HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/1996 - Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
October 28, 1996 - 7:00 p.m.
• CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None
RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING
ROLL CALL
Present: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt and Mayor Hedges
Absent: None
Pledge of Allegiance - Council Member Cox.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem. Debay to waive reading of the minutes of the
Regular Meeting of September 23, 1996, approve as written and order filed.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Debay to waive reading of the Ordinances and
Resolutions under consideration, and direct the City Clerk to read by titles
only. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
•Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A
FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON -
DISCUSSION ITEM):
Mayor Pro Tern Debay requested a staff report on the possibility of getting
the County program reinstated that assisted with beach maintenance,
lifeguard services, etc.
Council Member O'Neil asked that staff bring back a status report on the
Corona del Mar Farmers Market.
Mayor Hedges requested that the Legislative Committee consider a policy
stating that staff reports must be made available to the public by 5:00 p.m.
on the Friday prior to a Council meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
• 1. ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 96 -38 AMENDING SECTION 12.48.050(A)
OF THE NBMC PERTAINING TO THE MEANING OF GREEN CURB
MARKINGS OUTSIDE PARKING METER ZONES.
RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION
2. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96 -83 APPROVING THE DESTRUCTION
Volume 50 - Page 323
INDEX
Ord 96 -38
Veh & Trfc
(85)
Police/Rec Mgmt
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
INDEX
OF CERTAIN POLICE DEPARTMENT RECORDS. Res 96 -83 (32)
3. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96 -84 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88- Personnel
• 13 AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 301.1 OF THE PERSONNEL Policies
POLICIES PERTAINING TO THE CITY POLICY PROHIBITING Res 96 -84
DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT. (66)
4. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96 -85 DESIGNATING THE PW/Newport
GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF NEWPORT BEACH BOUNDED BY EAST Center Geog
COAST HIGHWAY, MACARTHUR BOULEVARD, SAN JOAQUIN Area
HILLS ROAD AND JAMBOREE ROAD AS "NEWPORT CENTER." Res 96 -85 (74)
5. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96-86 OF SUPPORT AND COOPERATIVE Orange County/
PROJECT PARTICIPATION WITH THE COUNTY OF ORANGE FOR Measure M
A MEASURE M FUNDING APPLICATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH Funding
THE PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT IRVINE AVENUE, UNIVERSITY Res 96 -86
DRIVE TO BRISTOL STREET IMPROVEMENTS. (54)
6. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96 -87 ADOPTING THE DECISION AND Mermaid Live
RECOMMENDATION OF THE HONORABLE JUDGE LLOYD E. Ent Permit
BLANPIED, JR. REGARDING THE APPEAL OF THE Res 96 -87
REVOCATION/NON- RENEWAL OF THE LIVE ENTERTAINMENT/ (27)
ADULT ORIENTED BUSINESS PERMIT OF TILY B, INC., A
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, DBA THE MERMAID.
7. Removed from Consent Calendar.
CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS
• 8. OCTA GAS TAX FUND EXCHANGE. Authorize City Manager to execute Orange County
agreement with OCTA for an annual exchange of OCTA Gas Tax Revenues Trans Agency
for City General Fund Revenues beginning July 1, 1997. C -3120 (38)
9. AMENDMENT TO CITY COUNCIL COST SHARING AGREEMENT: Orange County
NEWPORT HARBOR DEBRIS REMOVAL. Authorize the Mayor and Newport/Harbor
City Clerk to execute an amendment extending the agreement with the Debris Removal
County of Orange to share expenses for debris removal in Newport Harbor. C -2539 (38)
10. MACARTHUR BOULEVARD WIDENING FROM PACIFIC COAST CalTrans/
HIGHWAY TO FORD ROAD. Approve the Time Extension Amendments MacArthur B1
to Cooperative Agreements with Caltrans for Design Oversight and Segment Widening
1 Construction Oversight of the MacArthur Boulevard Widening Project and C -2825
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign both amendments on behalf of
the City.
11. OCEAN FRONT STREET END IMPROVEMENTS (CONTRACT NO. Ocean Front
3081). Award contract to JDC Inc. in the amount of $90,652.50 with a St End Improve -
contract contingency amount of $9,000 and authorize the Mayor and the City ment
Clerk to execute the contract. C -3081 (38)
12. 1996/97 SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER REPLACEMENT 1996/97 Side -
PROGRAM, CONTRACT NO. 3097. Approve the plans and specifications; walk Curb
• award Contract No. 3097 to Nobest, Inc. of Westminster for the total bid & Gutter
price of $126,190 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Replacement
contract; and authorize a contingency account in the amount of $31,000 to C -3097
provide for additional work in the contract area. (38)
13. BALBOA BOULEVARD STREET RECONSTRUCTION - CONTRACT Balboa BI
NO. 3118. Affirm the Notice of Exemptions for the project improvements; St Reconstr
Volume 50 - Page 324
is
l�
u
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
approve the plans and specifications; and authorize staff to advertise for
bids.
14. FEDERAL COOPERATIVE BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECT,
STAGE 10, SAN GABRIEL RIVER TO NEWPORT BAY. Authorize
Weeks Marine, Inc. to complete sand haul operations within the City of
Newport Beach in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Construction Solicitation and Specifications for the Beach Renourishment,
Stage 10, San Gabriel River to Newport Bay.
15. Removed from Consent Calendar.
16. AWARD OF CONTRACT - BALBOA ISLAND STREET LIGHT
REPLACEMENT PROJECT - PHASE II (CONTRACT NO. 3109) AND
BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -017) IN THE AMOUNT OF $122,000.
Approve plans and specifications; find that AAA Electric Services submitted
the "lowest responsible bid," that they can meet the requirements for
completing the proposed contract work, and declare them the `low bidder;"
award Contract No. 3109 to AAA Electric Services of Anaheim in the amount
of $286,666.50 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the
contract on behalf of the City and authorize a 10% contingency amount of
$28,666 for change orders and construction engineering costs; and authorize
$122,000 Budget Amendment (BA -017) to transfer funds from the Electrical
Section's Utilities Account No. 5300 -8110 to the Street Light Replacement
Account No. 7014- C5300035.
17. RESUBDIVISION NO. 997 [Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 36 -35
(Resubdivision No. 289) and Parcel Map 60 -36 (Resubdivision No.
454), located at 210 Newport Center Drive on property bounded by
San Miguel Drive, Avocado Avenue, Farallon Drive, Anacapa Drive
and Newport Center Drive]. Approve the improvement plans and
specifications and accept the public improvements constructed in conjunction
with Resubdivision No. 997; and authorize the City Clerk to release the
faithful performance bond (Bond No. 1524955).
MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS
18. LIDO ISLE IMPROVEMENTS AT VIA GENOA. Approve the concept of
constructing a raised landscaped area on Lido Isle at Via Lido Soud and Via
Genoa, with construction cost to be shared between the City and the Lido
Isle Community Association.
19. INVESTMENT IN ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL.
Authorize City membership in the Orange County Business Council
Economic Development Consortium with an investment of $5,000 for
business retention programs.
20. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -013). Approve BA -013 to appropriate the
gift of $24,600 from the Friends of the Library for materials and programs.
21. PURCHASE OF A PAINT STRIPER TRUCK AND BUDGET
AMENDMENT (BA -014). Approve the purchase of a used paint striper
truck from the City of Arcadia in the amount of $57,108; authorize the City
• Manager to proceed with purchase arrangements; and approve Budget
Amendment (BA -014) in the amount of $71,608 for the purchase, upgrades,
and new unit warranty for the paint striper truck.
22. Removed from Consent Calendar.
Volume 50 - Page 325
INDEX
(38)
Fed Coop
Beach Renour-
ishment Prjct
#10
(38)
Balboa Isl Strt
Light Rplcmt/
Phase II
C -3109 (38)
Finance
BA -017 (40)
Resub 997
(84)
Lido Island
Improvement/
Via Genoa
(74)
OCBC/EDC
(24/54)
Finance BA -013
(40)
Finance (40)
BA -014
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
23. PARKING METER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM - APPROVAL OF
BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -016). Authorize a budget amendment in the
amount of $57,000 from the Off- Street Parking Reserve Fund to Account No.
•7014- C5200033.
24. Removed from Consent Calendar.
25. DISPOSAL OF POLICE HELICOPTER - 1982 MD500D. Authorize the
disposal of the 500D helicopter to heli -mart for $230,000 which includes no
broker fee.
26. PROPOSITION 218 - VOTER APPROVAL FOR LOCAL TAXES.
Receive and file.
27. Removed from Consent Calendar.
28. Removed from Consent Calendar.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem. Debay to approve the Consent Calendar, except
for those items removed (7, 15, 22, 24, 27 & 28). The motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
• 7.
•
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96 -88 ESTABLISHING AN AUTOMOBILE
DEALERSHIP SALES TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAM.
SALES TAX INCREMENT REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR
STERLING BMW AND LAND ROVER.
City Manager Murphy explained that the City Finance Committee met on
Friday, October 25, 1996 to review the proposed resolution to establish an
automobile dealership sales tax incentive program, as well as the draft sales
tax increment reimbursement agreement for Sterling BMW. He said the
Finance Committee recommended approval of the resolution with some
changes and the committee and staff are recommending that the
reimbursement agreement, after comment by the Finance Committee, be
returned for further discussion and negotiation with Sterling BMW. He
asked that Council take action tonight on the resolution and set for action
the reimbursement agreement at such time as it is ready and complete after
further negotiations.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Debay to adopt Resolution No. 96 -88 establishing
an automobile dealership sales tax incentive program and to continue the
action on the sales tax increment reimbursement agreement for Sterling
BMW and Land Rover until the negotiations are complete. The motion
carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
Volume 50 - Page 326
INDEX
Finance
BA -016 (40)
Police Dept
Helicopter (70)
ABLE C -3011 (38)
Legislation
(48)
Sales Tax
Incentives (40)
Sterling BMW
& Land Rover
C -3121 (38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
I_h 1
15. NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (SR55 11)
INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS - CONTRACT NO. 2886.
• Council Member Glover requested clarification on whether this item is
related to the design of the Arches bridge.
Public Works Director Webb explained that this amendment is for additional
geotechnical engineering work required because of a change in structural
design for the Arches bridge. The structural changes will require a set of
borings for a center support span on the bridge, as well as additional borings
for the retaining wall sections along the channel next to Old Newport
Boulevard. He stated that the design phase will be complete in March or
April of 1997, the construction will begin in September of 1997 and it is
estimated that the length of construction will be approximately 18 months.
He said the bridge will be constructed in two or three phases and during
each phase there will be two lanes of traffic open in each direction. He said
that the City will hold community meetings with the businesses and will also
have community representatives to make them aware of the construction.
He noted that staff has met three times with a community group on
aesthetics and will schedule meetings to inform people of the final design
concepts after the first of the year. After the contract is awarded in the
summer of 1997 and the construction schedule is known, further meetings
will be scheduled with the business groups.
Motion by Council Member Glover to approve Amendment No. 2 to the
Consultant Agreement with Law /Crandall, Inc. for additional geotechnical
services in support of project design; and to authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute Amendment No. 2 on behalf of the City. The motion
• carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
22. AQMD ALTERNATE FUELS (CNG REFUSE TRUCKS) GRANT
ACCEPTANCE AND BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -015) IN THE
AMOUNT OF $475,532.
City Manager Murphy reported that there are people in the audience that
can assist with any technical questions regarding this issue. He distributed
a handout, "Exhibit E," showing the breakdown of the numbers with some
notes added in the right hand column.
General Services Director Niederhaus, responding to Mayor Hedge's
question, reported that to date the City has spent less than $25,000 for
consultants on this issue.
Mr. Murphy explained that the AQMD levies and collects fees (AB 2766 fees)
on motor vehicle licenses to reduce air pollution and emissions. A portion of
the fees are retained by the Air District for their programs, a portion is
utilized in competitive grant programs, and a portion is distributed to cities
in the basin for use as they see fit to reduce air emissions. The City applied
• for a grant in September of 1995 as part of one of the grant programs in the
heavy -duty vehicle category, specifically to replace ten of the City's refuse
vehicles (diesel) with Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) vehicles. The grant of
$413,000 from the Air District plus $68,000 of local City AB 2766 monies is
intended to make up the difference in the price of diesel versus natural gas
vehicles. The total grant is $500,000 and the City will receive $413,000 and
Volume 50 - Page 327
Newport Blvd/
PCH
C -2886 (38)
AQMD Grant
C -3123
(38)
BA -015 (40)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
INDEX
a sub - grantee, Sunset Property Services, will receive $77,000 for five street
sweepers. The City will be replacing ten refuse vehicles out of a fleet of
eighteen. Based on the current schedule, seven vehicles are due to be
• replaced now and the other three would be replaced a year or two early.
Some of the benefits of the program that staff has identified are: 1) vehicle
maintenance costs for three of the refuse vehicles would be reduced since
they would be replaced earlier than normal; 2) the natural gas fuel would be
purchased at 33% lower per gallon equivalent fuel cost (diesel cost today is
$0.99 per gallon and the cost for CNG at the City yard with a slow - fueling
facility will be $0.67 per gallon); 3) the air pollution emissions will be
reduced by a total estimated minimum of 9,493 pounds per year, which can
be utilized as a tool for the reduction of air emissions to revise the Rideshare
Program and the direct expenses from that program; and 4) reduction in
operating noise from the engine. He explained that the engine noise will be
reduced, however the noise from the tipping arm cannot be reduced. The
cost for the City to purchase ten CNG vehicles with a five -year lease is
$1,682,682. He explained the offsets and the expenses as depicted in the
handout and explained that all of the expenses will come from the $250,000
of the City's AB 2766 fees. The total cost of the program is $1,112,962. He
described the comparisons shown on the Exhibit and pointed out that if the
City were to buy 10 diesel refuse trucks versus 10 CNG trucks through this
grant, the net savings would be $41,000. If the City didn't buy the 10
natural gas vehicles and instead bought seven diesel vehicles the cost up
front of moving forward with this program and buying the three early is
$317,785. He said these vehicles will have larger, heavier tanks which will
result in a smaller payload on the refuse trucks. He said staff was very
concerned with the reliability of the engines and stressed the importance of
having reliable refuse trucks that are operable on the street. He said that
• based on all of the factors mentioned and in the report, staff is
recommending that the City Council accept this grant. He pointed out that
the actual contract with the Air District is in the packet, however the
Assistant City Attorney reviewed the contract and identified some concerns
specifically related to the sub- contractee and any potential liability for any
errors or acts of negligence on their part. The subcontractee, in a side
contract, has agreed to indemnify and hold the City harmless.
In response to Council Member Glover's questions about the annexation of
downcoast, Mr. Murphy explained that if the ballot measure fails and the
City moves forward with annexation, there is the potential that the City
would have to pick up the trash and staff wants to make sure there is
equipment in the total fleet that would be capable of doing that. He further
explained that the refuse hauling can be done with the City's present trucks,
however a natural gas vehicle was tested on Newport Coast Drive and on
some of the hilly streets in the Newport Coast area to make sure they can
successfully get up and down the hills.
Council Member Glover pointed out that the executive summary stated that
the limited availability of the CNG engine is responsible for the increase in
cost, however this will be offset by the use of grant funds. She explained
that she voted against applying for this grant originally because she saw no
reason why the people of Newport Beach should pay for the City to
experiment with natural gas vehicles. She said that originally The Irvine
• Company was involved in this and they pulled away, so she questioned what
would make the City think they could be successful when a private company
couldn't be. She said that in essence the City would be setting up a new
business and questioned the appropriateness of that. She spoke against the
acceptance of the grant and said she feels that it is incorrect and improper
for the City to be experimenting with natural gas vehicles.
Volume 50 - Page 328
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
INDEX
Mr. Murphy pointed out that on page 6 of the staff report there is a
discussion of the Alternate Fuel Vehicle (AFV) fueling station. He said that
when the grant application was initiated in September of 1995 staff had.
• planned, in conjunction with the grant application, to work with The Irvine
Company to construct a fast fueling facility at Jamboree and MacArthur.
Originally, the grant application would have required the City to participate
by helping entitle that site in terms of getting it through the City's system
and the Coastal Commission. He said the intention was to construct a fast -
fill fueling facility on a portion of the site and develop the rest commercially.
After exploring the costs of dealing with the large hole in the ground, the
grading, etc., The Irvine Company decided that it was not economically
feasible. He said the City currently fuels its fleet with two kinds of fuel,
diesel and reformulated gasoline, and for a number of years the City staff
has looked to see if there are other alternate fuels available that may make
sense. He provided a list of examples of other cities and agencies using CNG
vehicles.
Council Member Glover said she believes the message to the public is
incongruous when the Council says that the budget is very tight and then
gets involved in experimental programs.
Mr. Murphy explained that the original grant was to acquire the vehicles at
basically equal cost to diesel through the use of the grant and to have a fast -
fill CNG facility both available to the City and commercially available to the
general public. He said the key to making that station work was the airport
(the vans and shuttle service), as well as taxi -cabs. He further explained
that initially the City had a larger grant for more vehicles, however it was
reduced down to ten during the competitive process. He explained that it
• would have required some additional investment by Mesa to build the
station, some investment by The Irvine Company in terms of the use of their
land and the. future development of their land, with no direct City costs in
the fueling facility.
In response to Mayor Pro Tern Debay, Mr. Murphy explained that the grant
funds come from motor vehicle license payees in the air district area and the
grant will pay the incremental cost to buy the natural gas vehicles, since
they are more expensive per unit.
Council Member Watt asked for clarification on whether the price of natural
gas is less at the pump and Mr. Murphy explained that it is 33% less ($0.99
versus $0.67 per gallon), however because of the loss of payload and the
heavier fuel tanks, the fuel economy is less.
Mr. Guthrie, Fuel Solutions, said that he, on behalf of staff, aggressively
researched the engine maintenance issue and the bottom line is the engines
that will be used in this program will be third - generation engines that have
gone through evolution for about the last four years and are primarily from
Cummins Engines. The engines are deemed to very reliable and have
essentially equivalent down -time ratings as their diesel equivalents.
In response to Mayor Hedge's question about whether the price of natural
gas is subsidized in any way, Mr. Harger, Southern California Gas Company,
• replied that it is not, and that it is a fully weighted cost. He also reported
that the natural gas rates are relatively flat and have maintained a flat
nature over the last few years compared to diesel and gasoline which spike
depending on what happens in the Middle East. He said he can't guarantee
the City a fixed rate, however he said that based on the forecast of the cost of
natural gas over the next ten years, there is less than a 2% increase forecast
per year.
Volume 50 - Page 329
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
1" 1 '
Mr. Guthrie said that most cleanup programs are evaluated on cost
effectiveness and that is the major criteria that is used to judge programs.
• The format subscribed to by the Air Resources Board and AQMD to
determine cost effectiveness is just under $8.00 per pound over a 10 -year life
of the vehicles and there are many programs that have been funded that cost
as much as $20 -40 per pound. Mr. Guthrie said that the engine that is going
to be used in the vehicles is manufactured by Cummins and they are
currently on the third generation of development.
In response to Mayor Hedges, Mr. Guthrie said that other emission
reduction strategies that cities can use these funds for and that grant
applications are made for include telecommuting, rideshare programs, and
building bike paths, etc. He said he does not have information on the dollar
per pound emission reduction value, however as a category, heavy duty
programs are the most cost effective. He explained that programs can be
funded that would displace gasoline light duty pickup truck type usage, and
programs that can displace diesel in transit applications.
Mr. Harger reported that Chevron is in the process of implementing a
program and have found that replacing 40 UPS vehicles with natural gas
vehicles is more cost effective than car scrapping. He said car scrapping is
an option that is often chosen, however this is a more cost effective option.
Harold Jasper questioned whether this is the cost for purchasing front -
loading trucks and asked what the sense would be in buying front loaders to
replace side loaders or rear loaders.
• General Services Director Niederhaus explained that the City operates three
types of trash trucks: 1) rear loaders that are used for very narrow alleys
where the driver can't exit the vehicle and someone has to stay behind the
load; 2) side loaders which will be replaced by the CNG truck; and 3) the
front loaders, which are the best for the City as far as workers comp and
injuries. He said the plan is to replace the side loaders with six front
loaders.
Madeline Arakehan, owner of a trash hauling company and president of a
trade organization, addressed problems with the vehicles backfiring and said
that even though they have improved, they aren't cost effective. She also
voiced concerns about grant money and asked Mr. Murphy if the City pays
DMV license fees, to which he replied no. She said she cannot see the
necessity since the trucks aren't cost effective and the downtime is 33%
rather than 9 -10 %.
Mayor Hedges asked Mr. Murphy if he envisions having increased internal
service fund costs with the purchase of natural gas vehicles.
Mr. Murphy explained that because the proposal is to buy three vehicles
earlier than scheduled, the additional cost is $317,000. The money would be
incurred at some point, however it will be incurred a year or two earlier and
during the second year there will be higher costs, which also would be
incurred at some point.
• Mr. Niederhaus reported that the City currently has three trucks that
should have been replaced last spring and the earliest new trucks can be
received (diesel or CNG) is next spring. He said that staff is proposing to
purchase a total of ten trucks, which will decrease the overall maintenance
costs because the hydraulics, welding, and mechanical repairs are costly and
time consuming. He reported that as pointed out by Mr. Murphy the other
Volume 50 - Page 330
•
•
•
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
three trucks are being replaced approximately two years early and it will
require advancing the money in the Internal Service Fund. He further
explained that the recommended budget amendment in the amount of
$475,000 is merely an advancement of the AQMD funding. He said the
money to pay for and finance the higher cost for the CNG vehicles is not in
the budget and this is the authority staff needs to prepare the specs for the
purchase of ten new trucks.
Mr. Niederhaus reported that if the trucks prove to be successful, he would
hope to expand the usage.
Mr. Murphy said that if the program is expanded or other vehicles are
replaced with natural gas vehicles in the future, the replacement costs will
be higher assuming there are no grants available.
Mr. Harger said that the costs will come down as more vehicles are
manufactured and Cummins recaptures their investment dollars for
research in that engine. In the Southern California Gas Company territory,
there are approximately 4200 vehicles operating on natural gas (about 50%
private and 50% municipal, federal and state fleet).
Motion by Council Member O'Neil to approve the AQMD contract that
stipulates the conditions of acceptance of a grant for $500,000 for an
alternative fuel vehicles program and authorize staff to execute the contract
and proceed with the program; approve Budget Amendment (BA -015) for
$475,532 for the purchase of ten compressed natural gas refuse trucks to
provide interim funding until AQMD grant funds are received; and approve
budget amendments for the construction of a Corporation Yard compressed
natural gas fueling station, mechanic training, tools, and upgrades to the
Equipment Maintenance Shop as outlined in staff report.
Council Member Watt spoke in support of the motion and noted that if the
City can make this pencil out it might help with other programs, such as the
Rideshare program. She noted that the annual funds received from AB 2766
can be spent on this type of thing which does more to reduce the emissions
from transit than other programs.
In response to Mayor Hedges question about whether more trips would be
required because of the loss of payload due to weight and configuration of the
tanks, Mr. Niederhaus explained that it would require an extra six round
trips by each of the trucks. In other words, six of the eighteen trucks would
make one extra round trip per day, which would amount to about $400 per
week if all the overtime is considered, or $16,000 per year. He said that it
would be offset by the fuel savings and the rideshare savings of $30,000 and
$7,000, respectively. He said the cost estimate for the City to build the fuel
station which will allow the trucks to be fueled overnight is approximately
$70,000, however the Gas Company has offered to sell the City fuel savers,
which are small individual units for each truck, as well as install the gas
meter. The City crews will be installing the underground pipeline to the
parking area, the trucks will be pulled in at night and plugged into the
fueling station to be fueled automatically overnight. He said the $0.65 per
gallon includes the maintenance on the compressor, the replacement and the
CIP costs. He said the CIP costs will be borne from the 2766 Subvention
Funds and not City funds.
Mayor Hedges stated that he will not support the motion because it has not
been shown that it will result in a net savings to the City. He said the City
has already expended $25,000 out -of- pocket cost for the consultant, which is
not reflected in the report, and have estimated an additional $16,000 per
Volume 50 - Page 331
INDEX
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
year in trip costs. He said the report also does not reflect the additional
Internal Service Fund costs that the City will have to bear in the absence of
any other grant programs. He said that at best this results in a wash for the
• City, however it completely ignores the rather excessive cost borne by the
taxpayer at large to subsidize this program.
Council Member Cox said it is unfortunate that the Council is scrutinizing
this issue the way they are and he has never seen this kind of scrutiny on a
proposal to replace a vehicle or any other product. He said nobody talks
about the health costs of almost $7 billion per year due to the asthmatic
conditions that are caused by foul air. He said the reality is that these
vehicles are not futuristic and many companies have invested to generate
and create a market for them. He said the state legislature passed AB 2766
in an effort to raise funds to help deal with the air quality problem and to
assist cities with converting their dirty vehicles into cleaner vehicles.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Watt
Noes:
Glover, Mayor Hedges
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
24. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE HEARING
OFFICER IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF MARIE NGUYEN
(MASSAGE PERMIT TECHNICIAN PERMIT DENIAL).
Harvey Ginn, 555 E. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, legal counsel for Marie
• Nguyen, explained that his client has had a license with the City since 1987,
has been in her current location since 1991 and during this entire period of
time there has been no suggestion of impropriety at these locations. In 1992
while working in the City of Long Beach she suffered a conviction which
would have disqualified her from holding a license, however the conviction
was not revealed on her application. He said the information was not
withheld intentionally. He explained that his client is a naturalized
Vietnamese who speaks English rather poorly and does not read English
very well. He said she picked up the applications and took them out of the
building and they were completed by various individuals over the different
years. He said Ms. Nguyen signed the applications and returned them,
however it was not explained to her that she was signing under penalty of
perjury to the entire contents of the applications. He asked that this matter
be referred back to the Police Department to determine what restrictions the
department could live with in this particular case. In 1992 when there was a
problem, Ms. Nguyen took immediate steps and fired the involved employees
and turned their licenses in to the City the very next day. He said that his
client would be very amenable to any type of restrictions that the Police
Department may place upon her as to hours or mode of operation. He
indicated that his client is present, along with her interpreter, if the Council
wishes to direct any questions to her. He said that at her particular age she
has no other training and no other means of being self - supportive. In
response to Mayor Hedges, Mr. Ginn reported that Penal Code Section
647(a) is engaging in a lewd act and his client plead no contest to the charge.
• City Attorney Burnham stated that he read the hearing officer's report and
the report states that the same argument was presented at the hearing, and
in spite of that, the hearing officer recommended that the decision of the
Police Department denying the massage technician permit be upheld. He
said the denial is mandated by provisions of the municipal code which states
that a conviction of that particular Penal Code section is basis for denial.
Volume 50 - Page 332
Q1 `
Nguyen Massage
Appeal
(27)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
Mr. Ginn reported that the hearing officer found that the Chief of Police was
entitled to deny the application, not that it should be denied, but merely that
• he was within his rights to do so based upon the Code. He said the Council
has the right to modify that position and reiterated that he is not asking that
the license be granted as is, but that it be referred back to the Police
Department for further study to determine what type of restrictions might
be imposed upon her to allow her to continue to make her living.
Motion by Council Member Edwards to accept, approve and adopt the
determination made by the hearing officer to deny the appeal and sustain
the decision of the Chief of Police to deny the application for permit as final.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
27. CITY POLICY A -9, CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES.
Mayor Hedges explained that this item has been set for action on November
25, 1996. Motion by Mayor Hedges to refer this to the Legislative Committee
for recommendation and approval, after staff has completed their work and
prior to coming back to Council on November 25, 1996. The motion carried
by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes:
None
Absent:
•
None
Abstain:
None
28. COMMUTING VEHICLES (Requested by Mayor John Hedges)
[contd. from 9/23/961.
Mayor Hedges explained that this item was continued from September 23,
1996 and tonight the Council was to have received a report on commuting
vehicles in conjunction with an overall fleet study, which was to have been
completed six or seven months ago. He explained the problems that have
been encountered with getting the study completed and noted that
apparently the new consultant has not done the job or provided the City with
the answers that staff wanted them to provide in respect to commuting
vehicles, thus resulting in another delay.
He said he pulled this item to underscore the ongoing nature of the
commuting vehicle question which has been going on for six years as the
City has been attempting to come to some sort of policy decision on this
issue. According to the last survey, he said Newport Beach was up near or at
the top in the number of commuting vehicles per number of employees.
Motion by Mayor Hedges to continue this item to November 12, 1996. The
motion carried by the following roll call vote:
• Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Volume 50 - Page 333
INDEX
Council Policy
(69)
Budget (40)
Fleet Maint &
Procurement
Arroyo Assoc
C- 3041(38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
PUBLIC HEARINGS
29. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
• DISTRICT NO. 71 (BALBOA BOULEVARD BETWEEN "A" STREET
AND "H" STREET).
Public Works Director Webb reviewed the procedures for the assessment
district and outlined the steps that would need to be taken if the Council
decided to proceed with the formation of the district or if the proceedings are
abandoned. He explained that there are 173 parcels in the district and the
total cost of the improvements are $1,355,000, therefore, the assessment for
each parcel is $7,832.37. He stated that as of this morning the City had 29
letters representing 32 parcels or 18% of the District in protest and 57 letters
representing 57 parcels or 35% in favor of the District. At noon the City
Clerk received 72 letters of protest, mostly form letters. He distributed
copies of three of the letters and explained their contents. He said that staff
contacted 28 of the 72 that came in and was successful in reaching 15 of the
28 who said they did not send the letters and were still in favor of the
District. If all 72 protest letters were accepted, there would be a 53%
protest. If the 15 that were contacted were not included as valid protests,
there would be a 46% protest, which would be considered an unconfirmed
protest. He said there are three or four people in attendance who did not
sign the letters and will attest to that. He reported that staff contacted the
Newport Beach Police Department and asked them to begin an investigation
and they in turn contacted the District Attorney's office to assist with the
investigation.
City Clerk Harkless stated that the letters were delivered in the mail on
• Monday.
Mac Brown reported that as of about 11:00 a.m. on Monday morning there
was a 17 -18% protest and about 35% in favor. After the receipt of the letters,
he said he had staff start calling the people to try to determine if the
signatures were valid. He said this is quite unusual and may border on
fraud. He said he will ask staff for a report on the percentage of valid
protests and if that figure is less than a majority, which it is at this point in
time, then it is within the Council's discretion as to whether or not to
proceed. He said he isn't sure whether they will have an accurate figure
exactly as to the protest count this evening, but it appears that it will be less
than the 50% threshold.
In response to questions raised by Council Member O'Neil, Mr. Brown
explained that if it is determined within the next 25 -30 days that there was
actually a valid written majority protest, the proceedings can be aborted.
Mayor Hedges opened the public hearing.
Gus Chabre, 1128 E. Balboa Blvd., pointed out that by counting the 15
signatures as invalid protests, the percentage of protests is under 50% and it
is within the Council's power to grant the formation of the District. He said
that if the proceedings are stopped, whoever is responsible for the forged
letters, will have accomplished their goal.
• Bill Wren, 1118 E. Balboa Blvd., explained that if this issue cannot be
decided tonight the entire District will be in jeopardy because the process
may change if Prop 218 passes. He said that what has occurred is a blatant
travesty of civil rights and criminal proceedings are justified. He also
explained that if there are more than 50% protests registered, the Council
can by a 415ths vote approve the District, which would eliminate any
Volume 50 - Page 334
INDEX
Assess Dist 71
Underground
Util (89)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
future.
Roger Roussett, 121 Via Harbor, clarified that his father, Roger Roussett,
• Sr., did not submit the protest letter that was received on Monday, contrary
to what his mother told someone on the telephone, and when shown the
signature on the petition stated that it wasn't his father's signature nor that
of any other family member.
Dan Gilliland, 1134 E. Balboa Blvd., in response to comments raised at the
first public hearing, said that one reason to underground the wires is for
aesthetic reasons. He referenced the number of fires recently started by
downed power lines and pointed out that this would be a prime target area
for a similar disaster and also pointed out that the guy wires that hold up
the poles are a hazard at night.
Peter Pallette, 1210 E. Balboa Blvd., also noted that the fire issue is valid
and also stated that he believes the cost of the assessment will be recovered
by the increase in property values. He strongly encouraged the Council to
vote in favor of the formation of the District.
Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
Mac Brown briefly reviewed the steps necessary to form the assessment
district. He explained that the statement made by Mr. Wren about the
415ths vote option is correct and if the Council wants to take that action they
would need to make a finding that the District is necessary because of public
health and safety reasons.
• Motion by Mayor Hedges to adopt Resolution No. 96 -89 approving utility
agreements for approving contracts with the respective utility companies for
the underground work, and authorizing execution of the contracts; adopt
Resolution No. 96 -90 confirming assessments which takes final action
regarding any protests, confirms the assessment, approves the final
Engineer's Report and orders the works of improvements; adopt Resolution
No. 96 -91 authorizing issuance of bonds which sets forth the terms and
conditions for the sale of bonds and approves the Purchase Agreement
submitted by the designated underwriter; and to deny the protests and form
the district based on public health and safety factors as noted in testimony
received. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
RECESS AND RECONVENE
The Council took a brief recess at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m. with all
members present and seated.
30. CHINA PALACE RESTAURANT (Jack Mau, Appellant) - 2800 WEST
COAST HIGHWAY - MODIFICATION NO. 4464 (Review of the
• decision of the Planning Commission on the appeal of the
Modifications Committee's action concerning the proposed
construction of a 6 foot 4 inch high fence to enclose an outdoor
dining area along West Coast Highway. The lower 3 foot 4 inch
portion of this wall is solid, topped by 3 feet of glass, and will
encroach to within 2 feet of the front property line along West Coast
Highway).
Volume 50 - Page 335
INDEX
Zoning/Mod 4464
China Palace Rest
(94)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
INDEX
Assistant City Manager Wood explained that the request is for a wall along
the front of the restaurant that is a total of 6'4" high with the lower 3'4"
• solid and the upper portion glass. The Modifications Committee approved it
initially but with a change in the design so that the wall would enclose only
the accessory outdoor dining area. She explained that the change was made
because of a provision in the Mariner's Mile Specific Plan that says that 50%
of any lot frontage abutting Coast Highway shall provide a setback of not
less than 10 feet from the 12 foot setback that was established for the street
widening. The outdoor dining area is allowed to encroach into that as per
the ordinance, however the outdoor dining ordinance also provides that
fences, walls or similar barriers shall serve only to define the dining area
and not constitute a permanent or all- weather enclosure. The applicant
appealed to the Planning Commission and the Commission shared staffs
concerns with regard to the requirement of the Specific Plan. The Planning
Commission took into consideration the applicant's concern that if the wall
were shortened to just enclose the accessory outdoor dining area that it be
placed so that it respected the architecture of the building. The Planning
Commission approved the modification with the smaller area of the wall
with it connecting to the building in a more appropriate place. The
Commission also wanted to decrease the amount of the wall that is solid,
therefore added a condition that the solid portion should be no higher than
2'10 ". She explained that the City Council has the option of upholding the
Planning Commission's decision or modifying it, or denying the modification
application.
Motion by Council Member Glover to modify the action of the Planning
Commission to approve the construction of a 6'4" high fence along West
• Coast Highway with the lower 3'4" portion of the wall to be solid and topped
by 3' of glass, which may encroach to within 2' of the property line along
West Coast Highway, and to delete Conditions 2 and 6. She explained that
the motion will allow the 6'4" wall along the length of the building as
originally proposed by the applicant. She said that when she originally
looked at this she did not feel that this was appropriate, but after further
review and taking into consideration what the City is trying to do on
Mariner's Mile to improve the aesthetics, she thinks this is an appropriate
way to go. She said to have the line of the wall extend from one end of the
restaurant to the other will have a much better look, as far as symmetry,
than if the wall is brought in half way to the building.
Dan Johnston, 1033 Bangor St., San Diego, architect for Jack Mau,
explained that the only change that is reflected in the drawings that wasn't
mentioned by Council Member Glover is that the wall has been changed so
the solid part is lowered six inches to 2'10" and the upper part (the glass
part) will be 3'6 ".
Based on the information provided by Mr. Johnston, Council Member Glover
restated her motion, which is to modify the action of the Planning
Commission to delete Condition #2, which will allow the wall to be the length
originally proposed by the applicant. She explained that this sustains the
Planning Commission's decision to lower the solid portion of the wall to
2'10 ".
• Mayor Hedges opened the public hearing, and hearing no testimony, closed
the hearing.
Council Member Watt spoke in support of the motion and commended
Council Member Glover's efforts to beautify Mariner's Mile and said that it
makes more aesthetic sense to allow the wall the entire length if outdoor
Volume 50 - Page 336
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
dining is allowed. She said she doesn't really like the outdoor dining at all
in front of this particular building because it 'impacts the setback and it
would be better if it could be on the roof. The motion carried by the
• following roll call vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
31. CITY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS/ANNUAL STATUS REPORT
City Manager Murphy explained that this is a status report on Development
Agreements 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, which the City has entered into with various
parties. He said the development agreements are with The Irvine Company,
Library Exchange Agreement; Hoag Memorial Hospital; The Irvine
Company, Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement; Pacific
View Memorial Park; Ford Motor Land Development; and Fletcher Jones
Motor Cars. He further explained that as a provision of each of the
agreements, the Council is required to conduct an annual review on the
status of the agreements and conduct a public hearing.
Mayor Hedges questioned how long the document has been available to the
public and staff responded that it was made available on Wednesday prior to
the Council meeting and the parties involved had it for over a month. He
requested that in succeeding years the document be available to the public
earlier so that they can testify, if they so desire, and also so everyone has
enough time to look through it.
• Council Member Watt, referring to CIOSA, said it was her understanding
that the open space parcels were to be dedicated when the development
permits were issued for the major properties (Castaways, Newporter North,
and Bay View Landing) and asked if the dedications have occurred.
City Attorney Burnham said there were three thresholds for dedication: 1)
the issuance of the first building permit on Castaways or Newporter North;
2) the completion of the residential development; and 3) that all of the
parcels would be developed as entitled. He explained that the open space
dedication chart is Exhibit E to the CIOSA report and summarized that Bay
View Landing and Newport Knoll were to be dedicated upon the effective
date of the agreement; Upper Castaways and Newporter North, and
Freeway Reservation North were to be dedicated upon the issuance of the
first building permits; San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North
(which is no longer a candidate), and Jamboree/MacArthur were to be
offered for dedication upon the issuance of the last building permit for all
projects contained in the agreement, although the company could waive that
condition; and Newport Village was to be dedicated upon the issuance of the
first building permits for both Upper Castaways and Newporter North.
Motion by Council Member Watt to direct staff to bring back a specific status
report on November 12, 1996 on CIOSA to clarify the actual dedications.
Mayor Hedges opened the item up for public discussion.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Debay, Mr. Murphy stated that if Prop 218
passes it will not change these agreements.
Motion by Council Member Edwards to receive and file the reports. It was
clarified by Mr. Burnham that the motion makes the determination of good
Volume 50 - Page 337
I IN 3) W'l
TIC/Library #4
C -2823 (a)
Hoag #5 C -2912
TIC /Open Space
#6 CIOSA C -2920
Pac View #7
C -3058
Ford Motor #8
C -3059
Fletcher Jones
#9 - 3067
(38)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
faith and substantial compliance with each agreement by the other party,
except as to Development Agreement No. 6, which was continued until
November 12. The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
• Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Maxine Cohen, 118 33rd Street, distributed photos and a letter addressed to
the City Council dated October 27, 1996 requesting that consideration be
given to changing the parking on 33rd Street on the Balboa Peninsula in the
100 block between Balboa Boulevard and Seashore Drive, from the south to
the north side of the street. She reviewed the reasons for her request as
outlined in her letter. She further explained that her concerns had been
passed on to staff who indicated that a poll of residents on the street would
be required in order to get a consensus.
Mayor Hedges requested that Ms. Cohen's letter be given to the City
Manager and that this issue be referred to the Traffic Affairs Committee for
review and consideration.
• Rose Parvin, 412 31st Street, voiced concerns about the Cannery Village area
in conjunction with the 47 liquor licenses that have been granted and the
resulting devaluation of her property.
• Council Member Edwards asked Council Member Watt how much money
was raised on the Bay to Beach event. She indicated that she had not heard,
however Mr. Murphy indicated that he thought it was less than last year due
to the smaller turn -out.
• A member of the public (name not given) thanked the Council for taking a
stand against the Mermaid establishment.
32. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
VACANCIES:
Motion by Mayor Hedges to appoint Seymour Beek as the Marine Industry
representative and John Blom as the Corona del Mar representative. The
motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Jt i 4 WY 0 RIM IU
33. UNSCHEDULED VACANCY ON THE CITY ARTS COMMISSION.
• Motion by Mayor Hedges to accept the resignation of Ken Marshall effective
October 16, 1996; appoint Mayor Pro Tem Debay and Council Members
Edwards and O'Neil to the Ad -Hoc Appointments Committee; and direct the
City Clerk to post and publish a Special Vacancy Notice requesting that
applications be submitted by 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 13, 1996,
and schedule the submission of the nominations to the Council on November
Volume 50 - Page 338
INDEX
EDC (24)
Arts (24)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
25, 1996 with the final appointment to be made on December 9, 1996. The
motion carried by the following roll call vote:
• Ayes: O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
34. MEASURE Q (Requested by Council Members Watt and Glover).
City Manager Murphy explained that this item originated from two separate
requests from two Council Members. Council Member Glover requested a
discussion of what would be done with future savings that would be
generated if Measure Q is successful; and Council Member Watt asked for a
discussion related to the impact on small businesses and how the City might
be able to assist them if Measure Q passes. He said staff has identified that
if Measure Q passes there would be a savings of $250,000 from the City's
discontinuation of providing the service to the small businesses which put
their trash at curbside. He indicated that his recommendation is that the
savings be used to continue to rebuild the reserves to achieve the Council's
goals. As to Council Member Watt's issue, he said that four meetings have
been held with a number of businesses. He said that staff has attempted to
meet with the businesses to find out what their issues are in terms of how
they will comply. He reiterated that staff has consistently said that if
Measure Q passes the City will no longer provide the service in the
commercial districts, however would assist the businesses in the transition
to trash collection by the private sector. Another issue is the problem with
illegal dumping in someone else's bin, which is an issue that the City tries to
assist with today and are willing to continue to assist with. He stated that
the City will be available to try to help make the transition easier and said
that if it isn't being done successfully to please advise him.
Speaking on behalf of the Pier Association, Marcia Dossey stated that a
majority of the business owners did not receive the original letter and asked
whether the letters would be forthcoming and additional meetings
scheduled.
Howard Silver, business owner on Balboa Island, said he can't understand
how this came about and why the business people were not involved in this.
He said that if the residents get refuse pickup once or twice a week, the
business people should get at least get that much for their tax dollars. He
said he thinks the whole thing is a smoke screen and the City is preparing at
some future date to go into the trash collecting business and will eventually
charge the residents an extra fee. He pointed out that there is a lot of money
in trash and noted that it is interesting that $75,000 of taxpayers money has
been used to finance this initiative.
Council Member O'Neil, addressing Mr. Silver's statement about this leading
to the City's ability to charge residents a fee, clarified that this is an
initiative measure that needs to be voted on by the people and if the City
ever attempted to charge a fee for residential refuse collection that too would
have to be voted on. He said Measure Q actually reaffirms the people's
• desire not to be charged a fee for residential curbside collection.
Mark Kehke, 73 Bridgeport, Newport Coast, explained that the downcoast
citizens pay private waste haulers to pick up their trash ($35.73 /qtr.). He
said he understands that economics is one of the major hurdles to the
annexation since the County is trying to control how much tax revenue
would be transferred to the City. From his perspective, he said in order to
Volume 50 - Page 339
INDEX
Election (39)
Measure Q
Finance (40)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
INDEX
make it easier to annex this area into the City, he would be willing to
continue to pay for trash collection. In response to Council Member
Edward's question about insurance cost differences between downcoast and
• the City, Mr. Kehke said he hasn't researched this, however has been told
that because of the difference between City and County fire service, the fire
insurance cost will go down if the annexation occurs.
Harold Jasper, 1218 Sand Key, Corona del Mar, commended the Council for
planning the use of potential savings. He said that it is clear that instead of
saving $250,000 per year if Measure Q passes, the City may actually face a
resulting liability of $50 million merely because this was placed on the
ballot. He explained his statement by noting that in the staff report Mr.
Murphy incorrectly states that he is quoting from the 1959 initiative passed
by the voters, when in fact he quotes from Ordinance 1403 passed by the
City Council on November 8, 1971, establishing new rules and regulations
regarding trash disposal. He pointed out that in Section 604 -160 of the 1971
ordinance it is stated that the City Manager has the powers and the duties
to, among other things regarding trash, establish rules and regulations
governing storage, collection and disposition, including the determination of
standards and specifications for approved containers and the placement of
such containers. Based upon the language of the existing municipal code
and the City's 25 year history that free collection of trash is limited to
defined curbside containers, he asked if anyone truly believes that the City
Manager, the City Attorney and the City Councils have been breaking the
law for 25 years. He said that the placement of Measure Q on the November
5th ballot to eliminate continued law violations is the clarion call to
contingency litigators to base a $50 million claim against the City on behalf
of all commercial, apartment and condo owner tax payers who have not been
• provided free trash pickup for the past 25 years. He said the unspoken
agenda referenced previously has to do with secret negotiations which have
obviously been taking place regarding the annexation of Newport Coast. He
said the basis for this conclusion is that it is common knowledge that the
County will only give up 10% of the property taxes collected in Newport
Coast to the annexing City and the City currently receives 17% of the
property taxes collected by the County. He said that a Newport Coast
annexation fiscal analysis has not been publicly acknowledged by any of the
players and he asked if it is possible that a deal has already been struck
wherein Newport Beach has already agreed that it will not collect trash and
pay for it from ad valorem taxes and will accept the 10% portion of property
taxes offered by the County.
Council Member Cox told Mr. Jasper that his comments entirely are
insulting and totally unfounded and there is no basis for the things he said.
He said he has sat in the meetings that Mr. Jasper calls "secret" and no one
has made a deal or even suggested 10 %. He said he would appreciate it if in
the future he treated this organization, this Council and these people with a
great deal more respect because they deserve a lot more respect. He said the
Council is not up here for fun and are trying to act in the City's best interest
and they work day and night to do that. He said that for years the Council
has had the discussion of annexing the Newport Coast on their agenda, it is
in the Council's sphere of influence, and has been discussed for at least 20
years.
• Council Member Glover clarified that the reason that this City Council took
this up is because they felt the need to clarify and close what was felt to be a
loophole that has been there for many years. She said that this was done
with no hidden agenda and the City Attorney does not feel the clarifications
could have been handled by an administrative act.
Volume 50 - Page 340
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 26, 1996
IlVDEX
Mr. Jasper stated that the 1959 ordinance is moot because the ordinance
adopted in 1971 (Ordinance 1403) clearly spells out that the City Manager
has the administrative responsibility to set the standards and for 25 years
• curbside collection has been defined as "a can put out on the curb" and has
restricted its curbside collection to cans. He explained that there was an
ordinance adopted in 1954 and again in 1959 that eliminated the cost
because it stated that 25 cents per $100 of assessed valuation should be set
aside for trash collection.
City Attorney Burnham pointed out that the text of the current code
(6.04.170) is essentially identical to the initiative that was passed in 1959
and explained that an initiative ordinance can only be amended by a vote of
the people. He said he has looked at Dr. Jasper's argument about the
authority given the City Manager regarding the setting of rules, etc. for the
collection of trash service, and those powers granted to the City Manager do
not trump the vote of the people in the initiative ordinance, which was
simply recodified in 1971. Mr. Burnham explained that the ordinance says
the cost and expense of collecting, hauling away and disposal of garbage
shall be defrayed exclusively from the ad valorem property tax revenue for
the City. He said the City can determine the frequency of the collection,
however if someone were to go out and hire a refuse service to collect their
trash on a daily basis and present the bill to the City, there would be a
distinct possibility that a court would say that the City has a legal obligation
to pay that bill. He said it is his understanding that this is the reason why
Measure Q is on the ballot and is a concern that has been expressed by his
office for an extensive period of time.
Madeline Arakelian said she is not in favor of Measure Q only because of the
• annexation situation and the different treatment those residents will
receive. She said that as a trash hauler it would be beneficial if she voted for
it. She said that in the 45 years she has been in the industry, it has not been
an easy industry and she has seen more and more very small family owned,
three- generation businesses going out of business. She thanked the Council
and the past Councils for allowing her and the other haulers to participate in
the City of Newport Beach and pointed out that in the 33 cities of the county,
Costa Mesa, Irvine and Newport Beach are the only ones that have an open
forum for waste haulers and they all compete. She estimated that the
average monthly cost for pickup for a small business with a 3 -yard container
would be anywhere between $25 -55 for once a week service.
John Robinson, 2012 Leeward Lane, said that for over 30 years the City with
its small and proper equipment successfully serviced these 200 small
businesses, mostly with no more trash than a large household, and situated
in the cramped areas of Corona del Mar, Old Newport, the Peninsula, Balboa
Island, and the majority intermingled with private residences which are
actually above the business itself. If Measure Q passes, by the end of the
year there could be ten or more reluctant trash collection companies tying up
the alleys in the early morning hours, noisily trying to distinguish the
difference between household and commercial waste. He asked why the City
would pay over $70,000 to put this measure on the ballot and asked if there
is a possibility that this is the first step in making all Newport households
pay for their trash pickup either by the City or by a commercial company of
• the City Council's choice.
Responding to Council Member Edwards, Mr. Murphy explained that the
entire election budget is approximately $32,000 and the City Clerk estimated
the cost of Measure Q to be approximately $3500- $5000, so he is unsure of
where the $70,000 number came from.
Volume 50 - Page 341
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
_111
Council Member Glover voiced concerns about the inaccuracy of the figures
that have been quoted and Mr. Johnston stated that he received the figures
from the County.
• Ray Handy, 44 Whitewater, Corona del Mar, Central Balboa Business
Improvement District board member, said that most of the merchants aren't
against paying to have their trash picked up, but there is a logistical problem
with having private haulers come to Balboa. He said they called 12 of the
haulers on the list and of those they called none of them would pick up small
trash containers. He said there are approximately 100 businesses in Central
Balboa, and approximately 30 of the larger ones have private haulers now,
approximately 10 -15 have space to put a large trash bin on the property,
approximately 20 have space only for small trash cans in the alley, and
approximately 30 others have no space to put trash out at all, so the City has
a central location on Bay Street with six bins. He said there are up to 70
businesses and as many as 17 residents that use these six three -yard
containers. If Measure Q passes, Balboa will have to maintain a trash site
located on Bay Avenue in order to accommodate those merchants that do not
have space to put bins on their property. He said the problems associated
with maintaining the site are: 1) who will enforce which merchants can use
the site; 2) who will determine what each merchant will pay; 3) who will
collect the monthly payment from each merchant or resident; 4) who will pay
the monthly bills; 5) who will control the site and keep it clean; and 6) there
is no way to collect from the residents who use the site.
Phil Sansone, Corona del Mar, said that years ago the Newport Beach voters
passed an initiative ordinance that required that the City provide refuse
collection from ad valorem taxes, however the ordinance did not distinguish
• between commercial and residential collection. Initially, it was a City policy
to collect commercial refuse provided the number of containers was
comparable to that normally picked up from residential properties. Over
time the number of businesses using the free service grew from the relatively
few to around 200 and the number is constantly increasing and now they
generate so much refuse that it costs the City $250,000 a year to provide up
to six collections per week to handle the load, in contrast to the weekly
collections provided to residents. He said hindsight says that the City
should have curtailed the number of commercial pickups as well as the cost
quantity, but the alternative was that there would be overflowing trash cans,
boxes, etc. and unhealthy conditions as a result of it. Not incidental to this
issue is that the residents are now subsidizing the business recycling by
paying $2.03 per month recycling surcharge for one pickup per week, while
the small businesses pay the same amount for up to six collections per week.
He said that if the City started charging the 200 businesses the true cost of
recycling than they would find contracting with commercial haulers to be
more economical since many cannot get by with one or two collections per
week. If Measure Q fails current City taxpayers will not only have to
continue to foot the bill for refuse collection for those 200 businesses but will
also have to pay for the businesses and residences in areas that the City may
annex, who now pay for their own refuse collection. He said Measure Q is
written to protect the current Newport Beach taxpayers in the event that the
revenue from the annexed areas does not cover the cost of providing
essential services. The theory that charging annexed areas for refuse
• collection creates separate classes of Newport citizens doesn't hold much
water since there are many offices, apartment and condominium complexes,
as well as gated communities and the majority of the businesses in the City
that already pay for refuse collection. He said his recommendation to the
voters of Newport Beach is to vote "yes" on Measure Q and also to elect Jan
Debay, John Noyes and Dolores Otting to Council.
Volume 50 - Page 342
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
INDEX
Rush Hill, Chairman of the Board of the Newport Harbor Chamber of
Commerce, reported that the Board has looked at this measure and urges
support of it. He said the Board believes that the intent of the ordinance on
• the books is to provide for trash pickup for the residents of Newport Beach to
be paid for out of general fund money and not as a special fee. He said they
do not believe it was ever the intent of the ordinance to include business in
that definition, however the way it is written, it does include business and
approximately 190 of the 7000+ businesses avail themselves of this service
today and some of them as often as daily. If additional businesses continue
to use this ordinance for their free -trash pick -up there may be an unfunded
liability as large as $5 million. He said their Board would not vote in favor of
this issue if they felt it was an anti- business issue..
Mayor Hedges, responding to remarks made by Mr. Hill, noted that he
speaks for a Chamber of Commerce, which as a representative of the
business community, has supported every single tax and fee increase levied
on business in the past five years. He said he heard testimony from a
professional in the business that it would cost approximately $50 per month
to provide commercial refuse pickup ($10,000 per month or $120,000 a year)
for once a week pickup for 200 businesses. He pointed out that there is
nothing in the code that requires the City of Newport Beach to pick up daily
from anybody and he has been told that the City can't provide daily pick up
because a level of service that is artificially set has to be maintained. As far
as recycling fee charges, the recycling fee charges probably should be
increased for those businesses that take greater advantage of recycling,
however that has never been proposed. He said the annexation issue is very
real and despite the testimony of one person tonight, if annexation is
successful and if this measure is successful, it would create two tiers of
• citizens. He said the whole concept of two tiers has a great deal of history,
not only in municipal affairs but also in the labor world, and cited the airline
industry as an example. The argument that the down coast residents are
already paying for refuse service is specious, but it will create problems for
the City down the road. He said that there has been a committee formed to
support the measure and they filed a campaign statement because they've
collected money to support the measure. He pointed out that the contributors
are Browning Ferris Industries and Western Waste, two of the largest trash
haulers in the world. He said the whole thing has lots of problems, it was
poorly drafted, it was thrown together hastily, and while it may or may not
be true that some people on the dais have been concerned about it for some
period of time, it is something which is being rushed into without exhausting
administrative remedies. He said he doesn't think these huge trash haulers
would support this initiative unless they thought there was something in it
for them somewhere, whether A is increased business down the line or a
possible shot at the franchise of the entire City operation, so they give money
so they don't go against the Council majority and therefore curry favor with
them. He said it simply does not sit well with him to have these huge
companies rooting around in local Newport Beach politics and if you don't
need any other reason to vote "no" on Measure Q, that in itself will do it.
Council Member Glover explained that one of the reasons the City has
chosen to pick up trash for the businesses more than one time per week is
because of health issues. She said that all throughout society there are two
• tiers of people who enjoy different things, and noted that two tier citizenship
takes place all over Newport Beach for various and sundry reasons. She said
that she thinks the City Council, in all honesty, wanted to clear up
something that has been a problem on the books for many years. She
explained that the City has met with the businesses four times and she has
attended two of those meetings and staff has tried to explain to the small
businesses that the City will help them to find solutions. She said that she
Volume 50 - Page 343
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
II` 1
thinks the City Manager has done a good job in reporting to the Council the
importance of Measure Q and she is pleased that he and the City Attorney
were willing to bring this to the Council's attention. She said the passage of
• the original initiative in 1959 never intended to require the City to pay for
free trash collection for any small business or for that matter, large
businesses like Fashion Island, but it was intended to require the City to pay
for free curbside trash collection for residents. She said she strongly
supports Measure Q because it reaffirms the City's obligation to pick up
curbside residential containers and closes the current loophole which could
require the City to pay for all trash collection service for all businesses, at a
"budget busting" $5 million per year.
Motion by Council Member Glover that the City put the $250,000 savings
from Measure Q into reserves. She explained that the reserves are down
below the level where she would like to see them and until this is taken care,
she can't make political promises about the use of the possible savings, but
would recommend that it be put into reserves. She asked the residents to
vote "yes" on Measure Q.
Mayor Hedges asked if the motion'would include a $250,000 expenditure cut
to the General Services refuse budget next year.
Council Member Glover replied that she cannot speak to cutting of the
General Services budget next year, but it is a general concern of hers.
Mr. Murphy explained that if there are savings in labor costs, tipping fees
and vehicle reductions they would be built into next year's budget if Q
passes.
• Council Member Glover said the budgeting for next year would depend on
the service needs. She pointed out that she has asked that when there are
projected savings on an item that a line item be added to the budget showing
where those savings have been placed.
Council Member Edwards said that this issue was debated twice in
committee, it was debated publicly in City Council when it was decided to
place it on the ballot, the most public of discussion is happening again
tonight, and the most public beyond that is the opportunity to vote on the
issue on November 5th. Referring to the comments made about "secret"
meetings regarding annexation, he said there have been three or four
publicly noticed hearings on annexation before the Legislative Committee.
He said there have also been four public hearings before the City Council
during goal setting sessions since he has been on Council regarding
annexation. He reiterated that the Council has already heard from the City
Attorney that this cannot be done administratively. As indicated by Mr.
Hill, he said there are 7000 businesses in the City of Newport Beach and
7000 of them pay for their trash pickup and that will not change. What will
change is the trash collection for approximately 190 businesses that have
been taking advantage of the other 7000 businesses, as well as the residents
of the City of Newport Beach. If the measure passes on November 5, 1996, it
will reaffirm the fact that the residents of Newport Beach will have free
trash pickup. He said the annexation issue will be visited in the future and
• as indicated by one of the speakers and former Mayor Sansone, it doesn't
appear to be an issue to the people downcoast, and in fact, there are certain
benefits to coming to the City of Newport Beach, such as lower insurance
rates. If Measure Q does not pass, then there is the possibility of having to
dig into the reserves of the City and the City would be faced with cutbacks in
order to come up with an additional $5 million per year. He said he supports
the motion and salutes the maker of the motion.
Volume 50 - Page 344
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
Mill
Council Member Watt concurred that this needed to be done and it had to be
done to make things equal for all businesses. She said there are business
is districts that have formed business improvement districts to try to beautify
and improve their areas, so whatever help the City can provide is probably
needed. She said she supports the motion and supports Measure Q.
General Services Director Niederhaus said that something happened today
that the Council should be aware of before they allocate or take away the
$250,000. He reported that the City received a request from the developer of
the property at the corner of Jamboree and MacArthur to start refuse
collection within the next 30 days and also provide service for the Castaways
as they are phased into construction. He said this will all be accomplished
with the existing equipment and existing personnel. Based on this he said
the money may or may not be available and staff will have to look at how the
budget develops in December and January.
Mayor Hedges stated that no affirmation is necessary with this measure,
and the residents are being misled if they believe that a "yes" vote is
required to reaffirm the City's requirement to pay for residential trash
pickup from ad valorem tax revenues. He said that just as it is inconsistent
to pick up refuse for one set of businesses and not others, it will be
inconsistent to pick up trash for one set of residents and not others.
Referring to the campaign contributions made in support of Measure Q, he
said that multi - billion dollar trash companies don't give money for
something unless they think something is in it for them. He urged the
residents to vote "no" on Measure Q. Mayor Hedges requested that he be
shown as not voting on this item, and hearing no objection from the balance
•of the Council, the motion carried.
35. MAYORAL ROTATION (Requested by Council Member Glover).
Council Member Glover explained that she placed this on the agenda so the
Council could learn to deal with problems with civility. She noted that the
elections listed on page two should be corrected to reflect the elections of
1992, 1994, 1996, and 2000. She stated that she has been thinking about the
rotation of the mayorship for about a year, therefore spoke to the City
Manager about it, who has served in cities that have rotation of mayorships
and cities that do not have rotation. She said that she knows that to serve
on a City Council is a political thing and that politics enters into a lot of the
decisions. She said she feels that in a community as educated and as
affluent as Newport Beach that after a person gets elected they should be
more of a community leader and less of a politician and the best way to
achieve that is through rotation of the mayorship. She said that she feels
that anyone that is elected in this City by the citizenry of Newport Beach is
perfectly capable of serving as Mayor and every person who serves in
Newport Beach should be Mayor at one time or another. She said she is
hoping to get support for this concept and would like the City Attorney and
City Manager to look at other communities that have rotation systems to see
how the City could achieve this. She said she thinks the Council could be
more collegiate in the dealings with each other if a member did not have to
"politic" to become Mayor, and it was a natural rotation, therefore the people
of Newport Beach would be served better because the main thought process
• would be how to better serve the people. She said she would like to see this
on the agenda in November to be settled when the new election for mayor is
scheduled.
Phil Sansone, Corona del Mar, referencing the cost of running for office,
asked if the Council would consider looking into the feasibility of a Charter
Volume 50 - Page 345
Council (33)
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
amendment which would require the election of council members from
within the District that they represent and not at- large. He explained that if
someone is active in their community and people know them, they won't
• have to go out and raise money and chase different organizations for
contributions, etc.
Council Member Glover stated that she believes the current election system
is superb because it makes the candidate less parochial and the entire City is
given consideration when decisions are made. She said that if the seven
districts are pitted against each other there would be a real problem with
civility.
Council Member Cox said that this item has come up many times and it
always seems like it is brought up by a Council Member who doesn't seem to
be able to get the votes to be elected Mayor. He said he also finds that when
the position is treated as an annual event it becomes very ceremonial and he
believes the Council needs leadership. He said lie has never supported this
concept and can't change his mind since he believes that Council Members
have the right to elect their leaders.
Council Member Glover said that she is not suggesting the change for the
reason given by Council Member Cox. She said she feels this would work in
Newport Beach and pointed out that some very good people have served this
City that never served as Mayor and she doesn't feel that should happen.
Rose Parvin, 412 -31st Street, said that the expense of getting elected has to
stop, therefore this City and society has to start thinking about giving free
time to candidates so there is no need for special interest group support and
•the elected officials can serve the people honestly.
536. DATE FOR SWEARING -IN CEREMONY FOR NEW CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS (Requested by Mayor Hedges).
Mayor Hedges said he asked that this item be discussed because he had
heard some talk about having the swearing -in ceremony as late as December
3rd. He said he believes it is incumbent upon the Council to provide for
swearing in as early as possible and the date for swearing in has always
been kind of fluid since the date that the election will be certified is
unknown. He said traditionally the swearing -in ceremony has been held in
conjunction with the going away party for the outgoing Council Members,
and that would be his preference again.
Motion by Council Member Glover to have the swearing in ceremony for the
new members on December 3, 1996.
Council Member Watt stated that December 3, 1996 is fine, however stated
that she will be leaving town on the 26th for two weeks, therefore she might
make her final comments at the Regular Meeting on November 25th.
City Manager Murphy explained that December 3, 1996 is the date certain
when the County must certify the results, however the County has said that
they will have the results by November 26, 1996, so the ceremony could be
• held on the 26th or anytime after that.
After Council discussion, Mayor Hedges made a substitute motion to set a
special meeting for November 26, 1996 as the date for the swearing- in/going-
away ceremony (or earlier if appropriate). The motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
Volume 50 - Page 346
Council
(33)
•
•
•
City of Newport Beach
City Council Minutes
October 28, 1996
Ayes:
O'Neil, Edwards, Debay, Cox, Glover, Watt, Mayor Hedges
Noes:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None
ADJOURNMENT - 11:20 p.m. in memory of Meg Bauman, long -time resident of
Newport Beach and a docent for the Newport Art Museum, who died after a short
battle with cancer.
eWWWWWWWWWMWXXXXX WWXXs
The agenda for the Regular meeting was posted on October 23, 1996 at 4:15
p.m. and the supplemental agenda was posted on October 25, 1996 at 2:40
p.m., on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of
Newport Beach Administration Building.
City Clerk
r°
Mayor
Volume 50 - Page 347
l�