Loading...
1995 10 17 CC Minutes LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 17, 1995 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on October 17, 1995 was called to order at the hour of 3:00 p.m. by Mayor Pena, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena ABSENT: None Confirmed APPROVAL OF MINUThS MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the City Council Minutes of September 29, October 3, October 5, and October 11, 1995 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Bangerter advised that the Kidsline Program has received the Helen Putnam Award for Excellence and that it will be announced at the League of California Cities General Assembly on October 22nd. The City has been requested to bring a display to the conference as a model for other communities to use. Governor Wilson will be presenting an additional award in Sacramento at a later date. She advised that the number of calls received through the program doubled last year and they are currently working with the City of Indio to get them on-line with the program as well. Mayor Pena advised that the City also received the 1995 Vintages & Vinegars Award from the Inland Empire Chapter of the American Planning Association for the Civic Center design. None Mr Rupert Yessayian 78 023 Calle Estado, spoke in behalf of property owners, residents, and businesses who are opposed to the one-way street Calle Montezuma) around the Frances Rack BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 2 October 17, 1995 Community Park. Several businesses have attributed the one-way street as an important factor in making their business decisions to close or relocate and survey results reported 140 people opposed to the one-way street design and only 13 approved. He reported the opposition because of the Chamber of Commerce's report to the Council that there isn't any. He advised that a traffic survey evaluation prepared by the University of California reported no major traffic problems in this area and concluded that a one-way street design would be applying more control than is necessary. Ms. Audrey Ostrowsky, P.O. Box 351, also spoke in opposition to the one-way street. Her understanding was that the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors was initially opposed to the one-way street design and only changed to support it because of the money the Chamber receives from the City, which is why she's opposed to the City financially supporting the Chamber or the Arts Foundation. She felt that the property owners in the area weren't allowed to participate in the decisions that affect them the most. She urged the Council to redesign the street as a two-way street and make the street improvements that are needed. She was also opposed to businesses being allowed to operate out of homes. Mr. Alfred Hastii?, P.O. Box 1579, voiced opposition to the use of political signs in the City because he felt that they degrade the community. He believed that other citizens feel the same and suggested that brochures be used to acquaint the candidates with their constituents. He has spoken to the City Attorney and believes that the signs are illegal because there's no valid ordinance to regulate them and understood that a draft ordinance is being prepared to address the issue. Council Member Perkins agreed with Mr. Hastings, pointing out that he didn't erect signs during his campaign, neither would he in the future if he should seek re-election. He doesn't believe that political signs should be permitted. Ms. Susan Benay, 53-686 Avenida Velasco, Vice-Chairperson of the Cultural Affairs Commission, advised that their goal is to develop a Master Cultural Plan for the City to represent the full spectrum of the City's cultural needs. The steering committee, consisting of representatives from all segments of the community, will develop methods to gather data on all existing programs and cultural activities as well as survey needs that aren't being met. They plan to utilize questionnaires, telephone surveys, public forums, and other community-friendly methods to make the Commission available for input. She invited the Council's participation in this project. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 3 October 17, 1995 LETTER FROM PATRICK WELCH REGARDING BUSINESS SESSION ITEM NO.4 REQUESTS BY THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Noted and filed, Mayor Pena suggested that Business Session Item Nos. 5-10 be taken up prior to Item Nos. 1-4. Council concurred. BUSINESS SESSION 5. CONSIDERATION?ON OF A?ONS ESTABLISHING A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 95?1 FOR THE VISTA SANTA ROSA DEVELOPMENT LOCATED IN THE EASThRN PO?ON OF THE CITY. 5.1 ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTE?ON TO ESTABLISH A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, AUThORIZE THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX TO PAY THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING CERTAIN FACILITIES AND EXPENSES OF THE DISTRICT, AND TO PAY DEBT SERVICE ON THE BONDS. 5.2 ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $12,900,000 WITHIN THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT. 5.3 AUTHORIZING PUBLIC?ON OF A N?CE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE INTENTION TO LEVY SPECIAL TAXES WITH THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND TO ISSUE BONDS. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the first resolution of Intent before the Council would establish a Community Facilities District and authorize the levy of a special tax to pay the cost of constructing certain facilities and expenses of the District and to pay the debt service on the bonds. The second resolution is for intent to incur bonded indebtedness in an amount not to exceed $12 million. Staff requested that the public hearing be scheduled for November 21, 1995. He advised that there would be no fiscal impact on the City's General Fund nor the Redevelopment Agency funds. The CFD project is for 850 1,800 sq. ft. single-family homes on lots ranging from 9,000 to 10,000 sq. ft. and will be located south of Avenue 52, west of Madison Street. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman advised that the special tax would only be levied against potential buyers within the CFD and it would be disclosed to them prior to completion of the sale. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 4 October 17, 1995 RESOLUTION NO.95-73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.95-1 OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, TO AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX TO PAY THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING CERTAIN FACILITIES AND EXPENSES OF THE DISTRICT AND TO PAY DEBT SERVICE ON BONDED INDEBTEDNESS. It was moved by Council Members SnifflCathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-73 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO.95-74 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $12,000,000 WITHIN PROPOSED COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 95-1 OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-74 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to authorize the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing on the intention to levy special taxes with the Community Facilities District and to issue bonds. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-1S2. 6. CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDA?ON OF THE HUMAN SERVICES CO? TO INSTALL A CITY BULLETIN BOARD AT THE ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA CENTER. Mr. Hartung, Building and Safety Director, advised that the Human Services Commission has recommended the installation of a bulletin board at Albertsons in the La Quinta One Eleven Shopping Center. The bulletin board would cost approximately $900 and the installation has been approved by the management at Albertsons. In response to Council Member Perkins? Mr. Hartung advised that the glass-enclosed bulletin board would be placed near the east entrance and used only for posting City notices. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 5 October 17, 1995 M?ON It was moved by Council Members SniffIBangerter to authorize staff to install a bulletin board at the east entrance to the Albertsons store. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTh ORDER NO.95-183. 7. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO RECEIVE BIDS FOR WASHINGTON STREET INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 95?8. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that on May 16, 1995, the Council authorized staff to proceed with the design for interim improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection. Re requested authorization to receive bids on the completed design which will result in extending two northbound lanes through the intersection as well as two left-turn lanes and will require the removal of two traffic islands. He advised that the cost of the design and interim improvements is approximately $231,000. The bid opening is scheduled for November 30, 1995 and construction is expected to be completed by March 1, 1996. The contractor will be required to work his construction schedule around the special events occurring during the construction period. Council Member Perkins complimented the staff and CalTrans for the manner in which. this project was expedited, noting that it's the fastest project he?s ever seen go through the State. Council Member Sniff supported the project, but was concerned about the improvements being done during the tourist season. Mr. Cosper advised that a minimum of one through-lane open in both directions and one left?turn lane would be open at all times during construction. The interim improvements will expedite the next phase of improvements and minimize impacts to motorists. Mayor Pena pointed out that the City's funding cycle is partially responsible for projects being dbne during the tourist season because the budget isn?t adopted until July each year. In response to Council Member Bangerter. Mr. Cosper advised that the next phase of construction should begin in July or August, 1996 and completed within six months. The heavy phase of construction should be completed during the months of September and October, 1996. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to authorize staff to receive bids for the Washington Street Interim Improvements, Project No. 95-OS. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-184. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 6 October 17,1995 S. CONSWE?ON OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR AN INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT GRANT TO CONSTRUCT A BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the proposed resolution would allow staff to apply for an Intermodal Transportation Efficiency Act Grant for the purpose of constructing a bicycle and pedestrian path in the Cove. It will be primarily located on the east side of Avenida Bermudas, in and around the Civic Center, and tie residential and commercial areas together. The estimated cost of the improvements is $326,000, of which the City will be responsible for approximately $72,000 and the request for a commitment of funds will be submitted when the grant is approved. RESOLUTION NO.95-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR AN INTERMODAL SERVICE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT GRANT TO CONSTRUCT A BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA TO BE KNOWN AS THE CORAL REEF MOUNTAINS BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH." It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No.95-75 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 9. TRANSMITTAL OF TREASURER'S REPORT DATED AUGUST 31, 1995 FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE LA QUINTA FINANCING AUTHORITY. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to receive and file the Treasurer?s Report dated August 31, 1995 for the City of Ia Quinta and make this item a part of the Consent Calendar on future agendas. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-185. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to receive and file the Treasurer's Report dated August 31, 1995 for the La Quinta Financing Authority and make this item a part of the Consent Calendar on future agendas. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-186. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 7 October 17, 1995 10. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO.274. ORDINANCE NO.274 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QIY[NTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY, BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY REFERRED TO IN CHANGE OF ZONE 95- 079. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Ordinance No.274 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Council concurred on taking up the Consent Calendar before proceeding with Business Session Item Nos. 1-5. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED OCTOBER 17, 1995. 2. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR GARY DUNN, DATE OF LOSS, JUNE 22, 1995, IN THE AMOUNT OF $260. 3. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR JOSE M. GARCIA, DATE OF LOSS, 3JUNE 18, 1995. 4. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR RICHARD T. JONES, JR., DATE OF LOSS, MAY 25, 1995. 5. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION CONFIRMING AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE EXPIRATION OF THE CONTRACT FOR AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE NO.74. 6. APPROVAL OF REPORT OF AC?ON TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.95-022, A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A VEHICLE SALES LOT ON A PORTION OF A 2.7-ACRE SITE AT 79410 HIGHWAY 111. APPLICANT: MR. MOE NOURKHAH.. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 8 October 17, 1995 7. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION TO ALLOW TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF A PO?ON OF WASHINGTON STREET AND AVENUE 52 AND APPROVAL OF THE USE OF THE CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT AREA FOR THE ANNUAL LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 10K RUNI2 MILE WALK ON NOVEMBER 12,1995. APPLiCANT: LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. S. APPROVAL OF REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON PLOT PLAN NO.92490 i?EVISED) AND SPECIFIC PLAN NO.92-022; A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED COMMERCIAL PROJECT AT THE NORTIIWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. APPLICANT: MICHAEL IIURST, ARCHITECT. 9. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE MAINTENANCE MANAGER TO ATTEND A PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SEMINAR IN LAS VEGAS, NEVADA, NOVEMBER 30-DECEMBER 1,1995. 10. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ALLOWABLE FORMS OF, AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS FOR, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY. 11. APPROVAL OF THE CITY'S DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE DBE) POLICY FOR FISCAL YEAR 19951%. 12. ACCEPTANCE OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT MILES AVENUE AND DUNE PALMS ROAD, PROJECT NO.95-03. 13. APPROVAL OF SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP TAXI REGULATORY IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT. 14. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT WITH DONALD C. ANDREWS CONCERNING A PORTION OF THE LIQUIDATION FOR THE STEVEN D. WYMER QUALIFIED SETTLEMENT FUND. MOTION It was moved by Council Members SnifflCathcart to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with Item Nos. 5, 7, and 10 being approved by RESOLUTION NOS. 95-76, 95-77, and 95-78 respectively. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-187. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 9 October 17, 1995 BUSINESS SESSION continued 4 CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A MASTER PLAN AND RENAMING THE COMMITTEE TO A COMMISSION. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the Arts in Public Places Committee is requesting approval of their Master Plan and to change their designation from a Committee to a Commission. The intent of the Master Plan is to provide a defined public art program and help inform the community and developers of their goals and how art is evaluated for consideration. The designation change is being requested because. the Council's definition of a Committee is a temporary group chosen to give special consideration on a pending issue" which they feel no longer applies to them because they have existed since 1990 and a Commission is more of a long-term designation. Staff recommended that Commission members be compensated $50 for each monthly meeting attended and that $4,200 be allocated from the General Fund Emergency Reserve to cover the cost. He pointed out that some inconsistencies exist regarding compensation for Board and Commission members and proposed that staff drafi a uniform compensation policy for Council's review and consideration. Council Member Sniff supported the request because he felt that it was reasonable and logical. Mr. John Walling, 45-190 Club Drive, Indian Wells, Art in Public Places Committee Member, felt that the Committee has behaved more like a Commission than a Committee and should be redesignated. He advised that no additional staff time would be necessary and the consensus amongst the members is that compensation for meeting attendance is not necessary. In response to Council Member Bangerter, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that residency exceptions have been made in the past when certain technological background is required on a Commission. However, such exceptions would have to be addressed in the ordinance. Council Member Bangerter advised that a lot of work completed by the Committee hasn't been displayed because of project delays. Council Member Perkins was initially opposed to the change, but now feels that it would be more appropriate. He commented on the amount of time the volunteers donate to Commission work and felt that they should be compensated. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 10 October 17, 1995 Mayor Pena supported the request, but asked staff to bring back to the Council in December, a list of the various Boards and Commissions to make sure that their operating regulations are consistent. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to approve the Master Plan of the Arts in Public Places Committee as submitted, rename the Committee to a Commission, allocate funds from the General Fund Emergency account in the amount of $4,200, and authorize staff to make all necessary ordinance changes for approval by the Council. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-iSS. Council concurred on taking up Business Session Item Nos. 2 and 3 after the Closed Session. 1. CONSWE?ON OF REAPPROPRIATION OF CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that on September 19, 1995, the Council directed staff to bring options back to them for the reappropriation of approximately $1.2 million in Infrastructure Funds budgeted for the pool at the Fritz Burns Park. The estimated pool construction cost of $1,739,312 consists of $1,218,980 in Infrastructure Funds and $520,312 in Community Service Funds. He advised that the Infrastructure Fee Program was established to allow residential and commercial developments to proceed while insuring that the impacts resulting from such developments would be addressed through an in-lieu fee program. Resolutions were adopted in 1985 and 1987 to establish a policy for expending those fees. Re advised that Government Code Section 66000 defines infrastructure fees as an impact fee, therefore, they can only be used to address impacts caused by new developments and cannot be used to address past deficiencies, maintenance-related activities, nor the replacement or rehabilitation of existing facilities. He advised that the 19951% Capital Improvement Program CIP) that includes a five-year projection of projects and the Infrastructure Fee Study were used to develop the list of potential projects, as well as the Councils direction given on July 5th to use $160,540 from the Landscape and Lighting District for landscaping the medians along Eisenhower Drive and Washington Street Project Nos. 9610 and 9807). Projects in the CIP that had alternative funding sources were deleted from the list because of the unsurety of when the alternative funding sources would be available. Re advised that the prioritized list of projects Attachment 4) include the total costs, cumulative costs, and the annual impact costs for operations and maintenance once the projects come on line. Re reviewed the prioritized list of projects which was broken down into two different funding limits one using the $339,000 and one using the entire $1,218,980. He advised that the annual impact to the City for operations and maintenance of the recommended projects would be $52,100 if the full $1.2 million is reappropriated. That amount would be off-set by the BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 11 October 17, 1995 $70,000 in the Landscape & Lighting District Assessment Fund account that would not be used for pool operations and maintenance per the direction of Council on July 5th. He advised that the Adams Street Extension Project was not included in the CIP nor Infrastructure Fee Study, but was included by staff because of the possible need for a detour or alternate route during the Washington Street?Highway 111 Improvement Project and the need to alleviate traffic impacts caused by the new high school. Staff recommended that two 16-foot lanes be constructed on Adams Street from Westward Ho Drive to Miles Avenue and advised that all other improvements would be completed when development occurs. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Cosper advised that the cumulative costs to complete all of the projects is $1,019,738. The cost to complete all of the projects in the Five-Year CIP and the projects on the deferred list would be approximately $31 million. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Cosper advised that a reimbursement agreement would have to be signed prior to the improvements on Adams Street. Mr. Cosper advised that the intent of a potential realignment of the Infrastructure Program which is currently under study, is to more clearly define responsibility for improvements. He advised that street improvements are likely to be affected the most with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and the first 20 feet of pavement typically being the responsibility of the developer. Council Member Catheart asked if the Infrastructure Fee Policy is regulated by any outside agency. Mr. Cosper advised that creation of the fee is city-driven and Government Code Section 66000 establishes the criteria for setting up the fee and how it's developed. Council Member Cathcart asked if the policy revision would bring the City into closer compliance with current State law to which Mr. Cosper responded yes. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper advised that some of the median landscaping projects are included in the major thoroughfare category. Council Member Cathcart asked if it was possible for the City to be out of compliance with the State in regards to spending the Infrastructure Funds and what would happen if the funds are not used to offset impacts. Mr. Cosper advised that it depends on how the policy was set up. He felt that the policy is clear about how the funds are to be spent. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 12 October 17, 1995 Council Member Cathcart asked what the ramifications would be if funds were spent inappropriately. Mr. Genovese advised that the current Infrastructure Fee Program is being looked at because of the changes in the law. It's difficult to determine where the City could be Out of compliance legally because laws have mandated something different than what the City has and the City has been adjusting to it. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that if someone felt the funds were being used inappropriately, an injunction could be filed against the City or a developer could challenge the City's right to collect the fees. She advised that the current policy is Out of date and the study will address the issues of concern She noted that the Dolan decision radically changed the analysis needed as to what improvements can be imposed upon a developer as opposed to general improvements to the City. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Genovese advised that the new draft Infrastructure Fee Study could be ready as early as January, 1996. The BIA will review it to insure that Ia Quinta is competitive with the other cities and that developments within the City won't be held up. Council Member Sniff asked if Adams Street could be completed early enough to have relative value to the upcoming construction work at Washington Street and Highway 11. Mr. Cosper advised that Adams Street could be underway within three months and completed in 30 days which would be prior to the main construction at Washington Street and Highway 111. Council Member Sniff felt that having an alternate route available during the Washington Street/Highway 111 construction would be beneficial. He also felt that beautification of the frontages on Washington Street and the Ia Quinta Hotel were important. Council Member Perkins questioned the status of the monument signs that were to be erected at the entrances to the City on Highway 111. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that some of the property has been in bankruptcy, but was recently sold. The new property owners will be contacted to gain approval for the erection of the signs. Council Member Perkins wished to review the monument sign project again because he felt that the signs were too small. Council concurred. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 13 October 17, 1995 Ms. Terry Henderson, 54-711 Eisenhower Drive, felt that it is the Citys responsibility to move forward with the potential projects and that improved traffic flow would enhance the City?s viability to the commercial market. She questioned why the extension of Adams Street would take three months to complete and asked that the timing of the signal lights at Simon Drive and Adams Street be adjusted. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-215 Villeta Drive, was pleased with the list of potential projects, but felt that the Adams Street Extension Project should have higher priority. He was told that a property owner along Adams Street was willing to move forward with the street improvements if the City would approve a land swap and he asked if such a horse trade" has ever been submitted. He felt that elimination of some of the currently unconstructed medians would eliminate further concerns about how to landscape and maintain them. He urged the Council to focus on concerns that have a much keener bearing on traffic flow. Mr. Jeff Smith, 54-631 Avenida Alvarado, felt that the proposed reappropriation of funds was a shell game" to make sure that the money allocated for the pool disappears before the election. He felt that the funds would be reallocated after the election because of new members on the Council. He wasn?t opposed to the reappropriation of $339,000 saved on the new pool design, but objected to attempts to make the balance of the pool funds disappear. Mr. Ed Kibbey, 78-620 Sanita Drive, of the Building Industry Association Desert Chapter, was concerned that the Landmark monies be used for their intended purpose and comply with AB1600. He felt that the City has been out of compliance with ABI6OO and advised that the BIA is pleased that the City is looking into compliance. He asked that close attention be paid when the funds are reappropriated to insure that Government Code Section 66000 is complied with, pointing out that Infrastructure Funds are not intended for median strips unless they are needed for traffic control. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Cosper advised that the funds allocated for the pool consists of $1.2 million in Infrastructure Funds as well as Quimby Funds and Community Service Funds. In response to Mayor Pena, Ms. Honeywell advised that the Landmark money was designated for general recreational purposes which could include, but is not limited to a pool. She advised that the funds currently under consideration for reappropriation don?t include Community Service Funds. Mr. Genovese advised that Infrastructure Funds were the last funds to be allocated to the pool project. Council Member Bangerter asked if the Community Service and Quimby Funds have been somewhat depleted because the project expenses were expended from them first. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 14 October 17, 1995 Mr. Genovese advised that the pool project fund was created according to generally- accepted accounting principals and contains three funding mechanisms: 1) Community Service Funds, 2) Quimby Funds, and 3) Infrastructure Funds. Staff recommended that any reappropriation of this fund be done to the most discretionary funding mechanism. Council Member Bangerter asked if the Urban Forestry Program and Sports Complex Lighting Project were funded from the Community Service Fund. Mr. Genovese responded yes, advising that the total amount was approximately $160,000. Council Member Bangerter asked if that amount could be reappropriated back into the Community Service Fund, increasing it by approximately $200,000. Mr. Genovese advised that $200,000 of Infrastructure Funds could be removed from the pool project to fund those two projects and reappropriate $200,000 in Community Service Funds back to the pool project. Council Member Bangerter asked if the fundipg was split because of the division of the pool and park projects. Mr. Genovese advised that the funding was not split. Staff's recommendation is that the most flexible funding mechanism included in the park project be utilized for other projects. In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell advised that the use of the Landmark money was broader than just a pool. Council Member Sniff related the history of the contribution from Landmark. Mayor Pef? suggested that the Council consider reappropriation of the $339,000 in which h& could participate. Re said that he would excuse himself from the discussion on the remaining amount due to a conflict of interest. Council Member Cathcart suggested that a decision be made regarding the full $1.2 million amount first to find out if the Mayor would be able to participate in the reappropriation of all of the funds or be limited to the $339,000 amount. Re just recently realized that the pool and building were specifically deleted from the Infrastructure Fee Policy in the original study of 1985 and amended in 1987 and asked the City Attorney to elaborate on that issue. Ms. Honeywell advised that if the City Manager and Finance Director could assure her that the overall proportion of funding did not use the Infrastructure Funds for the pool and locker facility, she would not have a concern because the overall design of the project was not intended to use those funds. If a question exists about using the Infrastructure Fund BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 15 October 17, 1995 for those items she would be concerned about expending those funds for this project without researching the report and resolutions of 1985 and 1987 as well as looking at it in relation to the 1989 legislation. Mayor Pena asked if someone would be able to challenge the use of the $1.2 million amount for the pool project. Ms. Honeywell advised that would be a possibility unless staff assures her that the percentage of Infrastructure Funds being used would be used for general park purposes such as street improvements and parking as opposed to being used specifically for the pool. Council Member Sniff asked how long the City Attorney would need to complete the research to which she responded that she could have it ready by the next Council meeting. Council Member Catheart felt that the general policy of the Council has been to follow the list very closely and based on that, the funds couldn?t be used for the pool or locker facility because they were deleted from the list. Council Member Sniff felt that there was significant value in having the City Attorney conduct the research because of the changes in the law. Council Member Cathcart asked that a history regarding the Community Service Fund be provided as well. Mayor Pena suggested that a decision could be made contingent upon the City Attorneys report. Council Member Bangerter didnt feel that an immediate decision was necessary and asked if the CIP would be ready for discussion before or after the new Infrastructure Study was completed. Mr. Genovese advised that both documents would be ready in January or February, 1996. Council Member Bangerter advised that the CIP requires a lot of time and consideration and was opposed to making piece-meal" decisions on such an important program in a short period of time. Mayor Pena advised that the funds could be put back into the main project fund, but wouldn?t have to be a!located to specific projects at this time. Council Member Cathcart felt that some of the projects could move forward such as Adams Street. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 16 October 17, 1995 Council Member Bangerter felt that there were too many areas to consider under the CIP such as The Village and Westward Ho area to make such a quick decision and advised that additional funds would be received through an upcoming land sale and thus help with the funding of these projects. Council Member Cathcart felt that the reappropriation of funds should move forward to make sure that the City is in compliance with the Infrastructure Fee Policy. He advised that when the policy was adopted the projected income for a ten-year period was $38 million, but the actual income has been only $10 million. He reviewed the percentages set forth in the Infrastructure Fee Policy for future needs and compared them to the percentages actually spent. The projected $38 million was to be spent as follows: 16% for public buildings, 9% for public safety buildings, 11.8% for recreational facilities, 14% for bridges, 46.5% for major thoroughfares, and 2.4% for traffic signals. The actual expenditure percentages were as follows: 69% for public buildings, 0% for public safety buildings, 8.2% for recreational buildings, 0% for bridges, 19.4% for major thoroughfares, and 3% for traffic signals. He felt that the Council should immediately reappropriate the $1.2 million back into the project fund because the City has failed to meet both its income and expense projections. Mayor Pena agreed that priorities were set forth in the beginning, but the Council took a different turn which has somewhat divided the community. He advised that Measure A Funds from CVAG were used for bridge construction which accounts for the shortfall in that area of the expense projections. Council Member Perkins felt that the City is behind in taking care of its roads and bridges and that more traffic signals are needed as well as a new fire station and an upgrade of the Cove fire station. He was disappointed that more funds aren't available to handle these needs. Council Member Cathcart was doubtful that the income projected for the next ten-year period would occur and pointed out that $1.3 million is 10% of what the City will probably collect during the next ten years. He advised that the deferred list will increase if there's a shortfall in the projected income. Council Member Sniff advised that a significant amount was spent from the Community Services Fund for the removal of the Desert Club. Council Member Cathcart didn't believe that that expenditure would qualify for a reimbursement from the Infrastructure Fund. Council Member Perkins felt that necessary building removal would be normal costs involved with park construction. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 17 October 17, 1995 Mayor Pena believed that the cost to remove the buildings was approximately $180,000. Council Member Sniff hoped that a reasonable compromise could be reached to allow some of the improvements to move forward and yet maintain a significant portion of the funds for the park and related activities. Mayor Pena left the dais due to a conflict of interest to allow the Council to make a decision on whether or not to reappropriate the $1.2 million. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Cathcart/Perkins to reappropriate Infrastructure Funds in the amount of $1,218,980 from the Fritz Burns Pool Park Project for future consideration for other projects. Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter advised that she would vote NO because she felt that insufficient information exists regarding the Citys compliance with the Infrastructure Fee Policy. She also felt that this action should be considered in conjunction with the review of that policy as well as the CIP. Council Member Cathcart understood that the only concern regarding compliance was whether or not the Infrastructure Funds could be used for the pool project. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter, Mr. Cosper advised that the list of potential projects are in compliance with the Infrastructure Fee Policy and Government Code Section 66000. All of the impact fees will be reviewed during the policy review and the facility fee program could include the pool. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Genovese advised that both the collection and expenditure of fees would be reviewed during the policy revision. Motion failed with Council Member Sniff and Mayor Pro Tem Bangerter voting NO and Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-1S9. Council Member Sniff suggested that $739,000 be reallocated and $1 million left in place for the possible pool and/or other related recreational activities. Re advised that the other possibility would be to deal with the $339,000 amount only. He wished to see the Adams Street Extension, Eisenhower Drive Median, and Washington Street Frontage Road landscaping projects constructed with the $739,000 amount. Council Member Cathcart advised that he would probably support the suggestion if the remaining Infrastructure Funds are not spent on the Fritz Burns Project until a ruling is received from the City regarding the legality of that expenditure. Re was willing to wait on that decision until after the Infrastructure Fee Policy is reviewed. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 18 October 17, 1995 Mayor Pro Tern Bangerter advised that she could support it also. Council Member Sniff felt that the compromise would allow the City to improve the traffic flow and beautify some key areas of the City as well as maintain funds for the pool. Council Member Perkins felt that it was a watered-down motion, but would support it. Council Member Sniff pointed out that when land in Redevelopment Project Area No.2 is sold, additional funds will be available for improvements as well as some reimbursement to the General Fund. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Catheart to direct the reappropriation of $739,312 from the Fritz Burns Park Pool Project for various infrastructure needs. Motion carried unanimously with Mayor Peha ABSENT. MINUTh ORDER NO.95- 190. Mr. Genovese asked for clarification that the funds being reappropriated are Infrastructure Funds and the Council responded in the affirmative. STUDY SESSION PRESENTATION BY BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF COACHELLA VALLEY LA QUINTA UNIT. Mr. John Foster, representative for the Boys & Girls Club of Coachella Valley, advised that they raise approximately $800,000 annually and over $400,000 of that is spent on the La Quinta facility. He advised that this community must give more support than it has in the past and reviewed some of the La Quinta-specific programs that he felt the City might be interested in supporting. He suggested that the City consider supporting 65 scholarships for children who can't afford membership dues and the use of City crews to maintain the facility's landscaping. He felt that the entire community benefits from the Gang Prevention Program that costs them $40,000 annually. He felt that his suggestion for a City contribution of $50,000 was a conservative request in comparison to the amount of money spent at the La Quinta facility. Council Member Sniff suggested that staff negotiate a contract between the City and the Boys & Girls Club in the amount of $50,000 for the use of the Club's facilities and related personnel. He also suggested that the feasibility of grants be explored and a report brought back to the Council as soon as possible. He advised that the City established a relationship with the Boys & Girls Club sometime ago by providing land for the facility and a $135,000 contribution for the utility extensions. He felt that the Club is an extremely important asset to the City. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 19 October 17, 1995 Mr. Foster felt that a joint-use could be worked out because the facility is not in use at all times. He was confident that their program instructors would be interested in working with the Parks & Recreation Department as well. Council Member Sniff felt that it's important to handle the contribution on a contractual basis so that everything is clearly understood. Mayor Pena felt that many residents would be interested in learning computers at the facility. He felt that recreation shouldn't be a battle, but rather a shared effort where recreation uses are maximized. Council Member Sniff pointed out that the facility is available year-round. Mr. Foster advised that they would embrace any mixed use because the facility is not used to its maximum capability. Council Member Cathcart would support an even higher level of funding and possible expansion of the site since a similar facility probably won't be built any time in the near future. Council Member Sniff felt that the building itself is adequate, but suggested that new or upgraded equipment could be added. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Foster advised that an average of 250 children attend the facility daily with a membership of over 1000. The ages of the children attending the facility range from 7 years of age through high school, with the majority being from the primary grades. Council Member Perkins felt that the Council is supportive and that it's a matter of what the City can afford. His determination would be based upon afford ability and how much additional use the community would gain from the facility. He preferred that a contribution be made as a grant for the Club's discretionary use as opposed to being broke down int6 specific programs, unless it's for assistance through such things as yard maintenance. Mayor Pena felt that a contract should spell out what programs would be offered beyond what is currently there. Council Member Sniff suggested that the initial parameters be $50,000 to $75,000 and direct staff to promptly negotiate a shared-use contract, specifying some general programs, but being specific where necessary. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 20 October 17, 1995 In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Foster advised that low community support is due to a lack of awareness. During his 18-year service on the Board they have always raised enough funds for their prograrns, but they had to go into their reserves when the La Quinta facility was built and their fundraising efforts have had to increase. He advised that they provide quality prograrns for the youth and encouraged the Council, staff, and community to participate by joining heir Board. Council concurred on directing staff to negotiate an agreement with the Boys & Girls Club in accordance with Council?s discussion, i.e., joint-use facility. Council recessed to Closed Session to and until the hour of 7:00 p.m. CT?OSED SF?SION 1. Conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(B) one case). 2. Conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(B) C), receipt of clairns filed on hehaif of Todd Hanover, William Biller, and William Sikes. 3. Public Employee Appointment Assistant City Manager pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. 4. Review and consideration of City Attorney contract pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. 7:00P.M. Mr. Marty Brhel of Palm Springs, President of the Crime Control Education Foundation and Crime Control Foundation of America, advised that their non-profit corporation?s basic mission is to restore public safety through crime prevention and control. They seek solutions to the problems plaguing the criminal justice system and then try to achieve legislative remedies such as the three legislative bills they sponsored in Sacramento this year. They sponsor fundraising events to pay for experses?that were previously paid out of their own pockets. They are currently raising funds to obtain 15 minutes of air time on ESPN that will benefit the Coachella Valley by telling all of America about the valley and what the people here are doing to restore public safety. Mr. Jeff Fidler, of Cathedral City, advised that their current fundraiser is a dualthlon event to be held on November 24th and 25th. It will consist of two races, one for ages 15 and above and the other for kindergarten age through 8th grade. They have. obtained several sponsors for the BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 21 October 17,1995 event including Oshmanns, KESQ-TV, and the City of Cathedral City and they hope to obtain enough sponsors to obtain 15 minutes of air time on ESPN. Council Member Perkins said he was familiar with the organization and was pleased with their attack against crime. Re felt that they have some good connections and are familiar with the problems within the judicial system. Re supported helping them and advised that he would make a $100 personal contribution in addition to his regular membership fee. Council Member Cathcart advised that he, too, was familiar with the organization and supported giving them financial assistance. Mayor Pena was in favor of supporting the organization with a $1,000 contribution. Council Member Perkins suggested a contribution of $2,500. Mr. Fidler advised that they would be meeting with the producer on October 26th to map out their strategy for he show. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Bangerter to direct staff to agendize the request by the Crime Control Foundation for the next meeting in an amount not to exceed $2,500. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-191. None Council recessed to Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council reconvened. JOINT PUBLIC HEARTNG BETWEEN THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL AND THE LA OUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS I. AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DDA) BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY BUILDING HORIZONS PROGRAM. Council Member Bangerter abstained due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. Mr. Rerman, Community Development Director, advised that the second amendment to the DDA provides for the Agency to be reimbursed a maximum of $150,000 for the Agency's financial assistance for this project. The changes in the DDA will permit the BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 22 October 17, 1995 sale of the residential units to low and moderate-income households, eliminate the 3% down payment requirement, and increase the Second Trust Deed loan amounts from $20,000 to $30,000 per unit. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO.95-79 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND BUILDING HORIZONS. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-79 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member Bangerter ABSENT. 2. DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DDA) BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DESERT SANDS SCHOOL BUILDING CORPORATION FOR THE SALE OF APPROXIMATELY 25 ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF AVENUE 48 AND DUNE PALMS ROAD. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the purpose of the DDA between the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Redevelopment Agency is for the sale of property located at the northeast corner of Avenue 48 and Dune Palms Road. The DDA provides for the Agency to sell the 25.89 gross acres to the District for a cash price of $1.2 million, the District to construct improvements to Dune Palms Road from the future alignment of Avenue 48 north to Highway 111, and the Agency will assist in construction improvements to Avenue 48 from Adams Street to Jefferson Street. It also provides for an Implementation Agreement that will result in the disbursement of the District's percentage share of tax increment per year for the next 35 years. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 23 October 17, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-SO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DESERT SANDS SCHOOL BUILDING CORPORATION. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Cathcart to adopt Resolution No.95-80 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. BUSINESS SESSION.....................continued 2. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT RELATING TO CONSENT TO THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT GRANTED TO COLONY CABLEVISION. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that the Council continued this matter on September 29, 1995. She advised that staff doesn't recommend approval of the cable company's Franchise Agreement language regarding gross revenues." She advised that staff offered the following revised language that would place the burden for proving the City's right to collect a franchise fee for telephony service entirely upon the City: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary above or in the ordinance, franchised MCS provider or its affiliates shall not be obligated to pay a franchise fee or other fee, assessment or tax based on gross revenues derived from any telephony service unless the City can affirmatively demonstrate its legal authority under then applicable law to collect said franchise fee upon telephony revenues pursuant to the terms and conditions of this agreement." She advised that the cable company rejected staff's suggested language. In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell advised that staff was hesitant to recommend approval of a 15-year Franchise Agreement because amendments to the Federal Cable Act are expected to take place by the first of the year that will clarify whether or not the City has a right to collect telephony fees. The language rejected by the cable company would preserve the City's right to bring the issue up at a later time should the legalities exist. Mr. Jeremy Stem, 550 N. Continental Boulevard, El Segundo, Vice President of Corporate and Legal Affairs for Continental CableVision, advised that the millions they are prepared to invest in La Quinta will result in new jobs and improve the quality of the BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 24 October 17, 1995 cable service. He advised that they've never asked the City to waive their rights to collect a franchise fee on telephony service, but believed that the issue should be addressed after it's been clarified by federal law. They do not have a problem with paying a franchise fee on telephony service as long as their competitors are obligated to also pay. He advised that their proposed language would provide a broad definition of gross revenues and neither party would waive their rights relative to franchise fees for non-cable services. He felt that their proposal was in agreement with language used in the draft legislation which states that video-dial-tone video providers could be charged a fee in-lieu of a franchise fee if levied in a competitive and neutral manner. The new legislation is also expected to allow government agencies to collect compensation for use of their rights-of-way by telecommunication providers if assessed in a competitive manner, but they aren't allowed to collect a cable franchise fee for telephone service. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Stern advised that they are opposed to staff's suggested language because it sets any future franchise fees for telephony service at 5 % as a condition of the cable franchise. Council Member Cathcart asked if language reflecting something other than a 5% fee would be acceptable to them. Mr. Stern preferred using the same language contained in the City of Indian Wells agreement wherein a broad definition of cable revenue is used, yet preserves the City's right to seek additional revenues at a later date. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Stern advised that the new system would be capable of handling 111 analog channels and they will initially provide 58 channels as opposed to the 38 currently offered. Mayor Pena advised that the reason for rebuilding the cable system in the Cove area first is because that's where the older cables are located and the newer subdivisions have more up-to-date equipment in place. Mr. Stern advised that the new subdivisions would be upgraded within two years. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Stern advised that a 550 mhz system can only handle 78 channels. Currently, 75 % of the Cove area is operating with a 450 mhz system and the remaining 25% is at550 mhz. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Stern advised that they object to staff's proposed language because their company doesn't feel that they should be conditioned to pay telephony revenues in a cable franchise. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 25 October 17, 1995 Mayor Pena questioned the good of a franchise agreement to the City if the cable company switches over to telephony service in the future. Mr. Stern advised that it's unfathomable to think that Continental would change over to video-dial-tone service after fighting against it for so long. Mayor Pena advised that the City can't be sure of Continental's future decisions nor the possibility of the company being sold. Mr. Stern advised that video-dial-tone service was created by telephone companies because of their inability to get into cable business. He doesn't believe that business is going in that direction and advised that some telephone companies have backed away from it. He advised that none of their franchise agreements prohibit them from becoming video-dial- tone providers because it's not a concern. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Stern advised that city authority regarding video-dial-tone service has been an issue for a minimum of five years. Mayor Pena asked if it would be acceptable to them if the word all" was inserted. Mr. Stern advised that they don't want to commit to a 5% franchise fee for telephony service because they don't know enough about the market yet. They prefer to address that issue, if and when, the law allows the City to charge a fee for telephony service, as opposed to being forced to agree upon something at the present time. Council Member Cathcart felt that the cable company was trying to take away the City's future rights. Mayor Pena questioned what motivation the cable company would have to open up such discussions in the future. Mr. Stern didn't feel that the language in the Indian Wells agreement precludes the City from going after telephony revenues once they receive authority. Re said that the language is cable-specific with reservations of right for the City, stating that nothing herein prohibits the City from going after non-cable revenues in the future." Mayor Peha asked if a reduced-term agreement that utilizes the language in the Indian Wells agreement and requires only building a 550 mhz system would be agreeable to them. Mr. Stern advised that significant differences exist between the 10-year and 15-year agreements besides the 750 mhz cable system. He felt that staff chose to go with a 15-year agreement and now want the 15-year agreement benefits with a 10-year term. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 26 October 17, 1995 Ms. Honeywell advised that staff's rational for choosing a 15-year agreement was that the cable company was committing to follow the City's ordinance in which the gross revenue definition includes all revenues off of the system. Mr. Stern advised that the only ordinance change they've requested is the change to the Indian Wells language regarding gross revenues. Council Member Perkins felt that the language proposed by staff addresses the cable company's concern regarding franchise fee assessments for telephony service in relation to them and their competitors. Mr. Stern advised that staff deleted their original language that stated that they would pay a franchise fee for telephony service as long as their competitors were also obligated to pay. They will pay a franchise fee for telephony service on a level-playing field" with their competitors if the language is reinstated. Council Member Cathcart referred to previously-proposed language that would allow the cable company an opportunity to prove that a franchise fee assessment on telephony service would create an unfair advantage for their competitors and asked if that language would be acceptable to the cable company. Mr. Stern advised that their concern is that they would be making a significant investment up front and then have to prove unfair advantage after only three years in the market. He advised that loans would be difficult to obtain knowing that their competitors would undercut them by at least 5%. Re stated that they wouldn't have a problem if the City could affirmatively demonstrate its legal authority under then applicable law and the language in the agreement doesn't obligate them to pay a franchise fee for telephony service that their competitors aren't obligated to pay. Council Member Perkins didn't feel that it would be fair to charge the cable company a fee that their competitors weren't charged. Council Member Cathcart suggested that the matter be continued until the next meeting to allow staff further time to negotiate with the cable company. In response to Council Member Cathcart, Mr. Stern defined their competitors as GTE or other competitive local exchange providers. Council Member Cathcart pointed out the possibility that the City could be given legal authority to charge the cable company a franchise fee for telephony service, but not GTE. Re asked if they would have a problem with being assessed a franchise fee for providing telephony service in La Quinta if GTE didn't provide the same service in La Quinta as a local competitor. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 27 October 17, 1995 Mr. Stern advised that under those circumstances, they wouldn't be worried about being competitively disadvantaged. Council Member Cathcart felt that their proposed language would preclude the City from being able to charge the cable company a franchise fee for telephony service even if GTE didn't exist as a competitor in La Quinta. Mr. Stern suggested that the language be changed to state that if the City has legal authority, they can charge the cable company a franchise fee for telephony service as along as GTE or other competitive exchange providers in the local area are charged this fee in a competitively neutral non-discriminative manner. Ms. Honeywell advised that a level-playing field" is hard to define in this case because the cable company will be building a majority of their telephony service with money received from La Quinta residents for cable service and then charge the residents for that service. She pointed Out that telephone and cable systems are completely different. She advised that if in the future, Federal law allows local governments to charge a fee for use of rightsof-way, except for traditional telephone service, the cable company's definition of a level-playing field," i.e. the local telephone company, would preclude the City from being able to take advantage of Federal legislation. She advised that the Council could go with a 10-year agreement and use the Indian Wells language, but it would simply defer the decision to another day because the language is ambiguous. Council could also continue this until after Federal legislation is determined in February, 1996. She felt that a 10-year agreement would be more appropriate if the Indian Wells language is used. Mr. Stern didn't believe that the two issues were linked and advised that a 10-year agreement would provide less money and channels. Council Member Sniff suggested using the Indian Wells language with a 12-year agreement. Council recessed to Closed Session. Council reconvened. RUSINESS SESSION......................continued 2. CONSIDERATION OF M)OPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT RELATING TO CONSENT TO TIIE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF TIIE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT GRANTED TO COLONY CABLEVISION. Ms. Honeywell felt that both parties would be able to agree to the following language which she recommended approval of: BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 28 October 17, 1995 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary above or in the Ordinance, Franchised MCS Provider or its affiliates shall not be obligated to pay a franchise fee or other fee, assessment or tax based on gross revenues derived from any telephony service unless: 1) the City can affirmatively demonstrate its legal authority under then applicable law to collect said franchise fee upon telephony revenues pursuant to the terms and conditions of this agreement; and 2) the City levies the franchise fee or other fee assessment or tax fees on gross revenues derived from any telephony service in a competitively neutral and non- discriminative manner." Although she had some reservations, she recommended that the latest form of agreement submitted by the cable company be approved relating to the consent of the franchise transfer. Mr. Stern advised that the name Providence Journal? should be changed on the resolutions and agreement to Colony Communications, Inc. dba Continental CableVision. Ms. Honeywell advised that Continental would provide the City its unconditional guarantee of the franchise, ordinance, and the transfer agreement within ten days. Mr. Stern advised that the terms proposed by the City Attorney were acceptable to them. RESOLUTION NO.95-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE CONSENT OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA TO THE TRANSFER OF CONIROL OF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT GRANTED TO PROVIDENCE JOURNAL COMPANY M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No. 95-81 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. 3. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING A MULTI- CHANNEL SERVICE PROVIDER'S FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH COLONY CABLEVISION. See Business Session Item No.2 for discussion. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 29 October 17, 1995 RESOLUTION NO.95-82 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE CHANNEL PROVIDER'S FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH COLONY CABLEVISION OF CALIFORNIA. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to adopt Resolution No. 95-82 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Bangerter/Catlicart to bring back Business Session Item No.1 for further consideration. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95- 192. 1. CONSIDE?ON OF REAPPROPRIATION OF CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECT F'JNDS. M?ON It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Bangerter to appropriate $200,000 from the Infrastructure Fund to the Adams Street Extension Project and direct staff to proceed with the remaining balance as previously discussed for November 7, 1995. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.95-193. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS All reports were noted and filed. 1 REPORT REGARDING POLICY ON ACTIONS TAKEN IN STUDY SESSION. Ms. Honeywell advised that Council directed her to present them with some potential policy considerations with regard the type of actions that can be taken during a study session. She advised that legally the Council is not restricted from any type of action during a study session as long as it's clearly defined on the agenda. She advised that three options are listed in the staff report for Council's consideration. Council Member Cathcart suggested that the three options be brought back for consideration at the second meeting in November. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, suggested that it include other areas of the agenda as well. Council concurred. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 30 October 17, 1995 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' IThMS DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL DECORUM. Council Member Perkins advised that he preferred to bring this matter up in Closed Session, but the City Attorney has advised against it. He felt that council members attending any official government body, particularly one of the Council's own government-appointed groups, does so as Council Members and not as citizens and thereby lose a certain amount of their free?speech rights. Re believed that there has been a gross violation of the role expected of an elected official and his feelings are based on 15 years of experience on a City Council. He felt that guidelines should be established to prevent what he sees as intimidation by a Council Member giving direction to a body that makes recommendations to the Council, perhaps based upon the Council Member's remarks at their meetings. He felt that such unacceptable actions by a Council Member are imposing upon a Council-appointed body that is supposed to be impartial. He was concerned that committee or commission members may feel intimated or believe that the remarks represent the opinion of the entire Council. Re felt that if such actions are going to be permitted, then citizen-involved committees or commissions would no longer be needed. He didn't object to Council Members attending committee meetings, but after reviewing minutes of some of those meetings, he felt that statements are being made and direction is being given that is inappropriate. He believed that a standard of conduct should be established to eliminate the current confusion and disservice to the community. Re asked that staff be directed to review other cities and organizations and legal ramifications related to this problem and present a recommended procedure governing Council protocol and decorum. He suggested this as a method to change things that he feels are inappropriate and create an atmosphere of compatibility with the commissions. He referred to minutes of the Parks & Recreation Commission and Arts in Public Places Committee meetings which he felt reflected inappropriate action by a Council Member. Council Member Cathcart agreed that it's unfortunate that this matter has to be discussed in a public forum, but shared some of Council Member Perkins' concerns. He learned the hard way what impact and perception Council Members have upon the public, staff, and commission members and his relationship with staff changed when he joined the Council, pointing out that his inquiries were viewed as requests or demands as opposed to casual inquiries. Re realized that his relationship with the Chamber of Commerce changed also because his Council position has a different impact. He wasn't opposed to comments being offered as long as they're extended in the same manner that any other citizen would offer comments. He supported Council Member Perkins' request to staff in this matter. Council Member Sniff advised that he and Council Member Bangerter were Council- appointed representatives. on an Art Selection Committee of the Arts in Public Places Committee. He believed that they were expected to make comments. He advised that he BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 31 October 17, 1995 commented and critiqued the various proposals before the committee upon request of the committee chairman just as the other committee members offered their comments. Re advised that he asked to speak at the Parks & Recreation Commission meeting regarding the naming ofparks because of his long-term involvement with the mini-park. He didn't believe that they were intimidated or overly-influenced because they didn't accept any of his suggestions. However, he felt that he bad provided them with important historical background. Mayor Pena advised that some of the committee members have said that they feel they're being watched over when Council Members attend their meetings. He suggested that Council Members read the minutes of the meetings to find out what actions are taken instead of attending, unless they are appointed as a Council representative. Council Member CathcarL advised that he's heard comments from both commissioners and staff. He felt that Council should be reminded of the importance of an elected position and the impact it has. Re felt that addressing the issue through policy would be appropriate for the benefit of future Councils. Mayor Pena felt that it's unfair to refer the issue to staff because it's the Council's responsibility and suggested that the Council review their Rules of Procedures to see if this issue could be addressed there. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Cathcart to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to bring the Council's Rules of Procedure to the Council for review relating to this matter. Motion carried unanimously MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-194. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING UPDATE ON THE CITY'S DISASTER PREPAREDNESS PLAN. Council Member Cathcarl asked that staff present an update on the City's Disaster Plan at the next meeting. 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE BUILDERFEST AUCTION. Mayor Pena advised that he and Council Member Bangerter attended the Childcare Council Builderfest and the City was asked to purchase one of the playhouses in conjunction with the YMCA. Re advised that the City's portion was $2?OOO and contributions are being sought from various entities in the community. The playhouse will be located at the YMCA childcare facility. BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02 City Council Minutes 32 October 17, 1995 Council recessed to Closed Session as delineated on Page 20. Council reconvened with no decision being made which requfres reporting pursuant to Section 54957.1 of the Government Code Brown Act). There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned? fu11y submitted SAUNDRA L JUHOLA City Clerk Ctty of La Quinta California BIB] 12-13-95-U01 08:50:54AM-U01 CCMIN-U02 10-U02 17-U02 95-U02