1996 07 22 CC Minutes,(# LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
July 22, 1996
Adjourned meeting of the La Quinta City Council of July 22, 1996 was called to order
at the hour of 3:00 p.m by Mayor Holt, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
PRESENT: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Holt
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC COMMENT
Chuck Cervello, 44-616 Buckingham, lndio, Executive Vice?President for ACC, a
consulting firm for two waste disposal companies, spoke regarding the Solid Waste
Franchise Agreement and expressed disappointment that the contract was not put Out
to bid. He felt that the contract had several areas within it that could be enhanced,
pointing out that gated communities would not have automated pick-up service yet
would pay the same rate as those who do. He also felt that a dangerous precedent
was being set in Article 15.2 which will allow Waste Management to charge for
commercial and industrial recycling yet retain 100% of the revenue they receive from
such recycling. He recommended that the matter be continued for 30 days to
research the effect that the Palm Springs Recycling/Rancho Mirage court settlement
might have on this as well as the effect the contract might have on commercial
businesses who are being asked to recycle and then pay for it without the City
receiving any revenue from it.
Diana Garcia, 78-825 Nolan Circle, felt that waste disposal rates are important, but
so is exemplary service which she has received from Waste Management. She
pointed out that they also emphasize re9ycling which is important.
Ed Kibbey, 77-564 Country Club Drive, Palm Desert, representing the BIA Desert
Chapter, advised that they have passed a resolution recommending that the $8.50
tipping fee be passed back to the consumer and not retained by the cities. They feel
that it might be considered a tax and a violation of Proposition 62. He asked that the
County?s recommendation to return the fee to the consumer be honored since they
were the ones who originally set the fee.
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
Mr. Genovese, City Manager, asked that Business Session Item No.7 be continued
until after Public Hearing Item No. 1.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 2 July 22, 1996
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to continue Business
Session Item No.7 Consideration of Solid Waste Franchise) until after Public Hearing
Item No. 1. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Adolph/Henderson to approve the City
Council Minutes of July 2, 1996 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Adolph to approve the City
Council Minutes of July 16, 1996 as submitted Motion carried unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS None
PRESENTATIONS None
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE
1. LETTER FROM TRICE HEALY REGARDING THE COMMUNITY SWIMMING
POOL.
Noted and filed.
BUSINESS SESSION
1. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL
YEAR 1996/97 BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S APPROPRIATIONS
LIMIT.
Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that modifications to the budget for
Fiscal Year 1996/97 have been made as directed by Council, noting that the
budget includes increased services by both police and code enforcement. Staff
recommended adoption of the budget resolutions.
Council Member Perkins referred to the b1 8,000 set aside for a municipal
pool and amenities and asked if staff anticipated being able to build the pool
for $350,000, using the remaining amount for amenities.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 3 July 22, 1996
Mr. Genovese advised that that matter would be delved into when it goes back
to the Parks & Recreation Commission, adding that a pool could be built for
just about any amount of money, depending on the size.
Council Member Sniff felt that staff has done an excellent job on the budget
and supported it 100%. He advised that $518,000 was actually set aside for
park improvements which he hopes is used for a pool. An additional $180,000
was set aside for improvements and amenities to the parks which increases the
potential amount to $700,000.
Council Member Henderson advised that she would use her vote on this issue
to express what she felt was a disregard for fiscal responsibility. She read a
quote from the National Civic League handbook about the Council's exclusive
responsibility for policy making and the importance of the budget. She
congratulated the staff and Council for the $3,414,473 in the reserve account
and hoped that efforts would continue to increase that amount in the future,
but advised that over the last nine years, $1.6 million of the City's budget has
been allocated to non-profit organizations. Although these organizations are
a vital part to the community and their support is paramount, their financial
benefit to the City is subjective and should be treated the same as other
aspects of the budget. She pointed out that needed improvements in The
Village residential area would cost approximately $1.8 million, in the Westward
Ho area $1.1 million, and in the Saguaro and Sagebrush area $400,000. The
benefits derived from the organizations supported by tax dollars are
promotional and marketing in nature and she felt that RDA funds should not be
used for such purposes. She felt that a procedural policy should be used to
evaluate the funding requests and not politics. The demand for City services
will soon exceed the supply because of residential growth and a decrease in
property tax revenues. She has asked for a careful review of these
organizations' budgets for the purpose of justifying their continued and
increased funding. She felt that a new level of society is being created and
encouraged by government and that the Council as policy makers should
address this issue in the proper forum. Her vote to approve this budget would
a be tacit approval of the lack of this oversight which she could not do. She
felt that the following statement made at the June 20th Council meeting says
it all, a goal of each City department should be to cut operational costs and
increase efficiency."
Council Member Perkins commended the staff on preparing a practical and non-
overloaded budget, noting that it's as good as any he's been involved with.
However, he's unable to support the increased funding for the Chamber of
Commerce and La Quinta Arts Foundation, pointing Out that the Foundation's
request is a 50% increase over last year's and the Chamber?s request is a 13%
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 4 July 22, 1996
increase. This means that the City is funding more than 50% of the Chamber's
annual budget, therefore, he felt that their budget should be made part of the
public record which they have refused to do. He has received a 12% reduction
in his property tax which means a 12% reduction in City tax dollars and such
continued reductions over a period of time concerns him. He urged the Council
to closely review the City's projected revenues and reduce expenditures
wherever possible. He has voted in favor of previous City budgets, but
could not support this one because of the expenditures for the Chamber and
Arts Foundation.
Council Member Adolph felt that staff has done a great job on the budget and
supported it.
Mayor Holt concurred and was proud of the financial position the Council and
staff has placed the City in during her four years on the Council. She
recognized that things could get strained and tough in the future and felt that
if it does, everything should be laid out on the table and a cut made straight
across the board. It's important to promote activities that bring people into the
community. Making budget decisions is a very difficult responsibility because
some expenses are absolutely necessary, while some of the programs and
services the Council supports make a community what it is. She's proud to
vote for the budget and commended staff for their excellent work.
Council Member Sniff supported the budget and believed that the reason these
organizations are supported by the City is because they benefit the community,
increasing the value of life and encouraging new people to come here. He
believes in being proactive and supporting on a reasonable basis, those who
support the City, noting that the Chamber and Arts Foundation have been
extremely active, productive, and valuable to the City. Although property
values have declined, he felt that the State is on the upswing. He felt that the
budget was well-prepared and that it has the City in good fiscal condition that
will remain.
RESOLUTION NO.96-54
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1996/97 AND APPROVING A BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.96-54
as submitted. Motion carried with Council Members Henderson and Perkins
voting NO.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 5 July 22, 1998
MOTION It was moved by Council Members SnifflAdoiph to receive and file
the Five-Year Resource AFlocation Plan and establish the City's Appropriation
Limit. Motion carried with Council Members Henderson and Perkins voting NO.
MINUTE ORDER NO. 96-1?4.
2. CONSIDERATION OF FORMING A CITY LIAISON COMMITTEE" TO WORK
WITH THE LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S DEVELOPMENT AND
BUSINESS RETENTION COMMITTEE.
Mr. Weiss, Assistant City Manager, advised that the Chamber of Commerce
has suggested renaming the Business Development Task Force to the Business
Retention Task Force and that a new Business Development Committee be
established as an additional liaison between the City Council and the Chamber.
Council Member Henderson felt that it's good common sense to address the
issues causing growing pains for the City whenever possible, but hoped that
more time isn't spent in committee meetings than in implementing solutions.
She felt that the three areas of concern addressed by the Chamber in their
letter could easily be incorporated into the existing Workshop Exchange
Committee with the minutes from those meetings being forwarded to Council
and a verbal report being given by the Council's representative. Open
communication between the City and Chamber is a must, expediting of
solutions to business problems is critical, and participation by all Council
Members is paramount, but she didn't feel that participation should include
chairing" of the committee. She recommended that the new liaison
committee seriously discuss eliminating the Workshop Exchange Committee
and that two Council Members and two staff members be appointed to the
liaison committee, rotating Council representation after each third meeting.
She further recommended that the Chamber be the lead agency for the
committee.
In response to Council Member Adolph, Council Member Henderson felt that
the Chamber Education Committee should be retained.
Council Member Sniff advised that he has chaired" the Workshop Exchange
Committee meetings which he felt were productive and valuable. He preferred
having a comprehensive committee to deal with both issues instead of two
separate committees and felt that rotation would work best on a six?month
basis. The Workshop Exchange Committee has generally responded to the
Chamber's requests for meetings. They've met quarterly or semi?annually with
the next meeting scheduled for September to discuss The Village. He was
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 6 July 22, 1996
willing to go along with whatever the Council wishes, but suggested a
continuance to further consider this matter.
Council Member Henderson advised that she had suggested rotation after every
third meeting because of the fact that they may not meet monthly or even
quarterly.
Michelle Dallas, P.O. Box 255, Executive Director for La Quinta Chamber of
Commerce, advised that their intent was to assist the City with business
retention and economic development, believing the two issues to be large
enough to explore separately. Their intent was for the newly-named Business
Retention Task Force to meet internally on a monthly basis and the Business
Development Committee, which will consist of Council representation, would
meet monthly. They are willing to combine the two committees from the City's
standpoint, but would probably maintain them separately within the Chamber.
Mayor Holt advised that City/Chamber involvement in regards to economic
development and business retention was emphasized at the recent League of
California Cities Conference
Council Member Perkins didn't have a problem with having two committees
and felt that the idea behind it is excellent. He felt that it?s incumbent upon
the City to join the Chamber in this effort and hoped that the CouncrI would
receive minutes of the meetings.
Council Member Adolph agreed, but pointed out that consolidation of
committees is desirable whenever possible because of the number of meetings
Council Members are involved with. However, he understood the importance
of working on both issues.
Mayor Holt agreed and supported rotation on whatever basis the Council
wishes. She also felt that it's important for the Council to receive the minutes
of those meetings.
Ms. Dallas advised that the minutes of the City Liaison Committee are handled
by City staff and suggested monthly meetings initially if the two committees
are combined.
Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the Committee would be subject to
the Brown Act if the minutes are taken by City staff and, therefore, should
probably be set-up through a City ordinance.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 7 July 22, 1996
Council Member Henderson pointed out that it's the Chamber that has
requested the formation of the Committee and, therefore, should be the lead
agency, preparing the agenda and minutes of the meetings. She suggested
that the Chamber maintain both committees, but have them both represented
on the City Liaison Committee.
Council Member Perkins suggested rotation with two Council Members serving
at a time, but with only one being rotated off of the Committee at a time to
maintain continuity. He wished to receive an opinion from the City Attorney
regarding the Committee and the Brown Act.
Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that City committees are subject to the
Brown Act, but a Chamber committee that asks for City input is not a City
committee. However, it begins to look like one if minutes are taken by City
staff and it's held at the City. The committee should be set up carefully so as
not to be conceived as a City committee if it's not to be subject to the Brown
Act.
Council Member Sniff suggested that staff be directed to work out the format
and bring it back to Council.
In response to Mayor Holt, Ms. Dallas advised that they wouldn?t have a
problem with taking the minutes.
Council concurred on directing staff to clarify who would be responsible for the
Committee and how often they would meet.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to refer this matter
Chamber Liaison Committee) to work with the Chamber to come back to the
Council with a report and options for action. Motion carried unanimously.
MINUTE ORDER NO.96-115.
3. CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE LA
QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97.
Mr. Weiss, Assistant City Manager, advised that the La Quirta Arts Foundation
who is responsible for coordinating the La Quinta Arts Festival and Arts & Jazz
Festival has submitted a contract proposal in the amount of $75,000 which is
an increase of $25,000 over last year's contract.
Richard De Santis, 73-647 Sun Lane, Palm Desert, President of La Quinta Arts
Foundation, advised that they are sensitive to the issue of fiscal responsibility,
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 8 July 22, 1996
pointing out that they've not received an increase in City funding since 1992
even though their costs have increased and the demand for educational
programs and scholarships have skyrocketed. Their hard costs for marketing
the two festivals for a three-year period beginning in 1994 is $281,000, not
including staff time and the amount requested from the City during the same
period is $175,000, resulting in a shortfall of $106,000 in this one area alone.
If the current request is approved, the total percentage increase since 1994
would be 9%. They are aggressively pursuing corporate funding in hopes to
reduce their funding request of the City.
Stewart Woodard, 79?791 Olympia Fields, advised that he moved here two
years ago because the lifestyle and quality of life was beginning to resemble
the cultural lifestyle of Orange County. He believed that what the Foundation
does for the City goes beyond budget concerns and is an important part of the
ingredient that has improved this community.
Council Member Sniff supported the contract and believed that the festivals
have a very significant economic effect on the City. They market the City to
an ever-increasing number of people and give it a prestigious reputation.
Council Member Adolph advised that the Council is looking forward to the
Foundation being more self-sufficient and less dependent on City funding, but
since they've not requested an increase since 1992 and provide such a great
service to the community, he must support them in this contract.
Mayor Holt supported the contract and hoped that by promoting such
activities, it wouldn't be necessary to cut funding in the future.
Council Member Perkins advised that he supports the Foundation and believes
that they contribute to the quality of life in the City, but he couldn't support
the funding amount they've requested and would, therefore, vote against the
contract.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Genovese, City Manager,
advised that negotiations on the proposed contract were not held with the
Foundation and, therefore, staff's recommendation is as deemed appropriate
by the Council," noting that funding for this contract is contained in the
budget.
Council Member Henderson stated that the National Civic League handbook
advises careful consideration of technical expert advice from staff and without
that she couldn't support the contract. Although she felt that the Foundation
contributes to the City's quality of life and is a vital part of the community, she
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 9 July 22, 1996
questioned the use of tax dollars, including RDA Funds, for such activities and
hoped that the Council would consider addressing such issues on a policy
basis. She wished to see the matter continued for further investigation.
Council Member Sniff pointed out that the City receives services for these
funds and he felt that it's a very good business relationship.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the
Contract Services Agreement with the La Quinta Arts Foundation for Fiscal
Year 1996/97.
Council Member Henderson pointed out that the financial impact of the Arts
Foundation on the City is both subjective and approximate with the City
receiving a total of $669 for business licenses and sales tax from the festivals
last year. Although art sales were substantially higher, sales tax was not
received for sales that weren't reported locally and she felt that that should be
investigated in some manner.
Motion carried with Council Members Henderson and Perkins voting NO.
MINUTE ORDER NO.96-116.
4. CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE
COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY CONCERT ASSOCIATION FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1996/97.
Mr. Weiss, Assistant City Manager, advised that the Coachella Valley
Community Concert Association has requested funding in the amount of
$5,000. If approved, the funding would come from the Special Projects
Contingency Account.
Council Member Sniff felt that the Association has done a good job and is well
worth a $5,000 investment.
Council Member Henderson noted an error in the contract and suggested that
it be changed to reflect that the City?s assistance is to provide a music
education outreach program. She was pleased that the funding request is
substantially less than last year's and hoped that the organization would be
even less dependent on tax dollars in the future.
Council Member Perkins the contract, mainly because their funding
request is 50% less than last year's and he will support any other worthy
organization that reduces their funding request by 50%.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 10 July 22, 1996
Council Member Adolph believed that it's an outstanding organization and that
Donna Martin does an outstanding job.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the
Contract Services Agreement with the Coachella Valley Community Concert
Association for Fiscal Year 1996/97 with modified language as appropriate.
Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-117.
5. CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE LA
QUINTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97.
Mr. Weiss, Assistant City Manager, advised that the La Quinta Historical
Society has requested funding in the amount of $10,000 to help offset the rent
payments for the museum.
Council Member Henderson wished to see the Historical Society have some
level of comfort as to whether or not the City is committed to supporting their
long-range effort to purchase the property for a museum. She didn't have a
problem supporting the contract unless it continues to be ongoing. She
pointed out that the Historical Society hoped to discuss this issue with the
Council in a study session to find out if a greater assistance in purchasing the
building is possible.
Council Member Sniff stated that support was given last year with the
understanding that the Historicar Society would seek grant funding, but no
report has been received on that effort. He felt that a clear understanding as
to the appraised value of the property would be necessary to proceed further
with purchasing the property and that it would have to be dealt with in a larger
budgetary manner due to the cost of the property. He supported the request
for funding even though it's an increase over last year's amount because he
felt that the Historical Society has significant value and is a vital part of the
community. He would also support a study session to further discuss the issue
of the property.
Council Member Henderson felt that the Historical Society would like to know
how the Council feels about the museum property in regards to it being a
potential asset to The Village. They raised $25,000 last year to go toward the
purchase of the property. It was indicated last year that staff would assist the
Historical Society in seeking grants, but that has not happened.
Council concurred on directing staff to schedule a study session regarding the
Historical Society's museum in October if at all possible.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 11 July 22, 1996
Mayor Holt advised that this is the time of year that the Council considers such
contract service agreements and it?s not without great thought and deliberation
that the budget decisions are made.
Council Member Sniff pointed out that these are not additional items, but rather
items that are already included in the budget.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the
Contract Services Agreement with the La Quinta Historical Society for Fiscal
Year 1996/97.
Council Member Perkins pointed out that although this is a 9% increase over
last year?s request, the Council did indicate last year that they would look at
a long-range program for the Historical Society.
Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-118.
6. CONSIDERATION OF JOINT USE OF FACILITY AND SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF COACHELLA VALLEY, LA QUINTA UNIT.
Ms. Nicholson, Parks & Recreation Director, advised that the Boys & Girls Club
of Coache?la Valley, La Quinta Unit, entered into a lease agreement with the
City on February 4, 1992 for the facility on Park Avenue for the purpose of
providing youth programs. On December 19, 1995, the Council approved a
Joint Use of Facility & Services Agreement with the Boys & Girls Club for a six-
month period ending June 30,1996 in the amount of $30,000. The proposed
agreement will be partially funded with CDBG funds which will require
additional reporting from the Boys & Girls Club as noted in the agreement
under Section 4.2. The two components of the agreement are: 1) shared-use
of the facility for $30,000 which allows the City to use the facility for
programs Monday through Friday from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and Saturday
and Sunday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; and, 2) recreational programs
provided by the Boys & Girls Club for La Quinta youths from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30
p.m. during the summer and 2:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. during the school year.
The activities are listed under scope of services in the agreement and the
proposed contract period is July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1997 for $60,000
In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Nicholson advised that the
attendance records are included in the monthly department report and that the
City has the ability to charge a fee for use of the facility.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 12 July 22, 1996
In response to Council Member Adolph, Ms. Nicholson advised that the Bays
& Girls Club enrollment is growing.
Council Member Sniff expressed support for the program.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Ms. Nicholson advised that staff
communicates with the YMCA and Boys & Girls Club, but the Parks &
Recreation Commission hasn?t. However, some type of reporting can be
implemented to update the Commission on the programs these groups offer.
Council Member Henderson felt that the Commission should be well aware of
every recreational program provided by the City.
MOTION- It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the Joint
Use of Facility and Services Agreement with the Boys & Girls Club of Coachella
Valley, La Quinta Unit, and direct staff to utilize the General Fund Account in
the amount of $30,000, CDBG Funds in the amount of $30,000 for the
payments required by the Agreement. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE
ORDER NO.96-119.
7. See Page 23.
8. CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS RELATING TO A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION:
A) ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR AND GIVING NOTICE OF A
SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5.1996 FOR
THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF SAID
CITY. APPROVAL OF A CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA.
B? ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION REQUESTING CERTAIN SERVICES FROM THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ELECTION DEPARTMENT IN CONNECTION WITH A
SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE CONSOLIDATED WITH THE
STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 5,1996.
Mr. Weiss, Assistant City Manager, advised that on July 2, 1996, the Council
authorized staff to prepare resolutions for the purpose of placing the matter of
the Charter City concept on the November ballot. Staff recommended that an
impartial analysis and the Charter be mailed out with the sample ballot. The
question on the ballot will read as follows: Shall the Charter be adopted
making La Quinta a Charter City so that the laws of La Quinta shall prevail over
State law with respect to municipal affairs?
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(
#City Council Minutes 13 Jujy 22, 1996
Council Member Perkins supported the ballot wording and expressed
appreciation to staff for their work on what he felt is an important move for the
City.
Council Member Sniff supported placing this on the ballot and expressed
appreciation to Council Member Perkins for his efforts in pushing this issue
through.
RESOLUTION NO.96-55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR AND GIVING NOTICE OF A SPECIAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE CONSOLIDATED WITH THE STATEWIDE
GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5.1996 FOR THE PURPOSE
OF SUBMITTING TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF SAID CITY, APPROVAL OF
A CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA.
It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Henderson to adopt Resolution No.
96-55 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO.96-56
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY TO CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION WITH THE
STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5.1996 AND
TO PROVIDE CERTAIN SERVICES IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.
It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Henderson to adopt Resolution No.
96-56 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Perkins felt that any further publication should emphasize that
it?s the City and not the Council that will receive more power through the
Charter.
Mayor Holt asked the City Attorney to investigate what impact Proposition 62
might have on Charter cities.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 14 July 22, 1996
9. CONSIDERATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION REGARDING
COUNCIL DIRECTION TO PLANT TREES ALONG CALLE TECATE.
Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that on May 21, 1 996,
the Council recommended that the largest and best date palm trees from the
Hammer property be planted along the south side of Calle Tecate with the
remaining trees planted along the Bear Creek Bike Path and in a hidden oasis
south of Calle Tecate. Staff has determined that the placement of these trees
is exempt from environmental documentation requirements under CEQA 1 5301
Class 4(b)) and recommends that Council affirm that finding and direct staff
further in the placement of the trees.
Council Member Henderson has received several phone calls in opposition?to
the trees being planted along Calle Tecate and suggested that Council re-
address the issue. She felt that the Hidden Grove site would be less likely to
affect anyone and would create an oasis environment in the future that would
be beneficial to the community. Some of the residents along Calle Tecate have
provided her with photographs and have relayed their feelings about how the
trees will obstruct their view.
Mayor Holt felt that staff did a good job previously describing how the
problems would be mitigated, but she didn?t have a problem re-addressing the
issue as long as it didn't delay the planting of the trees.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney,
advised that there wouldn't be any problem with re-addressing the issue at this
time.
Council Member Henderson wished to see the Hidden Grove site considered as
an alternative location for the trees.
Mayor Holt felt that some of the residents may not understand the mitigation
process and asked staff if the view obstruction would be mitigated. She also
asked if there would be any problem watering the trees at the Hidden Grove
site.
Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the trees would be a minimum
of 25 feet high and planted on 25-foot centers, therefore the view would not
be obstructed by the tops of the trees. A 50% loss is anticipated which will
result in a net effect of being planted at 50-foot centers. There will be a small
additional cost for installing irrigation if the trees are planted at the Hidden
Grove site.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 15 July 22, 1996
Council Member Henderson agreed that the tree tops would be out of the line
of view, but felt that the tree trunks would resemble a row of telephone poles.
They should be planted where they won't be a problem for anyone if such a
place exists.
Council Member Adolph has talked to residents that are concerned about the
trees obstructing their view and he asked what size trees were proposed for
Calle Tecate.
Mr. Cosper advised that 80 trees over 25-foot high would be planted on 25-
foot centers or 40 trees on 50-foot centers. There are 41 trees that are 22-40
feet high.
Council Member Adolph believed the residents have a right to object to view
obstruction.
Council Member Sniff advised that he and Mr. Speer, the Senior Engineer,
attended a meeting at the home of a resident on Calle Tecate to discuss this
issue and only three other residents attended. He didn't feel that any of them
had adamant positions against planting the trees along Calle Tecate and he's
received several phone calls from residents who believe that it's a marvelous
idea. The trees will be on 52-foot centers and there l's no possibility that the
palm fronds will obscure the view. He pointed out that the tree trunks are only
two feet in diameter and the obstruction factor is minimal. Some residents
have been concerned about the maintenance of the trees and he assured them
that they would be maintained. He wasn't opposed to planting some of the
smaller ones in an oasis, but felt that the residents would be pleasantly
surprised at how attractive the trees will look along Calle Tecate. Some
residents have objected to planting the trees at the Hidden Grove site because
they wish to maintain the natural environment there. He didn't feel that any
serious objections exist to planting the trees along Calle Tecate and he wished
to move forward with it.
Mayor Holt was somewhat indifferent regarding this as she has not received
any calls for or against this issue.
Council Member Perkins has received two phone calls and he felt that the
opponents have a legitimate complaint as far as the row of trees looking like
a row of telephone poles because two-foot wide trees that are 52 feet apart
will look close together. He felt that date palm trees should be clustered and
that they wouldn't need as much maintenance if planted at the base of the
mountain. He didn't feel that the trees belonged along Calle Tecate, especially
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 16 July 22, 1996
without contacting the homeowners, and suggested that they be planted at the
Hidden Grove site.
In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Cosper advised that approximately
50% of the trees would be planted along the Bear Creek Bike Path.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Perkins to relocate
the trees Hammer Trees) to the base of Martinez Peak in a clustered oasis
setting.
Council Member Sniff advised that he wouldn't support the motion. He
believed that the residents are all aware of the potential tree planting and
pointed out that none of them were present to raise an objection. He felt that
it's a major loss for the trees to not be planted along Calle Tecate and advised
that planting them on 52?foot centers is almost double the normal spacing of
date palm trees.
In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Cosper advised that the trees on
Dune Palms Road are 20-30 feet apart.
Motion carried with Council Member Sniff voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-
120.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Perkins to adopt the
Community Development Director's recommendation that planting of trees in
the Hidden Grove is categorically exempt per Section 15301 Class 4(b)) of the
Guide to the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA). Motion carried with
Council Member Sniff voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-121.
10. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE ENGINEER
OF RECORD TO PREPARE THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR
LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1 FOR FISCAL YEAR
1997/98.
Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the Landscape and Lighting
District Act of 1972 requires the preparation of an annual Engineer's Report to
provide current projected costs for construction, operation, maintenance, and
servicing of the City's parks and landscape facilities and proposed assessment
rates. The proposed resolution will initiate the process and the Final Engineer's
Report will establish the final assessment levels for Council's consideration at
the public hearings
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 17 July 22, 1996
Berryman & Henigar, Inc. B&H), who has been the Engineer of Record since
the inception of the Landscape & Lighting Assessment District, submitted a
proposal for services for fiscal year 1997/98 and upon conclusion of
negotiations, it was determined that the annual cost to perform the services
would be $23,700. In an effort to negotiate a cost savings to the City, B&H
has proposed a three-year contract with an annual option for an additional
three years. Staff recommended that B&H be asked to reconcile the land-use
designations and assessments with the City's GIS software system which will
make it easier to determine if properties are being assessed properly and either
generate more revenues for the District or correct inaccurate assessments.
B&H proposes to replace Jeffrey Cooper with David Cosper as the Engineer of
Record. The estimated savings for these engineering services will be
$806/annually or $2,419 for a three?year contract. He advised that $30,000
is included in the budget for the proposed services. He presented alternatives
to Council including adoption of a resolution directing the preparation of the
Engineer's Report and authorization to execute a contract with B&H for said
services or to solicit proposals from other engineering services.
In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Cosper advised that the first-year
engineering cost of $16,500 is based on the City's current number of parcels
which is 14,300 with $5/parcel added to the base cost of $16,500 for each
additional parcel. Should a three-year contract be approved, the engineering
costs for the second and third years will depend on the number of parcels at
the end of the previous year.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Cosper advised that the reason
for initiating this process so early in the fiscal year is to enable Council to hold
the required public hearings in the spring before some of the residents leave for
the summer.
Council Member Henderson was disappointed that an RFP wasn't distributed
for these services, pointing out that the City has been struggling with having
its hands tied in good faith negotiations in another issue, yet we seem to be
voluntarily doing the same thing in this particular case. She wished to put it
out to bid if sufficient time exists to do so.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Cosper advised that the City's
parcel inventory and assessments are on disks, but the formula has to be
determined by the Engineer of Record.
Council Member Henderson didn't mean to suggest that B&H hasn't done a
good job, but she felt that the bidding process should be consistent.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 18 July 22, 1996
Council Member Perkins felt that the two contracts referred to were different
from each other and that this one is small enough to accept as it is. He
pointed out that engineering costs have been reduced over a period of time
under the present contract and considering what it costs to go out to bid, he
wasn?t sure there would be any savings.
Mayor Holt agreed, but appreciated Council Member Henderson's concerns.
Council Member Henderson wished to see all multiple-year contracts go out to
bid in the future and felt that the additional cost for doing so should be minimal
if handled properly.
Council Member Sniff was very much in favor of going out to bid on contracts.
He suggested that this resolution be adopted and authorization provided to
execute the agreement for one year and put the contract out to bid next year.
Council Member Henderson concurred.
Robert TVler, 44-21 5 Villeta Drive, felt that a conflict of interest exists and was
appalled that the Council would consider a proposal presented by Mr. Cosper
who is on contract to work for the City under the firm for whom he has
proposed a contract for, with himself as the lead engineer. He pointed out that
other agencies have a hard and fast rule about such actions and suggested that
the Council terminate this procedure and go out to bid.
Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that it?s not uncommon for a firm
providing engineering services under a contractual relationship to also provide
this type of service without additional approval by Council. In many cities, the
firm providing the City Engineer will conduct the assessment district
proceedings and very often be included in the contract.
Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she was not aware that Mr. Cosper
would be making the presentation on this item and that based on maintaining
continuity, she felt that it would have been more appropriate for someone other
than himself to make the presentation.
Council Member Henderson didn't see any impropriety to the point of being
illegal, but felt that it was improper for Mr. Cosper to prepare and present the
staff report.
Mayor Hoit advised that she would be more uncomfortable with this situation
had the City not worked with this firm for so long, but felt that perhaps
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 19 July 22, 1996
something had been learned from this and didn't have a problem with
proceeding with this matter at this time.
Council Member Perkins concurred.
Council Member Sniff suggested that they would alleviate some of the
perception if they retained Jeffrey Cooper as the Engineer of Record for this
year instead of Mr. Casper.
Council Member Henderson didn't have a problem with that and Council
Member Adolph agreed that it would probably be mare appropriate.
Council Member Perkins supported a one-year contract, but pointed Out that
the contract is with the engineering firm and they should be the ones deciding
who is assigned to the project.
Council Member Sniff felt it would be better to specify Mr. Cooper as the
Engineer of Record given the possible conflict of interest issue that has
surfaced.
Mr. Genovese suggested that this matter be continued to allow staff time to
consult with B&H and the previous Engineer of Record to make sure that they
don't have a problem with that.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to continue the
matter regarding Landscape & Lighting Assessment District 89-1 to the next
meeting. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-122
11. CONSIDERATiON OF THE CONSULTANT-SELECTION PROCESS FOR DESIGN
SERVICES NECESSARY TO PREPARE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATES FOR VARIOUS FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 CITY-WIDE
STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
Mr. Casper, Public Works Director, advised that on June 18, 1996, the
following street improvements were approved as part of the Capital
Improvement Program: traffic signals at Washington Street and Avenue 48,
Washington Street and Avenue 52, Highway 111 and the Plaza La Quinta
Shopping Center, and interim improvements at Highway 111 and Jefferson
Street; a channel crossing at the Whitewater Storm Channel on Dune Palms
Road; and, Washington Street improvements directly south of St. Francis of
Assisi Church. Staff recommended that one firm handle the engineering
services for all six projects to reduce costs. He advised that Council could
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 20 July 22, 1996
appoint one or two participants/observers to serve on the Consultant Selection
Committee that would develop a short list of consultants from a list of qualified
firms and review the RFP proposals to be submitted by the August 30, 1996
deadline. The Consultant Selection Committee is scheduled to meet on July
23, 1996 to develop the short list of consultants and the proposed members
are John Freeland, Jerry Herman, and Tom Hartung.
Council Member Adolph felt that having eight traffic signals within 2.7 miles
on Washington Street was ludicrous and wouldn?t support this.
Council Member Henderson suggested that any Council Members appointed to
the Consultant Selection Committee be appointed as observers only.
Council Member Perkins was comfortable with staff proceeding to handle it.
In response to Robert TVler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, Mr. Cosper advised that the
contract would be written with the ability to drop the Highway 111/Jefferson
Street project if a proposed major project at that intersection seems likely.
Mr. Cosper advised that the traffic signals would only be installed if justified
by the traffic study that will be prepared as part of the project
MOTION- It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to: 1) approve
the Consultant Selection Committee; 2) approve the Request for Proposals for
Preliminary Engineering and Design Services for various Fiscal Year 1996/97
street improvement projects; 3) authorize staff to receive proposals from
qualified firms; and 4) negotiate terms of a Professional Services Agreement
with the most qualified firm, as determined by the Consultant Selection
Committee, to be considered by the City Council at a future date. Motion
carried with Council Member Adolph voting NO. MiNUTE ORDER NO.96-123
CONSENT CALENDAR
APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED JULY 22, 1996.
2. TRANSMITTAL OF TREASURY REPORT DATED MAY 31.1996.
3. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE BUILDING & SAFETY DIRECTOR
TO ATTEND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS
ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING IN ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, SEPTEMBER 8-13.
1996.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 21 July 22,1996
4. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION FOR PLOT PLAN 96-579 TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MEDICAL OFFICE IN THE C-P ZONE, LOCATED
NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF FRED WARING DRIVE AND WASHINGTON
STREET. APPLICANT: THE WOODARD GROUP.
5. APPROVAL OF A FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
FOR TRACT 28341-1, KSL LAND CORPORATION.
6. APPROVAL OF A FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
FOR TRACT 28259-1. KSL LAND CORPORATION.
7. AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE AN APPRAISAL REPORT INVOLVING CERTAIN
LANDS OWNED BY ROXIE YESSAYIAN.
8. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OF AGING
FOR TITLE III PROGRAM.
9. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY
COOPERATION AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE URBAN COUNTIES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FOR 1997/98 FISCAL
YEAR.
10. AUTHORIZATION TO RECEIVE BIDS FOR JEFFERSON STREET RESURFACING,
PROJECT 96-01.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the
Consent Calendar as recommended. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE
ORDER NO.96-124.
Council Member Henderson suggested that the Agreement with the Riverside County
Office on Aging Title III Program be expanded to include legal counsel assistance to
the seniors regarding property assessments.
Council recessed to Closed Session to and until the hour of 7:00 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION
1. Conference with City's real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8, concerning potential terms and conditions of acquisition
and/or disposition of real property located west of Simon Drive. south of
Highway 111. and west of Adams Street. Property Owner Negotiator: Jack
Franks.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 22 July 22,1996
2. Conference with City?s real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8. concerning the potential terms and conditions of acquisition
and/or disposition of real property located at the northwest corner of Jefferson
Street and Highway 111. Property Owner Negotiator: Greg George.
3. Conference with City?s real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8, concerning the potential terms and conditions of acquisition
and/or disposition of real property located south of Highway 11'1, between
Adams Street and Dune Palms Road. Property Owner Negotiator: Christine
Clarke.
7:00 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. PLACEMENT OF THE REFUSE FEES ON THE TAX ROLLS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$116.64 ANNUALLY. SAID FEE INCLUDES REFUSE COLLECTION, DUMP FEE,
LANDFILL CLOSURE. RECYCLING PROGRAM, AB939 COMPLIANCE. &
TRANSPORTATION COSTS.
Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that this public hearing
was for the purpose of setting the rates for the City?s waste? disposal contract
with the proposed residential rate being $9.72/monthly or $1 16.64/annually.
A breakdown for both residential and commercial rates is included in Exhibit A
of the staff report and the costs associated with the closure of the Coachella
Landfill, including additional hauling costs, is shown in Exhibit B. He then
reviewed the monthly charge breakdown, noting those costs that were reduced
as well as the addition of transportation costs for having to haul to Edom Hill
instead of Coachella.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that there was no
overall increase in the rates from last year.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
Joe Coker, 80-950 Vista Bonita Trail, spoke in support of the City's contract
with Waste Management of the Desert He was pleased with their service and
the fact that their rates didn?t increase.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 23 July 22, 1998
Michael Jeffery, 78-755 Villeta Drive, believed Waste Management is
committed to the valley and urged the Council to approve their contract.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney,
advised that the rates needed to be set at a public hearing prior to approval of
the contract because they are a part of the contract.
RESOLUTION NO.96-57
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REPORT PRESCRIBING THE
CHANGES FOR RESIDENTIAL PARCELS FOR CITY-FURNISHED REFUSE
COLLECTION FOR 1996-97 AND DIRECTING THAT SUCH CHARGES BE
COLLECTED ON THE TAX ROLLS.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.96-57
as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
BUSINESS SESSION...................continued
7. CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS RELATING TO SOLID WASTE COLLECTION:
A) ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR THE
COLLECTION, TRANSPORTATION, AND DISPOSAL OF MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE.
B) ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR THE
COLLECTION AND RECYCLING OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS.
Mr. Weiss, Assistant City Manager, advised that on June 18, 1996, Council
granted a 30-day extension to the contract with Waste Management of the
Desert. The proposed contract provides a number of enhancements to the
City?s solid waste and recycling services such as automated collection, green
waste program, backyard composting program, and public education programs.
A semi-annual curbside City clean-up program is also provided at no additional
charge as well as a holiday greenery collection. Solid waste collection and
recycling have been separated into two separate agreements in response to
court decisions that have taken place since the current contract was signed
five years ago. There has been a restructuring of the mechanism by which the
recyclables are accounted for within the agreements to allow for
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 24 July 22, 1996
implementation of a market-based program for commercial recyclable materials.
Members of the City's negotiating team, the City Attorney, Community
Development Director, and Cerene St. John from EcoNomics, Inc., were
present to answer questions as well as Waste Management representatives
who wish to make a presentation.
Tom Freeman, 41-575 Eclectic, Palm Desert, Vice President of Waste
Management of the Desert, introduced members of their negotiating team and
thanked the City?s negotiating team for their assistance in making the proposal
possible. He reviewed some of the 18 significant enhancements within the
two agreements and advised that the residential rate has been reduced without
affecting the high level of service provided to residents. He felt that Waste
Management has negotiated an outstanding contract with the City in good faith
as required by the previous contract and he urged Council to unanimously
approve it.
Jim Brockman, 53-600 Polk Street, Coachella, District Manager for Western
Waste Industries, believed there could have been additional enhancements to
the contract if an RFP had been distributed and pointed out that it could still
be done since the *`good faith" negotiations have been completed. He
questioned whether the contract was the best the City could get for its
residents and didn't understand the purpose of two separate agreements. In
regards to AB939 and CERCLA indemnification clauses, he believed Waste
Management should be held responsible for providing a 50% diversion by the
year 2000 and that a $1 million cap on the CERCLA indemnification is
insufficient. He pointed out that the contract does not address how green
waste would be handled if local composting facilities don't exist. He felt that
it?s a good contract for residential service, but pointed out that it allows
commercial accounts to be charged for recycling which may hamper the City's
recycling program. He urged the Council to extend the contract another 30
days to take a closer look at it or at least open up the commercial part of the
contract to competitors.
Pat Cross, 78-750 Saguaro, representing Browning Ferris Industries, advised
that they wish to submit an RFP if the services go out to bid.
Robert Tyler, 44?21 5 Villeta Drive, questioned why competitive bidding wasn't
allowed on this contract and asked if a good faith" clause was included in the
new contract that would preclude competitive bidding next time. He
questioned how the City was supposed to know if they have received the best
deal if they don't put the services out to bid.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 25 July 22, 1996
John McDermott, 44-650 Seeley Drive, has a great deal of faith and trust in
Waste Management and urged the Council to approve their contract. He
experienced terrible service when he lived in Long Island and has been very
pleased with the service in La Quinta and the cleanliness of it.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised
that under the good faith" clause in the current contract, the City was
required to negotiate in good faith with Waste Management to extend the
contract and she felt that has been done. The new contract does not include
a good faith" clause.
In response to Mayor Holt, Mr. Weiss advised that the contract was separated
into two parts because of recent litigation and changes within recycling jaws.
Ms. Honeywell advised that the separate contracts was the City?s idea. It was
based on the litigation experienced by Rancho Mirage. The idea behind it is
that the contracts can be negotiated and bid separately.
Mayor Holt asked if there would be any danger in losing the recycling program.
Mr. Weiss advised that the contract provides for residential recycling, but
commercial recycling is treated somewhat differently as it recognizes the ability
for an open market to exist for commercial recyclable materials. The new
contract allows Waste Management to charge a fee for commercial recycling
based on what the market will bare and, therefore, compete on the open
market. The current contract doesn't allow a recycling fee because it was
written with the idea that recycling service could be sole-sourced. The
maximum charge for recycling would be the same as the collection of solid
waste.
Mayor Holt was concerned about the possibility of not having a green waste
program if no local facilities exist.
Cerene St. John, Principal Vice President for EcoNomics, Inc., advised that the
contract requires Waste Management to provide a green waste program for
non-gated communities. They have agreed to direct the green waste to a
composting facility selected by the City which is Cal Biomass in Thermal. It
didn't seem cost-effective to go out to bid at the present time, but the contract
contains a very broad change of scope clause in both agreements should
another composting facility be needed in the future. Transportation costs for
green waste are included in the contract, but if another facility is selected,
those costs would have to be renegotiated.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 26 July 22,1996
Mayor Holt pointed out the possibility of direct-mail brochures for public
education on recycling winding up in the trash and, thereby, increasing the
junk mail that the enhanced recycling services would be trying to address. She
suggested that Waste Management utilize and put dollars into the newsletter
for public awareness as much as possible.
Mr. Weiss advised that such concerns could be addressed during the City?s
annual review of the program with Waste Management that's provided in the
contract.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Ms. Honeywell advised that it?s
staff's understanding that construction sites are included in the recycling
agreement. The general contract provides a specific provision that includes
construction materials on construction sites with the exception of any recycling
materials that the contractor has set aside. She viewed construction sites as
being a form of commercial or industrial business.
Ms. St. John confirmed Ms. Honeywell's comments and pointed out that they
are required to use Waste Management for trash co?lection, but not for
recyclables.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Ms. Honeywell advised that
recyclable materials on construction sites are considered open market and may
be sold or hauled away free. However, Waste Management is the only entity
that can charge to haul those materials away should they have no recycling
value. Construction sites can be specifically included in the contract as
commercial businesses if the Council wishes.
In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Herman, Community Development
Director, advised that Section 8.01.070 of the Municipal Code requires a
contractor to have a trash bin on-site for the purpose of having the City's trash
hauler remove the trash, excluding recyclable materials.
In response to Mayor Holt, Mr. Weiss advised that gated communities handle
their own waste disposal contracts, but automated service would begin no later
than April 1, 1997.
Ms. St. John advised that Waste Management will work with gated
communities on an individual basis for automated service, making it available
for those who wish to have it.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Weiss confirmed that the City
would control the flow line.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 27 July 22, 1996
Council Member Henderson expressed concern about the community being
flooded with public education brochures on recycling. She pointed out that
Waste Management and EcoNomics are both required in their contracts to
provide such education and suggested that they utilize the newsletter for such
information to reduce the amount of junk mail. She hoped that the waste
disposal contract would eventually be able to absorb the AB939 issues
currently handled in the contract with EcoNomics as she has a hard time
understanding why the contracts with two separate entities handle like-
services.
Council Member Perkins felt that the good faith" clause in the current contract
places the City in a tremendous bind and wished to make sure that it's not
included in the new contract. He felt that the Council's only alternative is to
proceed with the current contractor.
Mayor Holt felt that these services should have gone out to bid because she
believes in competitive bidding. She didn't have any complaints against Waste
Management, but felt that the only way a contract can be negotiated in good
faith for the City's constituents is to go out to bid. She would not support this
contract because she felt that it's her constituents that she owes a good
faith" effort and not the contractor.
Council Member Adolph advised that he's also a firm believer in competitive
bidding, but felt that this Council is responsible for keeping a commitment that
the previous Council made with Waste Management. Therefore, he would
support this contract, but would not support a contract that includes a good
faith" clause.
Mayor Holt felt that good faith" negotiations have taken place and that the
City is now free to go out with an RFF.
Council Member Sniff felt that all contracts should be negotiated in good faith
even if it's not included in the contract language. He felt that the negotiators
have done a good job and that the City should move forward with the contract.
Council Member Henderson advised that she thoroughly believes in an open bid
process, but felt that her hands were tied and must abide by the intent of the
clause in the current contract. She felt that good faith" negotiations have
taken place and have resulted in a good contract. She didn't believe that going
out to bid would offer any significant changes, but wished that Waste
Management had offered to release the City from the good faith" clause
several months ago. She was disappointed that Western Waste and BFI didn't
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 28 July 22, 1996
go ahead and submit proposals based on information from public documents.
She advised that she would support the contract.
RESOLUTION NO.96-58
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA.
CALIFORNIA. APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION,
TRANSPORTATION, AND DISPOSAL OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY AND
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
CALIFORNIA, INC.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Reso?Resolution No.96-58
as submitted. Motion carried with Mayor Holt voting NO.
RESOLUTION NO.96-59
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA.
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR THE COLLECTION AND
RECYCLING OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA
QUINTA AND WASTE MANAGEMENT OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.
96-59 as submitted. Motion carried with Mayor Holt voting NO.
PUBLIC HEARING...............continued
2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 AND ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT 96-050. CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN
TEXT AND LAND-USE POLICY DIAGRAM AMENDMENT AND APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE
ZONING CODE, REPLACING EXISTING TITLE 9 EXCEPT CHAPTER 9.160)
AND DELETING CHAPTERS 5.36. 5.37.5.64, 5.66 AND A PORTION OF
CHAPTER 5.72. INITIATED BY THE CITY OF LA QUINTA.
Ms. di lono, Planning Manager, presented staff report advising that this matter
was continued from the Council Meeting of June 18, 1996 to allow staff time
to address concerns ra?sed at the public hearing. The topics were: 1)
development standards, specifically, sideyard setbacks, parking and accessory
uses; 2) recreational vehicle uses and 3) the equestrian overlay. Regarding the
development standards, all of the issues raised by the BIA were revised with
regard to parking and sideyard setbacks, accessory uses are now being
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 29 July 22, 1996
allowed to exceed the 200 sq. ft. currently proposed in the ordinance; and any
accessory buildings over 200 sq. ft. must meet the setback standards as
required in that particular district. Also added, was the issue regarding
guesthouses more than one guesthouse will be allowed on parcels over 10
acres. Regarding recreational vehicles, they are now allowed to stay on streets
and driveways for only 24 hours.
regarding the equestrian overlay, no changes are being recommended by staff.
She noted that the proposed ordinance requires all pastures, corrals and open
areas to be fenced from non-equestrian abutting properties. Fencing for
existing uses will not be required until a related physical improvement is
proposed. Additionally, the ordinance has been written to encourage
composting and other potential reuse of manure. Spreading of manure is
allowed for commercial operations Regarding lighting and sound, within the
overlay requirements lighting is limited to 9:00 pm and sound is limited from
8:00 am to 9:00 pm.
An additional change that was not addressed in the staff report is to allow
secondary dwelling units to apply for a minor use permit as opposed to a
conditional use permit, which is similar to guesthouse requirements.
She concluded in saying that the General Plan has been updated to reflect the
most current information regarding land use designations and the Zoning Code
update will implement the goals and policies of the General Plan.
In response to Council Member Adolph, Ms. di lono advised that secondary
dwelling units can have a range, it is guesthouses that cannot. A secondary
unit is commonly called a granny flat and can be rented if it meets certain
criteria
Council Member Adolph expressed concern about the reduction in parking
spaces in residential areas because with a four bedroom house and with
teenagers living there, there could end up being four vehicles with no place to
park them.
Ms. di lono advised that that was omitted upon the recommendation of the
BIA.
Council concurred on leaving in the parking space requirements.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 30 July 22, 1996
MARVIN ROOS, representing the Building Industry Association, advised that
they are very comfortable with the document and the revisions being
recommended. Regarding the parking issue, they didn't feel that it was a
widespread issue, but rather a market issue. It's very expensive to provide
these additional parking spaces and he hoped to continue this discussion or to
go with staff's recommendation. Regarding the sideyard gate, they continue
to request that the gate width be removed to allow for a larger gate at least
48".
ROBERT DANIELS, 46-485 Cameo Palms Drive, asked for Counci?'s
consideration regarding the size of accessory structures as there are larger lots
in the City that will accommodate an accessory structure larger than 200 sq.
ft. He suggested that the size of the lot be taken into consideration.
Mr. Herman advised that an addition has been made to the ordinance 201
plus sq. ft. has been added for accessory uses that will be required to comply
with the setbacks in the underlying zones.
SONNY KANLIAN, 50-400 Jefferson Street, addressed the matter of the
equestrian zoning advising that the zoning mix of residential/equestrian doesn't
work. He related the code requirements in Rancho Mirage regarding their
equestrian district commenting that it's much more strict. He requested that
a requirement for an inner fence be required along with a requirement for
manure to be hauled off and no lights on weekends except for special events.
He also commented on code violations which exists on the property adjoining
his and questioned why code enforcement is not dealing with these violations,
i.e. a rooster on the property and manure piled up against his fence.
REBECCA SABETTA. 51-975 Avenida Ramirez, requested an exception to the
20 x 20 garage size requirement to allow for remodeling of older homes. She
advised that she's trying to add a 3 hallway in her garage to allow access to
a new room to the rear of the house. She advised that this will still allow
space for parking of two cars.
Mr. Herman advised the code requires a 20' x 20' garage in order to park two
cars. If someone wishes to intrude into that space for some reason such as
a hot water heater, it would require expansion of the garage to 24' x 20'.
KEITH REECE, 80-209 Avenue 50, advised that they are disposing of 100% of
the manure on their property. Regarding lighting, he said that he has five lights
that don't put out any more light than the one yard light the Kanlians have and
they are pointed straight down into the arena. He felt that a 9:00 pm limitation
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(#City Council Minutes 31 JuJy 22, 1996
on lights is unreasonable since the Sports Complex lights are allowed to remain
on until 10:00 pm.
BARBARA IRWIN, 44-065 Camino La Cresta, asked that the Council remove
the deletion on Table 9-11 regarding off-street parking and that the pedestrian
gate be maintained, noting that she and others have worked very hard toward
establishing higher development standards.
WANDA REECE. 80-209 Avenue 50, advised that the planning staff has been
working hard on this document for several years and felt that everything has
been covered and urged the Council to adopt the document as recommended
by the Planning Commission.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED.
Council Member Perkins stated that he did not agree with the
recommendations made by the BIA regarding parking spaces in residential
areas because he didn't feel that parking on streets is desirable. The standards
originally in the ordinance were fair enough and should remain. He supported
a 24-hour requirement on the parking of R.V.'s. He had a problem with
parking R.V.'s in a sideyard as he didn't know of anything more distracting to
a neighbor. Regarding the gate size, he continued to support a 36 gate,
commenting that any work done in the backyard should include the cost of
access. Regarding the light requirement in the equestrian overlay zone, he felt
that lights and sound should both be allowed until 10:00 pm.
Council Member Adolph concurred with all of Council Member Perkins'
comments. In response to some questions, Mr. Herman advised that all
lighting has to comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance and regarding sound, there
is a residential standard which Code Enforcement can enforce utilizing a sound
meter. Regarding the grandfather clause in the equestrian overlay zone, Ms.
Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that some improvement to the property
would remove the grandfather clause.
Council Member Henderson stated that she had a problem prohibiting the
parking of R.V.'s in the sideyard and backyard if they are properly screened.
She felt that people have choices, and those who wish to have the more strict
requirements chose to live in gated communities where they have the stronger
restrictions. She also pointed out that R.V.'s include boats and a boat in a
sideyard should not be seen.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,( #City Council Minutes 32 July 22,1996
Council Member Perkins stated that he objected to parking of any R.V. higher
than a six-foot wall.
Mayor Holt and Council Member Adolph agreed with the parking of R.V.'s in
the sideyard or backyard if they are properly screened.
Regarding the request made by Ms. Sabetta, Council Member Henderson
wished to see some kind of latitude given to the Community Development
Director to approve a request like hers because a homeowner could very well
make this kind of change without getting a permit and without doing it
properly, so by providing a method of allowing such a modification would
ensure that the work would be done properly.
Council Member Perkins asked if home inspections are being made by the City
when property is sold and Mr. Herman advised not. Council Member Perkins
asked that staff research this matter and report back.
Council Member Adolph and Mayor Holt agreed.
Council Member Sniff advised that so many of the homes were built so many
years ago that there may not be plans available. He did not support a
prohibition of R.V.'s being parked on the sideyard or backyard if properly
screened. He also had no problems with lights/sound on until 10:00 pm. He
also felt that the residential parking requirement should go back to the way it
was and had no problem with a 48" gate. Regarding the equestrian overlay
zone, he said that he could see problems on both sides, but supported the
proposed ordinance. He also supported the 24-hr. parking of R.V.'s on streets
and driveways.
Council Member Sniff asked if Ms. Sabetta's problem was adequately
addressed and Ms. di Iorio advised that there is a provision in the new
ordinance for the Community Development Director to make a determination
of 10% on any minor adjustment to the development standards.
MARILYN PRIESTLY 44-300 Camino La Vonda, felt that R.V.'s should be
allowed in the sideyard if properly screened. She felt that 24 hours on the
street would be adequate, but is a little short after a long trip.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that properly
screened means a 6' opaque fence/wall.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(!#City Council Minutes 33 July 22,1996
Council Member Perkins felt that he could support the parking in sideyards if
a better definition of screening is developed.
Council concurred.
Council also concurred on the following:
1. 48" sideyard gate
2. Lights on until 10:00 pm in equestrian overlay zone
3. Return residential parking to original standard
4. R.V. parking allowed in sideyard and backyard with proper screening
5. Allow secondary dwelling units to be approved by a minor use permit
RESOLUTION NO. 96-60
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-318 PREPARED FOR
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 AND ZONING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT 96-050 ZONING CODE)
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph that Resolution No.96-60 be
adopted as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO.96-61
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA. APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE
LAND USE ELEMENT AND LAND USE POLICY DIAGRAM.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph that Resolution No.96-61 be
adopted as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to take up
Ordinance No. 284 as amended by title and number only and waive further
reading. Motion carried unanimously.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,("#City Council Minutes 34 July 22, 19S6
ORDINANCE NO.284
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 9 ZONING CODE) OF THE LA QUINTA
MUNICIPAL CODE EXCEPT CHAPTER 9.160 SIGNS). AND DELETING
CHAPTERS 5.36.5.37, 5.64.5.68. AND PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 5.72 AND
SECTION 6.08.105.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to introduce amended
Ordinance No.284 on first reading. Motion carried on the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Adolph. Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Holt
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Council recessed at this time to Redevelopment Agency and Financing Authority.
Council reconvened to regular session.
STUDY SESSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING SENIOR CENTER RENTAL POLICY.
Continued to August 6, 1996.
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
All reports were noted and filed.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS
Council Member Henderson noted that the trailer on the La Quinta One Eleven Center
has been given a four-month extension by staff.
Council recessed to Closed Session.
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02
,(##City Council Minutes 35 July 22, 1996
CLOSED SESSION
1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 CONCERNING POTENTIAL TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF ACQUISITION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF SIMON DRIVE. SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111,
AND WEST OF ADAMS STREET. PROPERTY OWNER NEGOTIATOR: JACK
FRANKS.
2. CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 CONCERNING THE POTENTIAL
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ACQUISITION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET
AND HIGHWAY 111. PROPERTY OWNER NEGOTIATOR: GREG GEORGE.
3. CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 CONCERNING THE POTENTIAL
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ACQUISITION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111, BETWEEN ADAMS STREET
AND DUNE PALMS ROAD. PROPERTY OWNER NEGOTIATOR: CHRISTINE
CLARKE.
Council reconvened with no decision being made which requires reporting pursuant
to Section 54957.1 of the Government Code Brown Act).
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Re ectfully submitted,
AUNDRA L JUHOLA City Clerk
City of La Quinta California
BIB]
08-30-1996-U01
09:30:51AM-U01
CCMIN-U02
07-U02
22-U02
1996-U02