Management provides refuse service for the Downcoast
area under a franchise agreement with the County. Under state law, the
County can continue providing services for five years after annexation is
finalized. If the City annexed the Downcoast area, Waste Management
• would continue as the service provider under their County franchise
conditions. If the City were to annex the Newport Downcoast area and
did not amend Section 6.04.170, the City would be required to provide
curbside service at a cost of $592,000 annually.
Ron Hendrickson, 1991 Port Claridge Place, stated that it would be more
appropriate for the proposed resolution referring to the initiative
language to have an actual date rather than the word "current" when
referring to curbside refuse collection for residential units within City
boundaries.
Tom Hyans, President of the Central Newport Beach Community
Association, asked if this ballot issue is a precursor to a charter revision
changing the requirement that ad valorem properly taxes be used for
trash pickup City -wide, and can the charter be compromised by
withholding part of the taxes from newly annexed areas of the City? He
added that It is interesting to note that the current cost to pick up trash
from 190 commercial establishments is about $1300 per year per
establishment, while service for the Newport Downcoast is projected to
be in the neighborhood of $170 per year. He feels that there is a big
disparity and should give the City cause to wonder about the long -term
cost of this self- service.
Dolores Otting, 17 Hillsborough, owner of Five Star Rubbish Service, asked
• if there is anybody on the Council that has a conflict of interest by voting
on this issue this evening, because this is considering that the City will be
charging for commercial businesses and the fact that these businesses
will eventually be transitioned into one of the 14 trash haulers with
permits.
Council Member O'Neil stated that he has not thought about this, and
that it has been disclosed and publicly announced on a number of
occasions that his law firm represents one of the commercial haulers in
the City. He is not aware of something that would create a conflict of
interest If he voted on this particular issue.
City Attorney Burnham stated that he does not know how this particular
ordinance would change the current practice except for just the
curbside container. However, the question is whether it is reasonably
foreseeable that by putting this issue on the ballot that this would result in
a source of income to Mr. O'Neil.
City Manager Murphy advised that from the staff's perspective, if the
voters approve the initiative and the City no longer provides the service
for free for an estimated 192 businesses, it is going to be his
recommendation that the City no longer be in the business, and In fact,
give that over to the private sector so that all of those who have a
permit (13) will be able to compete in the market place. He added that
• it is the City's intent to get out of that business and not continue to
provide it for a fee.
Mrs. Otting further questioned the use of the word "container," stating this
has alarmed many of the City residents that the automated trash system
will be back, and that the word "container" was not in the original
Volume 50 - Page 228
INDEX
Election /Refuse
Initiative
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
initiative of 1959. Also, she feels that container is not a good viable term
here because a lot of places in the City do not have room for
containers. She agreed that the initiative needs to have an effective
date. She was amazed to learn that the City will continue to pick up
trash for the approximate 190 businesses but will charge for doing this. If
• this becomes a reality, she will be competing with the City, and asked if
the City is going to charge the 11% franchise fee to the 190 customers
since she has to. She feels that there are too many unknowns here and
that the City is negligent in not clarifying these issues.
City Attorney Burnham reported that the transition plan would be worked
on between the date the Council approves the ballot initiative and the
date of the election, adding that the City would appreciate the helpful
support of those who collect refuse.
Madelene Arakelian, owner of South Coast Refuse and Recycling
Systems, asked for clarification regarding the word "container." She
stated that if this goes on the ballot, is approved and the decision is
clear that the City is going to start charging the commercial curbside
entities, perhaps the City will take the responsibility of putting a list out to
all the commercial haulers so that they have a choice.
City Manager Murphy advised that the word container was used to be
consistent with the language used in the current Municipal Code,
wherein City Attorney Burnham proposed alternate language for Section
6.04.170, to read: "... for any dwelling or dwelling unit, existing or future,
within the boundaries of the City as of November 1, 1996, that receives
curbside container refuse collection service from the City of Newport
Beach...."
® Motion by Council Member Edwards to adopt:
Resolution No. 96 -52 Calling and Giving Notice of the Holding of a
Special Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 5, 1996, for the
Submission to the Qualified Voters a Proposed Ordinance
(amended) with language provided by the City Attorney for
Section 6.04.170. "The Cost and expense of collecting, hauling,
away and disposing of garbage, refuse and cuttings as those
terms are defined by Sections 6.04.010, 6.04.020 and 6.04.030, for
any dwelling or dwelling unit, existing or future, within the
boundaries of the City as of November 1, 1996, that receives
curbside container refuse collection service from the City of
Newport Beach, shall be defrayed exclusively from the ad
valorem tax revenues of the City of Newport Beach;" and
Resolution No. 96 -53 Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Orange to Consolidate, Pursuant to the Provisions of
Section 10403 of the Elections Code, a Special Election to be Held
on November 5, 1996 with the Statewide General Election to be
Held on the Same Date; and
Resolution No. 96 -55 Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments
for City Measures Submitted at Municipal Elections.
• City Attorney Burnham suggested the following language for the initiative
to be consistent with the text of the proposed amendments: "Shall
initiative Ordinance 878 be amended to require the City of Newport
Beach to use property tax revenue to pay only for the cost of providing
Volume 50 - Page 229
INDEX
Election /Refuse
Initiative
Res 96 -52
Res. 96 -53
Res 96 -55
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
curbside container refuse collection for existing or future residential units
within City boundaries as of November 1, 19969"
Amended motion by Mayor Hedges to revise language in Resolution No.
96 -54, Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments Regarding a City
• Measure to read, "The City Council will authorize the Chairman of the
Legislative Committee to file written arguments in support of the
measure," was voted on and carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
Mayor Hedges advised that he was going to oppose the motion for two
main reasons: 1) if this ballot measure is successful and portions of the
unincorporated areas (Downcoast) are annexed, this will create two
separate classes of citizens in this City regarding how the refuse is
collected and how it is paid for: and 2) presently City ordinance requires
that refuse is picked up everywhere in the City. There are some 200
businesses who take advantage of setting refuse out at curbside at a
cost to the City of approximately $250,000, and the fatal flaw is that the
City has made absolutely no commitment to these businesses or any
other taxpayers in the City to say when enough is enough. The Council
needs to consider a possible commitment that once we have sufficient
revenues to provide services in the City a refund be given to property
taxpayers. As Council did not accept his proposal he cannot support
the motion.
• Council Member Glover stated that she, personally, doesn't like to
impose fees, and that it may not be proper to annex the Downcoast
area because the City may not get their share of property taxes, as the
County may keep more of the taxes. She looks at this proposal as a tool
in helping the people in the Downcoast area to become a part of
Newport Beach.
Council Member Edwards touched upon the Downcoast issue, City
Council Goals and what is fiscally responsible for Newport Beach. He
feels that this initiative helps to try and accomplish the annexation. In
keeping with the concept of the original charter provision, he stated that
it is hardly responsible to ask the existing citizens of the City to subsidize
people who are not going to be contributing their full amount of tax
dollars.
Council Member O'Neil stated he supports the motion, and added that
Newport Coast will be subject to a two -tier system whether they are
annexed or not because a portion of what they are paying in property
taxes will still benefit the County. Further, he feels that if the City decides
to go forward with the annexation, information as to whether it is
economically viable and sensible will be available to allow an educated
decision to be made, and the people in Downcoast will have an
opportunity to vote in favor of annexation. He doesn't have a problem
with the Mayor's concept of rebating taxes if the revenues are such that
• the City can afford a rebate.
Council Member Cox stated that there already is a two class system
today, and cited that he and Mayor Pro Tern Jan Debay do pay trash
pick up separate from the City and supports the motion.
Volume 50 - Page 230
INDEX
Election /Refuse
Initiative
Res 96 -54
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tern Jan Debay stated that she supports the initiative and
feels this will help clean up the City by not having trash setting out on the
main streets in commercial areas, and is a benefit to the residents, as
well.
Council Member Watt stated her view is that there are not two classes of
people but rather two different circumstances, i.e., annexations that
can't come into the City until something is arranged that allows them to
pay for themselves. She said: "talking about rebates is pontificating as
this Is not the time."
Motion by Council Member Edwards was voted on and carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
Hedges
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
S. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND CALTRANS MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING REGARDING METHANE GAS MITIGATION SYSTEM.
Approve MOU and authorize City Manager to sign agreement.
Council Member Edwards stated that he feels the MOU is going to solve
a problem that has existed in the City for a long time, and thanked staff
for the work done on this issue.
Mayor Pro Tern Debay stated that the public has been exposed for a
long time to a strong methane gas odor along Pacific Coast Highway
• near the lower campus of Hoag Hospital. She added that Senator Ross
Johnson has been very helpful to them when she and Council Member
Edwards testified in Sacramento in getting Caltrans' cooperation
regarding the problem. Therefore, she made a motion to approve the
MOU and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.
Dolores Otting raised the following questions: what other properties are
going to be involved in the MOU, and do we know how much they are
going to pay; what does the City get by being involved in the MOU, (i.e.,
become a financial clearing house); does the City have to hire a
consultant to interface with this issue and how much do we pay for the
consultant? She expressed concern regarding the figures in the Peat
Marwick study and asked if the City continues to have MOU's with State
money and put these into the budget, is this going to increase the fees
that the City passes on to residents?
Mayor Hedges advised Mrs. Otting not to confuse fees with cost of
services. He stated that as part of the Peat Marwick study the City retains
the software which is used to analyze whatever goes into the budget
regarding costs and level of service, and change /update the cost of
services as conditions change.
Mayor Pro Tern Debay added that the amount was arrived at because
Hoag is having to do a mitigation system to deal with all the gas, as the
• City put in extra gas into the system when the perforated PVC pipe was
laid along with the sewer pipe, overtaxing Hoag's system. She stated
that the figure is based on a bid by an engineer to Hoag as to what they
would have to do to mitigate the increased gas, specifically for this
project, and the money does not go into the General Fund.
Volume 50 - Page 231
INDEX
Election /Refuse
Initiative
Caltrans MOU/
Methane Gas
C -3099 (38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22,1996 - 7:00 p.m.
INDEX
Motion by Council Member Edwards to receive and file the subject
report, and that a letter be sent signed by Mayor Hedges indicating that
the City would assist Newport Center Association toward helping the
signage issue to move forward was voted on and carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes:
A vote was taken on Mayor Pro Tern Debay's motion and carried by the
Noes:
following roll call vote:
Absent:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Abstain:
Noes: None
IS
Absent: None
Abstain: None
9.
STATUS REPORT ON REQUEST REGARDING FREEWAY DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE.
Receive and File.
Motion by Council Member Edwards to receive and file the subject
report, and that a letter be sent signed by Mayor Hedges indicating that
the City would assist Newport Center Association toward helping the
signage issue to move forward was voted on and carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
10. GRANT APPLICATION FOR CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM. Approve the
submission of a grant application to the Bureau of Justice Administration
for an entitlement grant In the amount of $61,121 to establish a formal
Crime Prevention Program and dedicated position with the Police
Department.
Tom Hyans, President of Central Newport Beach Community Association,
• commented if it would not be wiser to accept the $61,000 grant money
to use for whatever crime prevention necessary in the City, not staff the
position at this time, but come back and discuss this at the next budget.
City Manager Murphy advised that this was discussed at a Public Safety
Meeting, and is a Federal entitlement grant through the Bureau of Justice
Administration. If the City declines the grant, it would go to another
agency. This grant is intended to supplement and not supplant positions
within the Police Department.
Police Chief McDonell, in response to Council. inquiry, stated that
typically grants of this nature are funded in three -year cycles, and are
only guaranteed for one year, and the succeeding years depending on
ongoing followup legislation. If the grant is not re- funded the position will
be subject to the normal budget review process.
Mayor Pro Tern Debay suggested a senior volunteer program in lieu of a
separate position in the future.
Motion by Council Member O'Neil to approve submission of the gr
application was voted on and carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
•
None
11. JULY 4TH ACTIVITY REPORT FROM POLICE AND FIRE /MARINE DEPARTMENTS.
Receive and file; no action taken.
Volume 50 - Page 232
PW (74)
PD /Crime Prvtn
Prog (70)
PD /July 4th
(70)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
INDEX
Volume 50 - Page 233
Mayor Pro Tern Debay stated that she wanted to express her thanks to
the Police Department, Fire and Marine Department and the Lifeguards
regarding their support during the July 4th Holiday.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
•
12. ORDINANCE NO. 96 -16 AMENDING PORTIONS OF DISTRICTING MAP NO. 18
Ord 96-16/Zoning
TO ALTER THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE "R -1" AND "PC" DISTRICTS
PCA 847 (94)
(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 847); GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 96.1(C) AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT
GPA 96 -1 (C) /LCP 45
NO. 45 TO ALTER THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE "RETAIL, SERVICE
Catanzarite
COMMERCIAL" USE AND THE "SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" USE - K.A.
Catonzartte and So Cal IBEW -NECA Pension Plan (352 Hazel Drive and
3901 East Coast Highway) (confd. from May 13 L 28, June 10 & 24, 1996).
City Attorney Burnham advised that the Council previously approved an
adjustment of the boundary between the two properties in Corona del
Mar. The adjustments do not change the size of the parcels, but
property from the parcel that is going to be developed for residential
purposes was transferred to the one to be developed for commercial
purposes, and vice versa. These actions are necessary simply to change
the designation of the portion of the parcels added and subtracted to
conform to their intended uses; also implements the settlement
agreement between the City and IBEW; and the Attorney's office has
approved the agreement to form.
Hearing no one wishing to address the Council on this issue, the public
hearing was closed.
Motion by Council Member O'Neil to approve the recommended action
•
as follows:
Adopt Ordinance No. 96-16 [Amendment No. 847] amending
Ord 96 -16
Districting Map No. 18;
Adopt Resolution No. 96 -56 [General Plan Amendment No. 96-
Res 96 -56
1(C)];
Adopt Resolution No. 96 -57 [Local Coastal Program
Res 96 -57
Amendment No. 45]; and
Adopt Resolution No. 96 -58 [Summarily vacating a portion of
Res 96 -58
Glen Drive between East Coast Highway and the
Northeasterly Boundary of Lot 68, Tract 673] and direct the
City Clerk to record same with the Orange County Recorder's
Office.
The motion was voted on and carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes: None
Absent: None
•
Abstain: None
13. ORDINANCE NO. 96 -26 ADOPTING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO
Ord 96 -26
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 8 BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Ford Motor Land
AND THE FORD MOTOR LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WITH RESPECT
Dev Corp /Dev
TO THE FORD LAND /NEWPORT PROJECT. (The Ordinance Will Revise And
Agm No. 8
Refine The Definitions And Developments Standards For Planning Area 4
C -3059 (38)
Volume 50 - Page 233
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
(Ford Land Development) Which WWII Reduce The Permitted Number Of
Dwelling Units From 500 To 450 And Provide Development Standards For A
Detached Single - Family Development).
Planning Director Patricia Temple stated that the purpose of the
• amendment is to provide regulations designed to accommodate the
proposed revised development program of 10017o detached single - family
dwellings. She advised that two letters were received late this evening
which expressed some concerns with regard to the proposal, specifically
traffic noise, street lighting and the location of the development. The
original approval included comprehensive environmental
documentation, and traffic noise and street lighting issues were analyzed
in the environmental review and appropriate mitigation measures were
imposed. Through the plan review process, staff will assure that the
project meets all mitigation requirements. The specific actions under
consideration do not include such items as street lighting plans, as these
will be reviewed by staff prior to issuance of building permits. The
Belcourt Master Association has expressed a concern regarding the
location of the development in relation to association property. This
project will not affect any common area of the Belcourt Master
Association, except as provided for in the Belcourt Terrace Landscape
Screen Agreement that was required as part of the original approval. It
is also important to note, that not only has this landscape agreement
been executed, but that the improvements required by the agreement
have largely been completed.
Council Member Watt expressed that it was unfortunate the two letters
mentioned in the foregoing came so late to the Council.
• In response, Planning Director Temple advised that with regard to the
issue that particularly relates to the additional landscaping, she has
reviewed the site plan and the specific location of the residence of the
persons who wrote the letter, and in that particular area there is
landscaping both on Belcourt Association property, as well as this
development property that is already in existence. Based on her
understanding of the project, the request is to require additional
landscaping within the individual private lots which may be subdivided
as part of this project. It is her professional opinion that those
homeowners should probably be allowed to landscape their private lots
in a manner that they see appropriate, and if there is some issue of
privacy in this area, that those new residents would be more than likely
to address that as part of the normal landscape plan. She reiterated
that the issues of traffic noise and the other lighting are addressed in the
mitigation measures and staff will be reviewing those before permits are
issued.
Ann Howard, 6 Chatham Court, representing Belcourt Master Association,
advised that there are several issues she wanted to address. In Belcourt
there are three associations, the Terrace Association, Belcourt Park and
Belcourt Master Association which is over all of the three Associations,
and if there were any contracts signed by the Belcourt Terrace
Association, they have not been approved by Belcourt Master
Association. Another issue is that there is an area in question where they
• have been denied access because of the closure of this area, and this
needs to be resolved between Belcourt Master Association and Pacific
Bay Homes as to the exact location of the lot line. All of these areas had
not come to their attention, and she is assuming that this has already
been approved from what the Planning Director states. She is here to
Volume 50 - Page 234
INDEX
Ford Motor Land
Dev Corp
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
request consideration that the Belcourt Master Association has
opportunity of addressing these issues with Pacific Bay Homes.
City Attorney Burnham confirmed that all of the issues were addressed in
the original environmental impact report referenced by Planning
• Director Temple.
In response to Mrs. Howard's comments, City Attorney Burnham stated,
that regarding the boundary of the two parcels, (Pacific Bay and
Belcourt Master) this is a private matter to be resolved between the two
property owners.
INDEX
Tim Paone, representing Pacific Bay Homes, a subsidiary of Ford Motor
Corporation, stated that Pacific Ford and Pacific Bay have been
extremely cooperative with all of the neighbors and beyond, and they
have already had two meetings, one with Mrs. Howard and one with the
Association Board at a meeting at which Mrs. Howard was present. In
terms of what occurs along the boundaries of the property, he stated
that there are no changes, and they are in favor of continued
discussions with the associations. He added that they have to comply
with all of the City's ordinances related to traffic, noise and some of the
other issues that were raised, which are old issues and were addressed
through the original environmental review.
Hearing no one else wishing to address the Council on this issue, the
public hearing was closed.
Motion by Council Member Watt to adopt Ordinance 96 -26, adopting
the First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 8: and adopt
• Resolution No. 96-59, adopting amendments to the Aeronutronic Ford
Planned Community (Zoning Amendment No. 848) was voted on and
carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
CONTINUED BUSINESS
14. CITY COUNCIL POLICY L -9 - CONVERSION OF PUBLIC STREET TO PRIVATE
STREET.
City Manager Murphy reported the policy has been that if there are
decorative lights, then typically they go private. If the community retains
the standard street lights and convert to private streets, then the City
would continue to maintain them. He advised that if Council needed
additional information before making a decision regarding section 1. e.,
under The following is to be designated as a public responsibility, (the
• savings to the City by the streets going private, and also the costs
retained if the street lights remained under City operation) this is in the
staff report.
In response to Mayor Pro Tern Debay's question regarding setting a
precedence, Transportation and Development Services Manager Rich
Volume 50 - Page 235
Ford Motor Land
Dev Corp
Ord 9.6 -26
Res 96 -59
Council Polity
L -9 (69)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
Edmonston advised that Ticonderogo in Newport Crest is still public, and
Spyglass Ridge became private three years ago and their lights are
maintained by the City.
INDEX
Council Member Edwards advised that he has had a few calls from
• people who were under the impression that the Council was going to
address an issue tonight that would "magically" designate Eastbluff as
privatized and wanted to clarify this, as this was not part of the Council
action. This is a change in policy to give direction to the people in
Eastbluff so that if they choose to make the decision to vote on the issue
of privatization or remain public, they will have knowledge of the costs
involved.
Michael Bigi, Chairman of the Eastbluff Association Traffic Impact
Committee, stated that he wanted clarification on the cost issue to
proceed with the vacation policy as outlined in Council Policy L -9. He
would like to take a package to the residents of Eastbluff which is very
clear and consistent with previous City policy as it relates to Spyglass
Ridge and Ticonderoga that the City does maintain street lights in a
privatization effort.
City Attorney Burnham proposed modified language to Council Policy L-
9 regarding Sections l.a. liability insurance and l.b. performance bond.
Motion by Council Member Edwards to approve amendments to Council
Policy L -9 and additional language as follows:
l.a. Liability Insurance which guarantees indemnification of and
a defense for the City should any lawsuit arise from any loss
• related to the use of the street or other private improvement
subsequent to the vacation.
l.b. A performance bond or other security satisfactory to the
Public Works Director is required to guarantee that the
association will maintain the streets and other facilities granted to
the association.
The motion was voted on and carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
Motion by Council Member Edwards that the City Council supports the
recommendation to give the Eastbluff Association direction that the
street light system continue to be maintained public if the community
becomes private, based on the financial information presented was
voted on and carried by the following roll call vote:
Motion by Mayor Hedges to reconsider proposed amendment to Council
Policy L -9, 1. e., under The following is to be designated as a public
responsibility: to delete the phrase," such as street lights," and make any
Volume 50 - Page 236
Council Policy
L -9
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
•
Abstain:
None
Motion by Mayor Hedges to reconsider proposed amendment to Council
Policy L -9, 1. e., under The following is to be designated as a public
responsibility: to delete the phrase," such as street lights," and make any
Volume 50 - Page 236
Council Policy
L -9
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
future conversion to a private community include street lights was voted
on and failed by the following roll call vote:
CURRENT BUSINESS
Edwards, Glover, and Hedges
O'Neil, Debay, Cox and Watt
None
None
INDEX
15. UPDATE ON CITY RIDESHARE PROGRAM AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIONS - Receive report on the City's Rideshare
Program and Transportation Management Associations (TMA) and receive
testimony from TMA's.
In response to Council inquiry regarding cost effectiveness, City Manager
Murphy advised that the City still has the governmental mandate on
Rideshare, which is a two -year agreement (expires 9/97). The budgeted
cost is $46,000, but the City typically has spent a lot less by utilizing part
time staff. He stated that when you look at other agencies and public
employers, he feels that the City is doing quite well to date as evidenced
in the staff report.
Mayor Hedges commented that he requested information from staff for
these programs to find out their total cost and measurable success.
In response to Council inquiry, Transportation Services Manager
Edmonton advised that regarding Ridershare, each day that an
employee participates, whether they carpool, ride a bike, walk to work
• or take a bus, they get an entry into a quarterly drawing. Each quarter
10 names are entered into the computer and then a random drawing
selects who receives a $100 cash prize. The cost is $1,000 per quarter.
Also, the AQMD has provided more ways to comply with changes in
regulations, i.e., changing the focus from average vehicle ridership to
each employee will have an emissions reduction target, which AQMD
feels is more directly related to the problem with air quality: by paying
brokers to buy old cars that are the worst polluters and taking them off
the road, turning them into scrap; and paying a flat fee per employee.
This would be the rule the City would fall under for next September. If the
City could change now and switch to that rule sooner, AQMD would
have to be contacted. As for the present, some of the other cities whose
contracts with AQMD are up and who switch, are still required to have
some level of employee rideshare program.
Janelle Dalton, Director of Newport Center Transportation Management
Association (nonprofit), said yes, the AQMD will allow Newport Beach to
switch over, but reiterated that the City still must do some employee
rideshare incentives as well as vehicle scrapping. She reported that
Newport Center Transportation Management Association, known as
Centeride, was incorporated in 1988 with the mission to improve
transportation mobility and enhance air qualify by promoting alternative
forms of commuting. The City of Newport Beach became a partner in
1990 and additional partners are Pacific Mutual, Pimco Advisors, L.P.,
• Newport Beach Marriott, The Irvine Company, Newport Center
Association and Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce. Their
purpose is to provide a comprehensive package of services to Newport
Center commuters, designed to supplement and not duplicate the
existing "in- house" programs. Centeride's guarantee return trip program
makes sure the employees get back home if they have an emergency
Volume 50 - Page 237
Rideshare Prog
(74)
Ayes:
Noes:
•
Absent:
Abstain:
CURRENT BUSINESS
Edwards, Glover, and Hedges
O'Neil, Debay, Cox and Watt
None
None
INDEX
15. UPDATE ON CITY RIDESHARE PROGRAM AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIONS - Receive report on the City's Rideshare
Program and Transportation Management Associations (TMA) and receive
testimony from TMA's.
In response to Council inquiry regarding cost effectiveness, City Manager
Murphy advised that the City still has the governmental mandate on
Rideshare, which is a two -year agreement (expires 9/97). The budgeted
cost is $46,000, but the City typically has spent a lot less by utilizing part
time staff. He stated that when you look at other agencies and public
employers, he feels that the City is doing quite well to date as evidenced
in the staff report.
Mayor Hedges commented that he requested information from staff for
these programs to find out their total cost and measurable success.
In response to Council inquiry, Transportation Services Manager
Edmonton advised that regarding Ridershare, each day that an
employee participates, whether they carpool, ride a bike, walk to work
• or take a bus, they get an entry into a quarterly drawing. Each quarter
10 names are entered into the computer and then a random drawing
selects who receives a $100 cash prize. The cost is $1,000 per quarter.
Also, the AQMD has provided more ways to comply with changes in
regulations, i.e., changing the focus from average vehicle ridership to
each employee will have an emissions reduction target, which AQMD
feels is more directly related to the problem with air quality: by paying
brokers to buy old cars that are the worst polluters and taking them off
the road, turning them into scrap; and paying a flat fee per employee.
This would be the rule the City would fall under for next September. If the
City could change now and switch to that rule sooner, AQMD would
have to be contacted. As for the present, some of the other cities whose
contracts with AQMD are up and who switch, are still required to have
some level of employee rideshare program.
Janelle Dalton, Director of Newport Center Transportation Management
Association (nonprofit), said yes, the AQMD will allow Newport Beach to
switch over, but reiterated that the City still must do some employee
rideshare incentives as well as vehicle scrapping. She reported that
Newport Center Transportation Management Association, known as
Centeride, was incorporated in 1988 with the mission to improve
transportation mobility and enhance air qualify by promoting alternative
forms of commuting. The City of Newport Beach became a partner in
1990 and additional partners are Pacific Mutual, Pimco Advisors, L.P.,
• Newport Beach Marriott, The Irvine Company, Newport Center
Association and Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce. Their
purpose is to provide a comprehensive package of services to Newport
Center commuters, designed to supplement and not duplicate the
existing "in- house" programs. Centeride's guarantee return trip program
makes sure the employees get back home if they have an emergency
Volume 50 - Page 237
Rideshare Prog
(74)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7;00 p.m.
such as illness, family crisis, or unscheduled overtime, and pays 100`90 of a
taxi ride or rental car. Centeride has formed and subsidized eight
company van pools, coming from Brea, Orange, Riverside, San Diego, La
Costa, Mission Viejo, Oceanside and Los Angeles. Centeride continues to
form and subsidize lease -cost, of all vans, and this has been a very
• successful program which began in July 1990. The van pool program
currently reduces 89 solo daily commute trips into Newport Center.
Centeride has a software program that provides members with
employees survey statistics and ridesharing maps list, as there is still a
requirement to do an annual employees survey. Centeride has hosted
several rideshare fairs and co- hosted a team rideshare fair with Caltrans.
Centeride has a bicycle commuting club called Centeriders that
organizes a semi - annual lunch time event to promote smog -free bicycle
commuting, along with information, instruction, and encouragement to
current and potential bicycle commuters. Centeride hosted the first
annual joint breakfast event with four Orange County TMA's. Sixty board
and member companies listened to John Cox present a message on
how advanced technology addresses California's mobility and air
quality problem, and how the AQMD Plan will impact future businesses in
Orange County. Centeride has a train transportation coordinator to
assist transportation staff personnel with riding, monitoring and
implementing regulation plans, and meets regularly with public agencies
to keep them informed about changes in grant money. Paying for
membership in Centeride makes these services, programs and
information available to all Newport Center employee members.
Susan Ambrose, Executive Director of Coastal Motion Corporation
(nonprofit), advised that the organization was created in 1989 in
concept by the city's business leaders and community leaders in tandem
• with public agencies including the State of California and the Orange
County Transportation Authority. The purpose of Coastal Motion was to
develop and create alternatives to reduce air quality emissions, provide
alternatives to commuters (employees) and reduce congestion within
the city and outside the boundaries, basically in response to Federal,
State, and regional mandates that are air quality based. Coastal
Motion's goals are different from most TMA's, such as conducting market
survey and needs assessments annually; prioritizing the goals into the top
five and focusing on the top three until one of those is completed and
the next one kicks in. The priorities the members selected are to create a
computerized in -house ride matching system that also automates trip
reduction plans, and Coastal Motion has done this for the City of
Newport Beach and several other members for the past two years. They
have been accredited and approved by the AQMD as providing one of
the most outstanding programs they have ever seen. Coastal Motion
also assists member companies in completing those trip reduction plans
by suggesting incentives, incentive language, helping evaluate whether
they would like to do trip reduction plans or options such as cash for
cars, credits for clean on /off road vehicles, paying cash per employee
(Air Quality Investment Program), and earning credits for vehicle trip
reduction or vehicle miles traveled. They also provide legislative and
regulatory monitoring and advocacy when their members request this.'
They serve as the centralized resource network for the community as well
as the City and all of their membership. They have been generously
• supported by Hughes Aircraft Company, City of Newport Beach, Hoag
Hospital, Orange County Sanitation Districts, School District, Newport
Harbor Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Transportation Authority
and the State of California, and received two grants for innovative
projects within the past four years. They have just been awarded
another grant to conduct the market survey within the airport area to
Volume 50 - Page 238
INDEX
Rideshare Prog
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
assess the kinds of needs regarding transportation questions and
transportation services or alternatives that cities and companies within
the region would like to have.
Ms. Dalton stated that she wanted to add that Newport Center TMA's
• automated ride matching program is based on commute paths, rather
than by zip code and has been approved by the AQMD.
Mayor Hedges requested a copy of budgets from the foregoing
speakers, stating that this would be helpful to the Council, and in the
absence of any Council action, it is safe to assume that the City will
continue to participate.
16. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL OPTIONS.
City Manager Murphy advised that in terms of the Council goal for the
year regarding solid waste options the City, in several recent discussions
with the Integrated Waste Management County staff, has been trying to
find additional cost effective long -term landfill options. The County
landfill rates were $22.75 on July 1, 1995, and effective April 1, 1996 the
rates were reduced from $35.00 to $27.00 per ton. CRT has, on an interim
basis without the City's formal approval, been utilizing a waste energy
plant in Commerce for the purposes of reducing their cost. As an option
pursuant to their contract, the City can direct them to take it to that
location and the City is entitled to a reduction in cost. The waste energy
plant currently has a cost of $22.50. This is an interim solution, and the
County is very interested in retaining the City's business within the County
landfill system. The City's answer is that they want something that is
stable at a low competitive rate and the recommendation is that on an
• interim basis, Council formally direct that CRT utilize either the Commerce
or the Long Beach Waste Energy Plants. The benefit to the City is a $3.12
per ton reduction on this interim basis ($90,000 savings if done for the full
year).
In response to Council inquiry, City Manager Murphy advised that
"interim" is used in relation to the County's time frame, and referenced
the supplemental report with additional information from the Solid Waste
Commission. The County Board of Supervisors' Integrated Waste
Management staff are trying to address the issue long term, and the time
table could be six months to one year at this point. As for the fact that
Newport Beach was taking their trash out of the County, he stated that
he was not aware until 90 days ago that CRT was doing this on a day to
day basis and this was discussed with CRT that per their contract, they
should be keeping the City well informed.
Madelene Arakelian, owner of South Coast Integrated Refuse Systems,
commented that she attended a special meeting of waste haulers and
she was totally flabbergasted that the County was discussing the landfill
issue and the participation of Taormina Industries having an option
through the City Manager's Group to operate the Brea Landfill. She
confirmed this fact in the City's staff report, referencing a document and
a letter from Bill Taormina indicating that they are participating in it. She
stated that the major issue is bringing back into the County trash that the
• City of Newport Beach is exporting to the burner, which they have been
doing for quite some time. She feels that going to the burner on an
interim basis is fine, and yes, trash can be exported to Los Angeles
County on an interim basis. She also feels that a long term contract to
go to the burner, would be unwise, and suggested month to month, as
Volume 50 - Page 239
INDEX
Rideshare Prog
Solid Waste
Disposal (44)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
INDEX
the County of Los Angeles and the City of Los Angeles are experiencing
a diminishing landfill issue.
Dolores Otting, owner of Five Star Rubbish Service, stated that the staff
report is excellent, very informative, very honest and has a lot of
• information that she spent 1 -1/2 hours asking about and was told that
none of it existed. She feels that some of the information in the staff
report is the reason why the Sanitation District never went forward. She
emphasized that there are some underlying issues within the County and
within Brea Landfill that have been going on for a long time, but
because of the late hour, she will wait on this issue. She feels that if there
is money coming back, maybe the residents of the City should get one
month of free recycling, because everyone is taking and taking and
taking and this would be a gesture of good faith. She added that she
appreciates Mr. Murphy's honesty on this issue and Mr. Niederhaus'
information stating that "you have no idea what it's like to sit in a room
for two hours and ask questions and be lied to." She cautioned that we
have to be very careful about what is going on with our landfills as they
are being broken up into three separate entities so that they can be sold
individually, but that is information that really needs to be discussed and
brought out to the public. She thanked Council Member Cox for all the
work that he has done.
City Manager Murphy advised that the City Council has before them
tonight an interim decision. He explained that there is a group which he
became aware of 90 days ago, a North County Group of Cities,
including the Taorminas, who are looking at some sort of lease
arrangement on the Brea Linda Landfill. The City has contacted them
and asked to be kept informed because these costs come out of the
• City's General Fund. He asked for Council's support to continue to talk
to those North County Cities about Newport Beach's possible
involvement in that lease arrangement, provided all of the questions can
be addressed, i.e., liability and future costs, and brought back for the
Council's, ultimate decision.
Mayor Pro Tern Debay commented that the Committee at SCAG is
looking for alternate ways to dispose trash. She likes the short term
interim idea expressed by Madelene Arakelian, because everything is
rapidly changing. The reason she joined that Committee was because
the Sanitation District was looking for the Orange County landfills to buy
them, and she was getting all kinds of information that she needed.
While visiting the Commerce Plant she has observed that it is not a
regular operation and is very flexible.
Council Member Cox agreed with the comment that was made to stay
flexible and feels that there isn't any time frame to put on this. He said
he doesn't agree with the comment about staying in County, especially
for Newport Beach, because the City does have a series of unique
information. He stated that he doesn't trust anybody after having been
through this, and that he was extremely bitter and cynical about the
whole thing. He added that the County is going to raise their fees as fast
as they possibly can raise them as they can't afford to operate the way
they are today. As for as what can happen in the seven cities deal, he
• doesn't feel that Newport Beach should care- other than keeping their
options open to go anywhere it is cost effective for them to go. In
closing, he stated that "It's nice to be a family, but when you don't have
other family members that want to be family with you, there is no point in
you being the good guy," The City spent a lot of money learning the
Volume 50 - Page 240
Solid Waste
Disposal
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
July 22, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
INDEX
hard way, and he feels it is wise to stay in the County, of least until the l Solid Waste
City knows what the long term deal is. Disposal
Motion by Council Member Cox, wherein he stated that the only item on
this agenda tonight is to direct staff to provide written notice to CRT, Inc.,
the City's solid waste recycling contractor, to utilize the Commerce or
Long Beach refuse or any other energy plants for disposal of all City -
collected waste on an interim basis until more stable and long term low
cost options for landfill disposal are available was voted on and carried
by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
17. COMMUNICATION FROM LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES - LEAC
ANNUAL CONFERENCE - OCTOBER 13-15,1996 IN ANAHEIM.
Motion by Mayor Hedges to designate himself as the City's Voting
Delegate for the Conference, and Mayor Pro Tern Jan Debay as
Alternate carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Hedges, Cox, Glover and Watt
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
• MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
None
ADJOURNMENT - 11:28 P.M.
• t i* M i i i• r t O i ** t t t M t t• 44
The agenda for this meeting was posted on July 17, at 5:20 p.m., on the City Hall
Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration
Building.
Attest:
ja,zzl&-�
Acting City Clerk
Mayor
Volume 50 - Page 241
League of CA
Cities (61)
Voting Delegate