Loading...
06/25/1981CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 25, 1981 The regular meeting of the City Council, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on June 25, 1981, at 6:11 p.m. PRESENT: Thomas A. Tillinghast, Mayor Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Pro Tempore Tony Petta, Councilman Roy W. Nix, Councilman Jim Rigley, Councilman Seth Armstead, City Manager Eugene Nazarek, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer Myrna Lindahl, City Clerk ABSENT: None JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT_ AGENCY ON THE REVISED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DRAFT EIR Mayor Tillinghast, serving also as Chairman of the Community Redevelop- ment Agency, announced the Joint Public Hearing, and stated it would be continued to July 9, 1981, at 6:00 p.m., at which time the first reading of the ordinance to adopt the Redevelopment Plan will be conducted, with second reading and adoption scheduled for an adjourned regular meeting to be held July 14, 1981. Attorney Nazarek stated the Statements of Economic Interest, filed by each member of the City Council and the CRA had been reviewed, with no evidence of conflict of interest which would disqualify any member of the City Council or Agency from acting on the Redevlopment Plan. Attorney Nazarek, in behalf of the City Clerk, and with confirmation of the Mayor, entered into the Record the following documents: Exhibit "A" - Affidavit of Publication of Public Hearing Exhibit "B" - Certificate of Mailing Notice to Property Owners Exhibit "C" - Certificate of Mailing Notice to Taxing Agencies Mayor Tillinghast opened the Joint Public Hearing, and requested the public to specify whether their statements are being directed to the Redevelopment Plan or the Environmental Impact Report, or both. Page one - 6/25/81 Attorney Nazarek stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the Revised Redevelopment Plan and the certification of the EIR. Evidence will be introduced for consideration of the City Council and Agency in connection with six findings and determinations, contained in Section 33367 of the Health & Safety Code, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk, which will be made in the adoption of an ordinance adopting the Plan. Staff Presentation was given by Gale Carr, President, Gale Carr & Associates, Consultant to the Agency. The presentation included an explanation that the Council and Agency are considering expansion of the project area, since there are areas within the City which require improvements which, if allowed to remain unimproved, will continually downgrade the quality of the community. Redevelopment will provide the means for completion of the improvements. Mr. Carr then summarized the contents of the Report on the Redevelop- ment Plan, which is the basic supporting documentation for the Rede- velopment Plan and the ordinance which will adopt the Plan. This Plan will provide a method of financing rehabilitation of deteriorating structures by the property owners through low interest rate loans and grants. It will also provide a method for installation and maintenance of public facilities, and will assist in providing an improved land use plan for the community. Primary sources of revenue will be tax increment, as the major source, interest income, and the possibility of issuing bonds. A bond issue would only be accomplished if they could be guaranteed to generate adequate funds to pay off the bonds. Mr. Carr further stated there had been a substantial review process conducted on the Plan, with the Project Area Committee and the Planning Commission conducting numerous meetings and hearings. As a result of the hearings, the Planning Commission adopted the preliminary plan, which served as the basis for preparation of the Plan, and approved the Redevelopment Plan unanimously, by Resolution No. PC 81-06, adopted June 8, 1981, which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. The Project Area Committee, after fifteen meetings, also unanimously recommended approval of the Redevelopment Plan, on January 8, 1981. Meetings have been conducted with other agencies who have expressed concern regarding the Plan. Several meetings have been held with representatives of the Colton Joint Unified School District, with future meetings being planned, in an effort to reach an agreement by July 9. Five meetings have been held with the San Bernardino County Fiscal Review Committee. This Committee has submitted a letter of comments, which will be responded to, in an effort to reach an agreement by July 9. Page two - 6/25/81 CITY ENGINEER STAFF PRESENTATION City Engineer Kicak summarized certain projects which are of vital importance to the health and safety of the community, and stated the projected costs for those projects as follows: (1) Additional wastewater treatement capacity will be required, at a cost of $1.6 Million Dollars, if the rate of flow is at maximum density under the general plan; however, at the rate it is flowing presently, the additional cost will be $3.2 Million Dollars; (2) Streets - Additional revenue of $2.5 Million Dollars will be required; (3) Parks - For purchase capital, operation and maintenance, $1.2 Million Dollars; (4) Storm Drain System - San Bernardino County prepared a Master Plan in 1973, which only addressed the major line running from the freeway and Van Buren to Mt. Vernon and up Pico Street, to collect the major run-off areas. At the time, the cost was estimated at $1.57 Million Dollars. The cost for that would now be in excess of $3 Million Dollars. No local storm drains were addressed in that plan; therefore, an additional $1.5 Million Dollars would be required; (5) Street Lighting - Mr. Kicak stated a Street Light Petition had been presented at this meeting by residents requesting the installation of street lights due to the high rate of crime in their neighborhood. The City presently has approximately 200 street lights. Approximately 250 additional street lights are required to provide adequate lighting in accordance with the required standards. Revenue of $1 Million Dollars is needed for this project; and (6) Traffic Signals - It appears that additional signals will ultimately be warranted within the community, for a cost of $.5 Million Dollars, approximately. Mr. Carr stated that as a result of the survey conducted, the projects and improvements which are needed, and a review of the income and expenditures of the City since incorporation, it is evident there is not sufficient revenue to finance the needed improvements without the redevelopment process. At the present time, there are very few properties in the community which are not rehabitable. He further stated that the need for redevelopment has clearly been established, and can be accomplished at a much lower cost at this time. Attorney Nazarek entered into the Record a Street Light Petition, signed by twenty-one residents, which was received this date. The Petition states the following: "The residents on Pico between ' Michigan and Vivienda and the residents on Vivienda between Pico and Tanager are filing this Petition for the City of Grand Terrace to install street lights because of the high rate of crime in this neighborhood." This document is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Mr. Nazarek further stated this is one of the elements that can be considered in determining blight. Attorney Nazarek then entered into the Record, in behalf of the City Clerk, and with confirmation of the Mayor, the following documents: Page three - 6/25/81 Exhibit "D" - Resolution No. CRA 81-9 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING AND ADOPTING ITS REPORT ON THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE REVISED GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF SAID REPORT AND PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL." Attached to the Resolution is the "Report On The Redevelopment Plan For The Revised Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project, dated June, 1981. Exhibit "E" - Resolution No. PC 81-06, adopted June 8, 1981, titled: "RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE APPROVING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE REVISED GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, MAKING ITS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AS TO CONFORMING WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND CERTIFYING AS TO THE REVIEW OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT." STAFF REVIEW OF EIR Lewis Sullivan, Planning Director, advised that the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report remains in draft form until the input from the Public Hearings is incorporated into the document. This is a general EIR on the Redevelopment Plan, and any specific project will require another environmental review. Mr. Sullivan then summar- ized the potential environmental impact on the community. Following a request for clarification by Councilman Rigley, Mr. Sullivan further stated an initial study will be conducted on specific projects, which will determine if a negative declaration is appropriate, or if further environmental review is required. Mayor Tillinghast then entered into the Record the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, as submitted, and also was entered as part of the Report of the Agency, as Exhibit "F". REDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW Mr. Gale Carr, Consultant, then summarized the Redevelopment Plan, using visual aids, stating the Project Area incorporates the entire City, and is consistent with the General Plan. A nine month review was conducted by the Planning Commission and Project Area Committee to determine the consistency with the General Plan. Mr. Carr outlined the zones within the community and described the proper land use for each zone. Both the Planning Commission and Project Area Committee, consisting of members of the community, have unanimously supported and recommended to the Community Redevelopment Agency adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Mr. Carr clarified what it provides a funding so deteriorating effects on expense or obligation to through a tax increment Page four - 6/25/81 redevelopment does for the community, stating urce to accomplish projects to ensure no further the community, and accomplishes this at no the property owners within the community, program. 11 �1 Tax Increment was defined as follows: Once the Redevelopment Plan has been approved, the tax dollars paid by the property owners will not be increased, and will continue to be distributed to the various taxing agencies by the County of San Bernardino. The taxes paid by property owners are those which would be paid, whether or not the City is involved in redevelopment. Once the City is established as a redevelopment project area, the total amount of the taxes being paid by the property owners at that time is the amount which will continue to be distributed, by the County, to the various taxing agencies. However, as the valuation of properties increases and new construction develops, any increases in taxes, from the base amount presently paid to the County, will be distributed directly back to the City, rather than being distributed throughout the County. The City normally receives approximately only twelve percent (12%) of the,tax dollars paid by the residents. However, as a redevelopment project area, the City will be receiving up to 100% of the tax dollars paid by the residents, enabling the City to accomplish projects within the City, to benefit the citizens of the City, rather than the largest percentage of the tax dollars being used outside the community for projects which do not benefit the citizens of Grand Terrace. At such time as the projects are completed, as identified in the Redevelopment Plan, all tax proceeds will once again go directly to the County of San Bernardino, to be distributed to the taxing agencies, thereby resulting in increased benefits for all concerned. Mayor Tillinghast then entered into the Record, as Exhibit "G", the proposed Redevelopment Plan, there being no objections filed. Attorney Nazarek, in behalf of the City Clerk, and with confirmation of the Mayor, entered into the Record the following documents:. Exhibit "H" - Rules & Regulations relating to re-entry of business into the Project Area and Rules for Owner Participation in the Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Nazarek further stated these had been adopted as a part of the original Redevelopment Plan, and also apply to the amended Redevelopment Plan. Attorney Nazarek, in behalf of the City Clerk, and with confirmation of the Mayor, then entered into the Record the following written comments received regarding the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report and/or the Revised Grand Terrace Redevelopment Plan, as Exhibit "I": (1) A letter dated May 26, 1981, from James W. Dilworth of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, raising objections and concerns to the Redevelopment Plan. (2) A letter from the Colton Joint Unified School District dated May 28, 1981, regarding the EIR and Redevelopment Plan. Page five - 6/25/81 (3) A letter dated May 29, 1981, from Stephen Williamson of the State Clearinghouse regarding the EIR. (4) A letter dated May 26, 1981, from L. D. Smoot of the Department of Transportation regarding the Redevelopment Plan, and raising questions concerning the EIR, particularly the mitigation measures for increased traffic flow. (5) A letter dated June 25, 1981, from James W. Dilworth represent- ing the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District entitled "Objections of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District to the Revised Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Redevel- opment Project." (6) A letter dated June 17, 1981, from Robert Rigney of the San Bernardino County Administrative Office entitled: "Report of Fiscal Review Committee Pursuant to Section 33353.5 Health and Safety Code," with attachments. Mayor Tillinghast opened the meeting for oral comments. Supporting Testimony - None. Opposing Testimony Dolores Carter, San Bernardino County Administrative Office, stated she was not voicing objection, but rather wanted to clarify certain statements as follows: (1) When reference has been made to the Fiscal Review Committee, it is composed of all taxing entities within the area. Subsequent meetings have been held with the County alone to negotiate various financing for the project. The Fiscal Review Committee is composed of all entities, and each entity has the right to negotiate individually; and (2) Clarified that the letters received from the various taxing agencies with respect to the Plan should include a letter dated June 17, 1981, which was submitted by the County acting alone. Attorney Nazarek stated the letter dated June 17, which Ms. Carter referred to, has been included as Exhibit "I". There was no further oral testimony or questions or comments from Council or the Agency Members. CC-81-221 Motion by Councilman Rigley, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to continue the Public Hearing to July 9, 1981, at 6:00 p.m. at the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road. Recess was called at 7:07 p.m., and reconvened at 7:20 p.m., with all members present. ITEMS ADDED TO AGENDA Agenda Item 4H - Community Block Grant Funds/Community Center. Page six - 6/25/81 APPROVAL OF MINUTES (6/11/81) Following corrections on Page 3 - CC-81-207, Page 5 - Proposed Civic Center/Community Center, Fire Station Facilities, and Page 11 - CC-81-222 CC-81-219 and CC-81-220, Motion by Councilman Petta, second by Councilman Rigley, ALL AYES, to approve the Minutes of June 11, 1981, as amended. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar: Items 3A - Approval of Check Register 062581; 3B - A Resolution declaring that salary increases for FY 1981-82 shall be effective July 1, 1981; and 3C - A Resolution urging the support of Assembly Bill 1981 (Ingalls). CC-81-223 Motion by Councilman Grant, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve the following item on the Consent Calendar: 3D - RESOLUTION NO. 81-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, INVITING PROPOSALS FOR A CITY-WIDE BROADBAND TELE- COMMUNICATIONS (CABLE TELEVISION) FRANCHISE. CHECK REGISTER NO. 062581 Mayor Tillinghast stated that Item No. 1453 on page one, a three -volume set of California Corporation Manuals, is deleted - the City Manager has indicated in a discussion that they will be returned. CC-81-224 Motion by Mayor Tillinghast, second by Councilman Nix, to approve Check Register No. 062581 as amended, with the deletion of Item No. 1453. Councilman Petta questioned the check on page six which has been drawn for the purchase of park land, stating there is a possibility the closing of escrow could be delayed beyond June 30, and questioned the legality of the delay, since there could be a delay before the check is actually delivered. Following clarification by Attorney Nazarek that there is no problem as long as the City does not deliver the check, Motion carried, ALL AYES. RESOLUTION NO. 81-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THAT SALARY INCREASES FOR FY 1981-82 SHALL BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1981. Councilman Grant stated the language of this Resolution had been dis- cussed during the Workshop Session regarding modifying the language to reflect salary adjustment, rather than salary increases, and to ensure that the Resolution does not reflect any guarantee of an increase in salaries, and read the proposed changes to the Resolution. Page seven - 6/25/81 CC-81-225 Following discussion on the amendments to the Resolution, Motion by Councilman Nix, second by Councilman Rigley, ALL AYES, to approve Resolution No. 81-36, as amended. 0 RESOLUTION NO. 81-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, URGING THE SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 1981 (INGALLS) Council indicated they did not wish to adopt this Resolution. No further action will be taken on this item. COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE REPORTS PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commissioner John McDowell commented favorably on Council's previous passage of the Mobile Home and Architectural Ordinances. PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE Chairman Dick Rollins commended Howard Ellis, reporter for the Sun, on his article regarding the Summer Youth Program, and commended the Director, Gil Pritchard, stating the Program has been designed to be self-supporting. ENERGY COMMITTEE CC-81-226 Motion by Councilman Petta, second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to accept recommendation from the Chairman of the Energy Committee to appoint Geoff Dooley to the Energy Committee for a term to expire June 30, 1984. VOLUNTEER SERVICES COMMITTEE Chairman Bob Yeates summarized the activities for the second annual Fourth of July City Picnic. Stated there will be two vacancies on their Committee, and requested Staff to advertise to fill the vacancies. WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE Mayor Tillinghast stated a Staff Report had been received recommending abolishing the Ways & Means Committee due to inactivity. Tom Coyle, Administrative Assistant, stated the Committee has had varying memberships and has played a role in budget considerations, with no input being received for this next year's budget. The Committee seems to be dormant, since there are no records on file indicating Minutes of meetings held. Therefore, the Staff recommends Council appoint an ad hoc committee for any specific purpose required by Council, such as reviewing proposed budgets, rather than a standing committee as it presently exists. Page eight - 6/25/81 In discussion, Councilman Nix stated the consideration of dissolution of the Committee is no reflection upon the members; that an estab- lishment of a short-term ad hoc budget committee would be more appropri- ate; and that Council did not provide adequate definition of the scope of the tasks. Councilman Rigley voiced objection to abolishing the Committee, and recommended delaying action for more consideration. Mayor Tillinghast stated he felt the Committee could have served an important function, with its major project for each year to review the budget, and throughout the year to consider financial impacts on the City. However, Council has been receiving no input from this Committee. CC-81-227 Following discussion, Motion by Councilman Nix, second by Councilman Petta, to abolish the Ways & Means Committee, making use of ad hoc committees as needed. The Motion carried 4-1, with Councilman Rigley voting NOE. COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUNDS/COMMUNITY CENTER Mr. Phil Holdridge, 22674 Miriam Way, President of the Grand Terrace Lions Club, addressed Council with the following recommendations from the Lions Club Board of Directors: (1) Use Community Block Grant funds for rehabilitation of the Community Center, provided there is not a compromise in the use as it now exists; (2) Explore other sources of funding projects; (3) That the City Staff, the San Bernar- dino County Office on Aging, and the Grand Terrace Lions Club work together to provide expanded services to the senior citizens in improved facilities; (4) Should funds not be used for rehabilitation of the Community Center, the City and the Grand Terrace Lions Club should allow the Colton Joint Unified School District Board of Directors to renegotiate the existing lease on the Community Center. LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 81-01 Attorney Nazarek summarized the steps to be taken to establish a Landscaping and Lighting District, to include preparation and pre- liminary approval of a boundary map, directing the City Engineer to prepare a report and cost estimate, preliminary approval of the Engineering Report, a declaration of the City Council of its intent to form an assessment district, and the calling of a public hearing for which mailed and published notices are given. City Engineer Kicak summarized the City Engineer's Report and three resolutions for proposed adoption this date, and stated Council has received the Report consisting of a boundary map, assessment diagrams, an explanation how the boundaries were determined and how the assess- ments are to be spread and the reasoning therefor, as well as the spread of cost for the individual properties. He further stated that it is important to recognize the purpose of the Landscaping and Lighting District is for maintenance and operation of the street lights, with construction of the facilities to be accomplished under separate and different proceedings. Page nine - 6/25/81 Mr. Kicak stated the boundaries of the Landscaping and Lighting District have been amended to include one section which had inad- vertently been omitted, and described the boundaries as amended. It is recommended the City contribute $10,000 toward the cost of the proposed street lighting. There are 1245 Parcels within the proposed assessment district. In discussion, Council questioned how the assessments would be handled if a large parcel of land is developed in the future, whether the $33,000 had been distributed equitably, and whether or not the City's rightful share should be more or less than $10,000. Mayor Tillinghast opened the meeting to public participation. Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry, spoke in favor of the establishment of a Landscaping and Lighting District, feeling the community needs and desires proper lighting. Mayor Tillinghast closed the meeting to public participation. RESOLUTION NO. 81-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALI- FORNIA, ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, COST ESTIMATES, DIAGRAMS, ASSESSMENTS AND REPORT FOR THE FORMATION OF LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 81-01 WITHIN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 15, PART 2 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Following reading of the title of the Resolution by Attorney Nazarek, CC-81-228 Motion by Mayor Tillinghast, second by Councilman Grant, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No. 81-38. RESOLUTION NO. 81-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALI- FORNIA, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S "REPORT" FOR CERTAIN STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED DISTRICT KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS LAND- SCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 81-01. Following reading of the title of the Resolution by Attorney Nazarek, CC-81-229 Motion by Councilman Nix, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No. 81-39. RESOLUTION NO. 81-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALI- FORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE FORMATION OF A LANDSCAP- ING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 81-01 WITHIN SAID CITY, AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 15, PART 2 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING THEREON. Page ten - 6/25/81 I -11 Following the reading of the title of the Resolution by Attorney CC-81-230 Nazarek, Motion by Councilman Rigley, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No. 81-40. Mayor Tillinghast announced that a Public Hearing regarding the pro- posed establishment of a Landscaping and Lighting District No. 81-01 will be held Thursday, July 23, 1981, at 6:00 p.m., at the Terrace View Elementary School. FIELD'S SUBDIVISION STREET IMPROVEMENT REPORT City Engineer Kicak gave a Staff presentation regarding the proposal to replace existing curbs with curbs and gutters in certain portions of the community, with the City sharing the cost of the project with the property owners. Staff is recommending the City pay one-third of the total cost of the estimated improvements, estaimated at $68,998.83, with the remaining two-thirds of the share, $138,104.87, to be shared equally among the property owners within that improve- ment area comprising 75 lots, for a cost of $1,842,73 for each property owner. Mr. Kicak then requested Council authorize Staff to conduct a survey of the affected property owners to determine interest in this proposed project. In discussion, Council recommended consideration of a more equitable formula for cost to the property owners by dividing one-third of the cost equally, with the other third to be prorated according to the frontage of the lots; and also questioned the cost of the project. Other areas discussed were the proposed survey of the residents, the possibility of this project setting a precedent in relation to the City sharing the cost, the various reasons why certain portions of the City have curbs and gutters in existence, while other areas have none, feeling this is a situation inherited from the County, and a formula to be used in prorating the cost of this proposed project. Councilman Rigley recommended the City's share be 50%. Also discussed was the possibility of the City's portion being the cost to remove the old curbing and preparation of the streets for new curbs and gutters to be constructed - the property owners' share to be the cost to install the new curbs and gutters. Mayor Tillinghast stated consideration should be given to the fact that this project would benefit a small minority of the citizens, and will be paid from funds contributed by all citizens; he would therefore concur with Staff's recommendation. Following further discussion, Mayor Tillinghast directed Staff to review this matter further based on discussion this date. Recess was called at 8:55 p.m., and reconvened at 9:05 p.m., with all members present. RESOLUTION NO. 81-41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE FISCAL YEARS 1980-81 AND 1981-82 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIII-B OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION AS REQUIRED BY CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 7910 Page eleven - 6/25/81 Attorney Nazarek read the title of the Resolution. Mayor Tillinghast stated the Appropriations Limit for FY 1980-81 is $1,247,793.00, and for FY 1981-82 is $1,390,321.00. Mayor Tillinghast opened Public Hearing on the matter, and closed Public Hearing - there being no citizens speaking for or against the matter. CC-81-231 Motion by Mayor Tillinghast, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No. 81-41. STREET VACATION REQUEST City Engineer Kicak stated a request has been received from Kenneth W. Smith Engineering, Inc., regarding vacation of a Parcel previously dedicated to the County of San Bernardino. Requested authorization to proceed with the necessary steps for vacation of the easement as requested, since the proposed street is not presently shown on the General Plan Circulation Element. Should any development occur in the future which would propose a reasonable circulation development within that block, the dedication could be requested at that time. CC-81-232 Motion by Councilman Grant, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to direct Staff to proceed with the necessary steps to bring to Council for their consideration the vacation of the easement as requested by Kenneth W. Smith Engineering, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. 81-42 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING LICENSING SAN ONOFRE UNITS II AND III NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, DEVELOPING ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF ENERGY, AND CONSERVATION OF OUR RESOURCES. Mr. Joe Falkner, Area Manager for Southern California Edison Company, requested Council approve this Resolution supporting development of nuclear power plants, developing alternative forms of energy, and showing a continued commitment to the conservation of this Country's energy resources. Mr. Falkner further stated our Country has a tremendous energy problem and has a need to develop alternative sources of energy, since the oil supply is controlled by the OPEC nations. Large amounts of money are flowing out of the Country. This resolution of support will be of great assistance, since a tremendous amount of opposition is shown at the Hearings concerning establishment of nuclear power plants. CC-81-233 Motion by Councilman Rigley, second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve Resolution No. 81-42. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS CC-81-234 Following discussion, Motion by Councilman Rigley, second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to approve Staff's recommendation for budget adjustments as outlined in the Staff Report dated June 25, 1981, entitled "Budget Adjustments," which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Page twelve - 6/25/81 d POLICE CHIEF REPORT The City Manager reported that Officer Petrovich will be on patrol once again in the community. Councilman Grant stated,in regards to the Sheriff's proposal regarding the communication project, it was previously indicated in the presenta- tion that the cost would be in the fiscal year. However, the cost will be spread over three or four years. There is no new information on the helicopter program, except the cost will increase. FIRE CHIEF REPORT Howard Wright, Battalion Chief, briefly summarized the 1980 Fire Protection Annual Report prepared by the San Bernardino County Forestry and Fire Warden Department. Mr. Wright read the portion of that report regarding Grand Terrace, and thanked the organizations which had been mentioned in the Report, and also thanked the Grand Terrace Womans Club, since they had inadvertently been omitted from the Report. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager Armstead reported the following: (1) Stated that the reduction in subvention funds from SB 102 (Marks) will be $12,984.00 for the City, rather than the previously proposed amount of $227,006.00; (2) The letter defining and clarifying Community Redevelopment, which Council requested be sent to the citizens, has been prepared in draft form and is being finalized, and requested Council comments on the proposed letter. Councilman Nix recommended an introductory statement defining the rationale for Community Redevelopment and a statement that 1 the priority list, as submitted, is a tentative priorty list, which had been established at the Public Hearing for proposed projects. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Nix stated he will be on vacation, and thus will be unable to attend the Council meeting of July 9 and the Fourth of July Annual Picnic. Councilman Grant reported the following: (1) Attended the Girl Scout Court of Honor Ceremony on June 16; (2) Briefed Council on the CRA Seminar, which he and the City Manager attended in Sacramento, sponsored by the League of California Cities. Mayor Tillinghast recommended sending resolutions strongly opposing Assembly Bills 1721 (Lockyer) and 1693 (Tucker), which would allow implementation of binding arbitration and agency shops, feeling both are detrimental to municipal government. Page thirteen - 6/25/81 RESOLUTION NO. 81-43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, STRONGLY OPPOSING THE ADOPTION OF ASSEMBLY BILL 1721 (LOCKYER). RESOLUTION NO. 81-44 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, STRONGLY OPPOSING THE ADOPTION OF ASSEMBLY BILL 1691 (TUCKER). CC-81-235 Motion by Mayor Tillinghast, second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to approve and send to the local representatives and to members of the different committees Resolutions No. 81-43 and No. 81-44 opposing AB 1721 (Lockyer) and AB 1693 (Tucker). PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Barbara Pfennighausen, 12364 Pascal Avenue, questioned when widening of DeBerry between Mt. Vernon and Michigan would be completed, stating the area has become very hazardous during construction. Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry, commended Council for adopting the Resolution in support of nuclear energy, and requested those property owners who have allowed shrubbery to overgrow the sidewalks be requested to trim their shrubs. EXECUTIVE SESSION - JOINT SESSION WITH THE CRA The Council adjourned to a joint executive session at 9:35 p.m., with the City Manager, Finance/Administrative Services Officer, and Attorney Nazarek in attendance. The regular meeting reconvened at 10:31 p.m., with all members present. Mayor Tillinghast announced the purpose of the joint Executive Session had been to discuss possible litigation, with no action taken. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:32 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held July 9, 1981, at 6:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, , 0 Ci ty 01erk APPROVED: Page fourteen - 6/25/81