Loading...
1996 02 06 CC Minutes*% LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6, 1996 Regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council on February 6, 1996 was called to order at the hour of 3:00 p.m. by Mayor Bangerter, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Bangerter ABSENT: None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Confirmed APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the City Council Minutes of January 16, 1 996 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS None PRESENTATIONS Mayor Bangerter presented a plaque to the Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the Marine Corp Reserve for their contribution to the Toys for Tots campaign. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Ed Kibbey, 77-564 Country Club Drive, Suite 400-B, Palm Desert, representative for the Building Industry Association, questioned the Council's recent action to increase the funding from $20,000 to $50,000 for the retention basin artwork in the La Quinta Village Shopping Center, pointing out that the funds are derived from developers He also questioned the use of Art in Public Places funds for Ms. Grygutis to travel from Arizona to La Quinta. Mr. Victor Massey, 78-900 Miles Avenue, commented that his rent has doubled over the last 1 3 years and asked the Council to consider adopting a mobile home rent control ordinance. He advised that the mobile home park in which he lives was covered by a County rent control ordinance prior to the City's annexation. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 2 February 6, 1996 Mr. Phillip Basquez, 78-900 Miles Avenue, asked what residents should do to initiate discussions on the enactment of a mobile home rent control ordinance. Mr. Paul Berlier, 39-586 Tandika Trail, Palm Desert, a local artist who was one of the three finalists that submitted designs for the retention basin artwork, asked the Council to reconsider their action of January 16th. He asked them to accept new proposals or select one of the local finalists because he didn't believe that a level- playing field existed during the selection process, pointing out that the artist selected didn?t adhere to the same deadline nor budget limit that the other artists did. Mr. Dennis Chap Chappel, 7?856 Joni Drive, Palm Desert, President of Desert Contractors Association, advised that they are concerned about local work being done by local contractors, whether it's construction or art. He felt that local contractors are overlooked and urged the Council to give them fair consideration He also asked that the opinions of the shopping center tenants be considered when making an artist selection. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE 1. LETTER FROM NANCY NARD RESIGNING FROM THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMISSION. Council asked that a letter of appreciation be sent to Ms. Nard for her service on the Art in Public Places Commission and that the recruitment process for filling the vacancy begin. 2. LETTER FROM ROBERT TYLER RESIGNING FROM THE HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION. Council asked that a letter of appreciation be sent to Mr. Tyler for his service on the Human Services Commission and that the recruitment process for filling the vacancy begin. 3 LETTER FROM CHRISTOPHER BACA REQUESTING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ATTEND A NATIONAL YOUTH LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. Council Member Sniff pointed out that the Council did not fund a similar request made at the last meeting, and therefore, didn't feel that this one should be supported either. He suggested that the Council discuss this type of BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 3 February 6, 1996 funding request during the upcoming budget review to possibly find a way to assist in the future. Council concurred and Mayor Bangerter advised that she would assist Mr. Baca?s efforts on a personal basis. 4. LETTER FROM RON LOVERIDGE. MAYOR OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. REGARDING THE MILITARY ROLL OF HONOR. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the City of Riverside has requested the City to officially support their effort and help insure that names of all military personnel from this jurisdiction who died in active duty are included in their honor roll list. No financial assistance is requested at this time. Council Member Sniff believed it would be appropriate to involve the Veterans of Foreign Wars VFW) in this effort, but felt that the Council needed additional information before it could take any action. After a brief discussion, Council concurred on placing this matter on the next agenda as a Business Session item. 5. LETTER FROM BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF COACHELLA VALLEY REQUESTING A LETTER OF APPROVAL FOR DISTRIBUTION?ION OF FOOD THROUGH THE F.I?N.D. PROGRAM. Council concurred on sending a letter of approval to the Boys & Girls Club on this matter. 6. LETTER FROM AUDREY OSTROWSKY REGARDING HER PROPERTY RIGHTS. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that staff always responds to Mrs. Ostrowsky?s letters and distributes copies of such responses to the Council. * Council Member Sniff felt that appropriate action should be taken to deal with this continuing issue. Council Member Perkins felt that Mrs. Ostrowsky's complaint was legitimate and is entitled to her property rights. He agreed that it should be dealt with. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 4 February 6, 1998 BUSINESS SESSION There was a consensus of the Council at this time to take up Business Session Item No.6. 6. INTERVIEW OF APPLICANTS FOR HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT. The applicants, Mr. Stewart Woodard and Mr. Jim DeMersman, gave brief presentations on their qualifications and background. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that to retain State certification, the Commission is made up of three professional positions and two lay-person positions. He felt that both individuals qualify as professionals, but pointed out that the lay-person must be a resident of La Quinta. MOTION- It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to appoint Stewart Woodard as the lay-member and Jim DeMersman as the professional member to the appropriate seats to fill the unexpired terms on the Historical Preservation Commission. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 96-11. CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF FY 1995/96 COMMUNITY SERVICE GRANT APPLICATION FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE L A QUINTA SENIOR CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000. Mayor Bangerter abstained due to a conflict?of interest and left the dais. Ms. Nicholson, Parks & Recreation Director, advised that the current amount in the Special Project Contingency Fund is $10,600. On January 16th, the Council set aside $4,000 for future consideration of a request for funding from the Friends of the La Quinta Senior Center to purchase three additional computers to augment their current computer class. Ms. Grace Mulcahy, 79-875 Westward Ho Drive, presented a brief history of the Friends of the La Quinta Senior Center and reviewed some of the purchases they've made as a result of fundraising events. She advised that the computer classes will generate funds for the Senior Center and pay for itself in a relatively short period of time, noting that it'S a win-win situation. Mr. Hayden Bower, 48-121 Via Hermosa, President of the Friends of the La Quinta Senior Center, commented on the benefits of senior citizens being BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 5 February 6,1996 computer literate and advised that they have an insufficient number of computers to accommodate the 175 + seniors currently signed up for the computer class. He believed that the seniors would hesitate to attend computer classes elsewhere in the valley because they're more comfortable with the familiar surroundings of their own senior center. He pointed out that the computer classes will be self-supporting and generate revenue for the City. Mr. Robert Metkus, of La Quinta Highlands, spoke in support of the funding request and urged the Council to approve it. Mr. Alibaba Farzaneh, 39-902 New Castle Drive, Rancho Mirage, owner of the Sesame Restaurant, advised that he would donate the $4,000 needed to purchase the computers. The Council expressed their appreciation to Mr. Farzaneh for his generous donation. Council Member Sniff asked that the grant program be agendized for the next meeting for the purpose of considering the funding requests that weren't funded on the last go-around or adding additional funding for the La Quinta Library Council Member Henderson understood that the Council wished to leave approximately $9,000 in the Contingency Fund and was opposed to considering any further grant requests. Council Member Adolph concurred. 2. CONSIDERATION OF NAMING THE PARK LOCATED AT EISENHOWER DRIVE AND AVENIDA COLIMA. Ms. Nicholson, Parks & Recreation Director, advised that the park at Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Colima was acquired in 1988 and the City adopted a Park Naming Policy in January, 1 995. Names for the park were solicited from the public and presented to the Parks & Recreation Commission who then recommended names to the Council on November 21, 1995. The Council referred the matter back to the Parks & Recreation Commission, directing them to be more site specific in naming the park and recommend methods for honoring certain individuals within the parks. She advised that the Commission has recommended two park names for Council's consideration, the. Cove Mini-Park and Eisenhower Mini-Park. The Commission will be reviewing methods for honoring certain individuals in parks at their February meeting. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 6 February 6,1 996 Council Member Henderson in referring to a letter in the staff report, advised that she didn't understand why Ms. Baty felt that the Council had mistreated or intimidated members of the audience when this issue was previously discussed. Mayor Bangerter felt that it might be because the Council solicited park names from the community and then disregarded their suggestions She advised that she had a problem with that herself and felt strongly that the process should be changed or made clearer to the public before soliciting their suggestions. Council Member Henderson commented that the Council always appreciates the time and effort that is put into Commission recommendations, but she didn't believe that they're required to accept them. Council Member Sniff didn't believe that there was any attempt by the Council to be intimidating. He felt that the community response to naming the park was extremely small and perhaps the Park Naming Policy should be reviewed again. However, he felt that the Council should move forward in the naming of this park Council Member Perkins felt that the Council may not have given clear emphasis on what they wished to achieve in the policy until this matter came up, but was pleased with the park-name recommendations currently before the Council because they identify the location of the park He apologized if anyone felt that the Council had been inconsiderate bf their suggestions. Council Member Adolph didn't have a problem with the name Eisenhower Park," but didn't like the word mini." Council Member Sniff supported the name Eisenhower Mini-Park," pointing out that mini" has been associated with that park since 1985. Council's original intent was to build a series of small parks throughout the Cove area because of the small size of the lots. Council Member Henderson felt that it was unnecessary to retain the word mini" in the park name because she didn't feel that many such parks would be built in the near future. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to name the park located at Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Colima the Eisenhower Park. Motion carried unanimously MINUTE ORDER NO.96-12. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 7 February 8,1998 3. CONSIDERATION OF NAMING THE PARK LOCATED AT LA PALMA DRIVE AND ADAMS STREET. Ms. Nicholson, Parks & Recreation Director, advised that the park at La Palma Drive and Adams Street was acquired in 1989. The Parks & Recreation Commission has recommended the following names: Serrano Park, North La Quinta Park, Adams Street Park, and Mountain View Park. Mr. Robert Metkus, of La Quinta Highlands, was opposed to the name North La Quinta Park," advising that the people on the north side don't like being referred to as North La Quinta" because it's all one City. He didn't feel that a park name was necessary, noting that the residents just refer to it as the park," but suggested that it be named after Ryan Ramirez if a name is to be selected. Council Member Sniff felt that if there's a policy the Council should be consistent in naming the parks and he liked the name Adams Street Park" and felt that Mr. Ramirez could be honored in some other way within the park. Mayor Bangerter was opposed to North La Quinta Park" because she felt that it's divisive. She referred to a previous request made by several people to name the park Ryan Ramirez Park" and advised that she still supports that request. However, she encouraged the pursuit of some method to honor individuals within parks. Council Member Henderson felt that having a park name is important in emergency situations to identify the location. She suggested dropping the word street" and just naming the park, Adams Park." Council Member Perkins supported naming the park Adams Park" and agreed with the concept of honoring individuals through: tree plantings, bench dedications, etc. Council Member Adolph concurred and wished to see some type of artistic dedication for Ryan Ramirez. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to name the park located at La Palma Drive and Adams Street the Adams Park. Mayor Bangerter advised that she would vote no because of the number of public requests to name the park something else. Motion carried with Mayor Bangerter voting NO. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-13. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 8 February 6, 1996 4. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPOINTMENT OF TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SERVE ON THE CIVIC CENTER ART-PURCHASE COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMISSION MEMBERS) DURING THE LA QUINTA ARTS FESTIVAL. Council Member Perkins withdrew his name from consideration. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that two Council Members need to be selected to serve on the Art-Purchase Committee to select art for the Civic Center during the La Quinta Arts Festival. MOTION- It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to appoint Council Members Adolph and Henderson to participate on the committee to select Civic Center art during the La Quinta Arts Festival and authorize a 10% leeway over the $3,000 that is budgeted. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-14. 5. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL RFP) FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO ASSIST STAFF IN IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT AB939). Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the City has been under contract with EcoNomics to help develop? and provide recycling programs that would help the City meet its AB939 waste diversion requirements. La Quinta entered into a cooperative effort in 1993 with the cities of Rancho Mirage and Indian Wells to utilize the sam?consuItant for similar programs. They, too, are currently selecting and interviewing consultants. The cooperative effort lowered the consultant costs for each City, but it has been stopped pending further direction from Council. He then reviewed the recycling programs implemented during 1995. He asked the Council for further direction in proceeding with the RFP process. In response to Mayor Bangerter, Mr. Herman, advised that the formula that was developed by the California Integrated Waste Management Board CIWMB) to determine waste reduction percentages is based on population, employment, and taxable services of an area, but doesn?t consider economic fluctuations that might exist in that area, thereby throwing the factors off. According to CIWMB's formula, La Quinta has achieved a waste diversion of 43%, but in actuality is closer to 25-30% and a modification of the formula by CIWMB may affect La Quinta's diversion rate. However, CIWMB would probably take La Quinta?s good faith effort" into consideration at that time. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 9 February 6, 1996 Mayor Bangerter asked if there was any way to determine the individual City costs for consultant services in the past cooperative effort. Mr. Baker, Principal Planner, advised that the savings estimated in the staff report is based on cost estimates contained in the 1 990, Source Reduction Recycling Element SRRE) and Household Hazardous Waste Element HHWE). Those cost estimates are compared to estimated staff time and actual consultant time to determine the estimated savings between the three cities. Mayor Bangerter asked if it would be beneficial to combine this RFP with the upcoming negotiations for waste hauler services. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that it would be difficult to determine that at this time because of the uncertainty of the status of those negotiations. However, the information that is generated from the selected consultant will be important during the negotiations with the waste hauler. Council Member Sniff advised that he has been a member of CVAG's Energy and Environment Committee for some time and suggested that he be appointed as one of the Council Members to serve on the consultant selection committee. Mayor Bangerter was unsure about continuing the cooperative effort with the other cities. Council Member Adolph questioned if it would' be taking a step backward and more costly to change consultants at this point and if staff might be able to take over the program after one more year. Mr. Herman advised that the purpose of the RFP is to determine if the City wishes to remain with EcoNomics or select another consultant. The benefits in remaining with EcoNomics would be the City's experience with them, as well as their local knowledge of the area due to their work with surrounding jurisdictions. He advised that staff would be able to handle the maintenance of the recycling program once the State mandates are met. Council Member Perkins asked if the other cities were contributing their fair share of expertise in the cooperative effort and if staff was comfortable with it. Mr. Herman felt that the joint effort is beneficial to the City, pointing out that it's a two-tier program with the first being services required by all three cities and the second being more unique projects that are City-specific. Those BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 10 February 6,1996 working in the cooperative effort have been seeking to develop alike-programs that work well within the communities. Council Member Perkins preferred to continue the selection process and the cooperative effort with the other cities as long as staff is comfortable with it, advising that he likes cooperative efforts between cities. Mayor Bangerter asked if the consultant selection would be based on all three cities selecting the same consultant. Mr. Herman advised that the cities of Rancho Mirage and Indian Wells have delegated the responsibility to staff for selecting a consultant, but La Quinta?s resolution requires that the Council be given the opportunity to serve on the selection committee or delegate that responsibility to staff. Council Member Henderson asked Mayor Bangerter what her concern was with a cooperative effort. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mayor Bangerter advised that her concern with the cooperative effort is that part two of the program contains a number of City-specific projects; Council Member Perkins asked if there were any Council Members on the selection committees of the other cities to which Mr. Herman responded no. Council Member Adolph felt that a cooperative effort was the way to go, but felt that a condition should be placed on the program for staff to handle the program after one more year. Mr. Genovese advised that a consultant contract would be for one year only and would have to be brought back to Council for any further consideration. Council Member Henderson volunteered to serve on the consultant selection committee. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the Request for Proposals for AB939 implementation consultant services and authorize staff to proceed with the selection process to contract for professional services and appoint Council Members Sniff and Henderson to participate in the selection process. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes I February 8, 1996 Council Member Perkins preferred to see the Council Members observe" the selection process as opposed to serve" as participating members on the committee. Mayor Bangerter concurred. Council Member Adolph agreed and withdrew his second. Motion failed for lack of second. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the Request for Proposals for A8939 implementation consultant services and authorize staff to proceed with the selection process to contract for professional services and appoint Council Members Sniff and Henderson to observe the selection process. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-15. See Page 1 for Business Session Item No.6. 7. INTERVIEW OF APPLICANTS FOR CULTURAL COMMISSION AND CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT. Mr. John Detlie, Ms. Andrea Spirtos, ana Ms. Judy Vossler gave brief presentations on their qualifications and background. VOTING BALLOT NO 1 Council Member Adolph voted for Judy Vossler Council Member Henderson voted for Judy Vossler Council Member Perkins voted for Judy Vossler Council Member Sniff voted for Judy Vossler Mayor Bangerter voted for Judy Vossler MOTION- It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to appoint Ms. Judy Vossler to the Cultural Commission term to expire June 30, 1997. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-16. Council Member Henderson commented on how impressed she was with Mr. Detlie's resume and so she has set up a meeting between Mr. Detlie and BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 12 February 6, 1996 CVAG's Executive Director, Corky Larson, to discuss the possibility of bringing all of the arts in the valley together into one organization like an Allied Artists of Coachella Valley which would include landscape architects and interior designers. 8. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPOINTMENT OF AN INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF LA QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION TO THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMISSION. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to remove Ms. Carolyn Lair as a La Quinta Arts Foundation representative on the Art in Public Places Commission upon the recommendation of the La Quinta Arts Foundation and appoint Johna Davis as the La Quinta Arts Foundation representative on the Art in Public Places Commission term to expire June 30, 1996. Council Member Henderson had a problem with the ordinance related to the Art in Public Places Commission and questioned the rationale for three of the members being nominated by the La Quinta Arts Foundation. She had additional concerns with the ordinance and asked that it be reviewed by the Council. Council concurred on reviewing the ordinance within four to six weeks. Mot+on carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-17. 9. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT NO.1 T? TRUST AGREEMENT FOR THE LA QUINTA FINANCING AUTHORITY, LOCAL AGENCY REVENUE BONDS SERIES 1991 CITY HALL PROJECT). Mr. Falconer, Finance Director, advised of a correction in the report before giving a brief presentation. He advised that in 1991, $704,717.50 was set aside in a debt service reserve fund to cover the City Hall Project bonds and staff recommends that an insurance policy be substituted for the bond reserve for the purpose of making funds available for interim improvements to the Civic Center area between City Hall and the Senior Center. An insurance policy Contract from Municipal Bond Investors Assurance Corporation MBIA) was submitted to Council for consideration. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Falconer advised that the last several bonds issued by the City have been secured through an insurance policy with MBIA in lieu of setting aside funds. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *% City Council Minutes 3 February 6, 1996 Council Member Adolph asked if accrued interest was included in the $704,715.50 amount to which Mr. Falconer responded that the amount inc?uding interest is approximately $715,000. Mayor Bangerter asked what the funds would be used for. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that specific improvements haven't been identified yet, but the intent is to complete as many street improvements to Avenida La Fonda as possible. A conceptual design will be brought before the Council prior to any work being done. Council Member Sniff inquired as to the downside or risks involved with this action. Mr. Falconer advised that there would be a loss of interest on the reserve fund as well as a 5% up-front cost for the insurance policy. He advised that the purchase of a reserve fund surety bond must be approved by the bondholders. Mayor Bangerter felt that the benefits outweighed the negatives. Tn response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Genovese advised that this action is needed to accelerate improvements on the Civic Center campus between the Civic Center and the Senior Center, including street improvements to Avenida La Fonda and it's necessary to look at funding options when looking at the Capital Improvement Program. He advised' that there is no pre?conceived notion about what will be built, but only a general knowledge of what improvements are needed. Council Member Perkins advised that construction of an amphitheater on the Civic Center campus has been discussed in the past, but he felt that public use of an amphitheater to be built at a new church on Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive should be investigated. Council Member Adolph understood that a conceptual plan for the campus had already been discussed and asked if further feasibility studies would be needed. Mr. Genovese advised that no feasibility study would be needed. He advised that general improvements will be looked at and felt doubtful that sufficient funds would exist to build an amphitheater. The conceptual design brought before the Council will be based on available funds. Mayor Bangerter felt that the City must be creative with the funds that are available. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 14 February 6, 1996 Council Member Henderson didn?t believe that construction of an amphitheater should be considered at this time, but felt that the area should be landscaped with grass. Council Member Sniff felt that it makes good sense to free up the funds now and discuss the improvements during the review of the Capital Improvement Program. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to authorize the City's bond trustee, First Trust, to contact bondholders of the 1 991 City Hall Project and request their approval of Amendment No. 1 to the Trust Agreement. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-18. 0. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 280 RE: HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION. ORDINANCE NO.280 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 7.04, SECTION 7.04.020 HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Ordinance No.280 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Bangerter NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CONSENT CALENDAR Council Member Henderson requested that Consent Calendar Item No.6 be removed for discussion. 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED FEBRUARY 6, 1996. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 15 February 8,1998 2. APPROVAL OF OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE BUILDING & SAFETY MANAGER TO ATTEND THE WOOD STRUCTURES I ANALYSIS OF WOOD- FRAMED BUILDINGS" SEMINAR AT THE WHITTIER HILTON HOTEL. FEBRUARY 28-MARCH 1, 1996. 3. APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY THE ROTARY CLUB OF LA QUINTA TO UTILIZE THE COUNCIL CHAMBER FOR A FOUR-WAY SPEECH CONTEST ON FEBRUARY 22.1996 FROM 6:00 P.M. TO 10:00 P.M. 4. APPROVAL OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF INDIO TO PROVIDE KIDSLINE SERVICES TO THE YOUTH OF INDIO ON A CONTRACTUAL BASIS IN AN AMOUNT OF SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS $6,000). 5. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS TO THE LA QUINTA SENIOR CENTER. 6. APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE OF SUNLINE BUS PASSES. 7. APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 8 FOR THE FRITZ BURNS PARK PROJECT NO.95-02. 8. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER/TAX COLLECTOR TO PURCHASE TAX-DEFAULT PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with the exception of Item No.6, with Item Nos 5 and B being approved by RESOLUTION NOS. 96-03 and 96-04 respectively. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-19. It?m No. 6: Council Member Henderson suggested that th? City cooperate with the selling of bus passes without accepting a commission. She also felt that it would be a good project for the Chamber of Commerce to get involved in. Council Member Perkins felt that the Chamber has enough to do already. He felt that the Senior Center would be a good distribution point for the passes and suggested that the commission from sales be utilized to purchase Senior Center needs. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 16 February 6, 1996 Council Member Henderson wasn?t sure that the commission derived from the ticket sales would be significant enough to collect. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to approve the agreement with SunLine Transit Agency to sell bus passes at City Hall on a three-month trial basis. Council Member Perkins wished to see staff develop some innovative ways to increase the ticket sales and make sure that the seniors from the Senior Center know where passes are available. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the commissions collected would be earmarked and the Council can decide how to utilize them at the end of the three-month trial period. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-20. STUDY SESSION DISCUSSION ON CITY COUNCIL DECORUM. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that on October 17, 1995, the Council discussed this issue under Mayor and Council Members? Items and requested that?it be brought back for discussion. Included in the staff report is research of other cities' Rules of Procedures as well as a written legal opinion from the City Attorney. In response to Mayor Bangerter, Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she would be concerned with establishing a total ban against Council Members speaking at other meetings as the City of Napa has done, pointing out that the FPPC allows Council Members to speak as members of the public on items which affect them personally even when they may not participate in the decision due to a conflict of interest, in recognition of their First Amendment rights. Council Member Sniff didn?t see a problem with Council Members speaking at Commission meetings as long as they acknowledge that they are speaking on their own behalf and not the Council's. Council Member Perkins advised that he has several questions that he would like to give to the City Attorney for clarification and wished to continue this discussion until perhaps the next Council meeting or the one following. Council concurred. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 17 February 6, 1996 2. DISCUSSION ON THE CURRENT CONTENTS OF THE AGENDA OUTLINE INCLUDING POTENTIAL REVISIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S RULES OF PROCEDURE. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that on October 1 7, 1995, the Council discussed their Rules of Procedure as it relates to taking action during a study session and directed staff to bring the issue back to Council for a general review of the agenda contents since other areas of the agenda are implied to be for discussion or general direction only. He advised that the City Attorney's report on October 17th listed three options for Council's consideration and an outline of the current agenda format. The present concern is to provide assistance to the Council when an item is added to the study session by a Council Member, clarifying that it's for discussion only. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Genovese advised that option #3 would always allow possible action on any study session item and, therefore, it would be very important for the Council to clarify if it's an item for consideration or discussion. Mayor Bangerter felt that, although, option #3 could be beneficial, the public's perception of study session items is that they are for discussion only. She felt that it would be better to reschedule those issues appropriately on a future agenda whenever a Council action is needed to avoid misconceptions by the public. Council Member Henderson agreed to a point, but felt that under option #3, if the agenda clarified that action would possibly be taken on a given study session item, it would be wide open for Council action Mayor Bangerter felt that it would be confusing to the public Council Member Perkins suggested that a no action will be taken" could be inserted on the study session to clarify Council's intent to the public. Mr. Genovese advised that it's difficult for staff to always know what the Council's intent is when an item is requested to be scheduled for a study session, pointing out that conflicts could exist if Council's intent was to take action, but staff interpreted their direction to be for discussion only. Ms. Honeywell advised that the three options were intended to codify the Council's intent within Council's general rules. The first option would codify Council's usual practice wherein study session items are for discussion only BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 18 February 6, 1996 with possible direction being given to staff, but no final action is taken until after the item is placed appropriately on a future agenda. The second option gives the Council an alternative to take action as long as the language on the agenda clarifies such possible intent However, it would be necessary for the Council to specifically give direction to staff on their intent to take action when requesting an item be placed on the study session agenda. The third option would allow action on study session items at any time, but the agenda should include a notice in bold that such a possibility exists. In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell advised that an item is placed on the agenda as a Mayor and Council Members' Item when it's at the request of only one Council Member. If the Council majority should then decide that they wish to take action on that item it would be placed appropriately on a future agenda for the purpose of discussion or taking action. Mr. Genovese advised that generally administrative issues brought to the City Manager's attention by a Council Member can be brought up as a staff concern. It benefits both staff and Council when the terminology used to place an item on the agenda is easily understood and not left to interpretation. In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell advised that direction to staff to bring an item back on the agenda for consideration would not be considered an action under the definition of action." Since there's no prior history of the Council taking final action during study sessions, it would be important to reflect that possibility on the agenda?nda if indeed it is. Council Member Sniff felt that the current process of discussing an issue in study session and then directing" staff t? place it on a future agenda for action when it's necessary has worked well. He was concerned about having an option wherein action could be taken at any time, pointing out that urgency items can always be placed on the agenda for action if it's necessary. Council Member Perkins was in favor of adding option #1 to the Council's Rules of Procedure because it better clarifies Council's intent. Council Member Henderson preferred being able to take immediate action after a discussion, but understood the concerns. Council Member Adolph asked what would be wrong with stating on the agenda that action may be taken on a specific study session item at the end of the discussion. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 19 February 6, 1996 Mr. Genovese advised that the challenges involved with that option are in writing the staff report with the correct terminology wherein the intent is easily understood to the public and understanding of intent to the Council itself. Council Member Sniff supported option #1 also. Mr. Genovese wished to have clarification placed under each agenda category to clarify the Council's intent on those items listed in that category. Ms. Honeywell advised that under the Brown Act, an item may be placed on the agenda if an immediate need exists. However, such action could violate the Council's own Rules of Procedure if they are amended as being discussed, so she suggested that Council consider providing that same flexibility in their rules. The intent of option #1 is to bind the Council to discussion only of any issues that are on the study session agenda. Council concurred. Council Member Henderson asked for clarification, regarding the procedures for Council to reconsider a previous Council action. Ms. Honeywell advised that a Council Member?that voted with the majority on a previous Council action may move to reconsider that action at the same meeting or the following meeting. If the motion to reconsider is not done at the initial meeting, nor placed on the next agenda, then the Council must first meet the urgency finding for adding it to the agenda before a motion can be made to reconsider it. In response to Council Member Sniff, Ms. Honeywell advised that the Council's Rules and Procedures supersede the Brown Act and do not require that the second to a motion to reconsider be made by a Council Member who voted with the majority on the previous motion. Council Member Perkins asked for clarification on Sections 7.2 and 7.4 of Council's Rules and Procedures as it relates to tie-votes. Mr. Genovese advised that staff would look at those sections when they review the entire rules and will bring it back to Council. Council concurred. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 20 February 6, 1996 3. DISCUSSION OF UPDATE ON CHARTER CITY RESEARCH. Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that the Council discussed this issue in March and April, 1994 and staff conducted some legal research for Council's information. Further analysis will be conducted and brought back to Council should they be interested in the formation of a charter for the City. The research would include the benefits and drawbacks of the charter form of government and a time frame by which to accomplish the necessary milestones for a specified election date. Council Member Sniff felt that it would be interesting to know what the legal costs are to-date on this issue as well as the cost to continue researching it and placing it on the ballot. He felt that the Council needs a detailed analysis and simple chart noting the positives and negatives of the issue. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that all of the legal work has been completed and didn't see a need to conduct any further extensive research at this point. She advised that drafting an actual ordinance will require some legal work, but suggested keeping it relatively simple. Council Member Henderson was supportive of becoming a Charter City and giving staff direction to pursue it further. Council Member Perkins advised that he initially brought this issue up and feels tha?the research conducted by the City Attorney?rney is excellent. He felt that it would be an important and positive step for the City. He pointed out that it would provide some protection from the State and allow more flexibility in using local labor as well as protection fror? Proposition 62 because charter cities have certain pnvileges that general law cities do not have. He earnestly suggested that the Council take a hard look at the charter city concept and direct staff to develop a time table for placing it on. the upcoming election ballot. He noted that general law cities are basically extensions of the State and charter cities are not. Council Member Sniff was puzzled as to why more charter cities don't exist in the state. Ms. Honeywell advised that charter cities have been in existence since the turn of the century and sometimes the court system has favored the legal rights of charter cities and sometimes they've not. The current trend seems to be in favor of the local power of charter cities which has caused a renewed interest in their development. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 21 February 6, 1996 Council Member Perkins agreed with the City Attorney that a broad charter is better than one that is too specific. He wished to see staff pursue this issue and bring it back to Council as soon as possible? with a time frame for getting it on the ballot in November and a report on the benefits and drawbacks without doing any extensive research. Council Member Sniff pointed out that a chart of positives and negatives could serve as ballot arguments should the Council decide to move forward with this. Council concurred. 4. DISCUSSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. Council concurred on continuing this item to a future meeting. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS All reports were noted and filed. DEPARTMENT REPORTS A-i. UPDATE ON LIBRARY FUNDING ISSUES Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that research is continuing on this issue and staff anticipates bringing an update to Council within the next few months. Council Member Henderson wished to get a legal opinion regarding the possible use of Quimby Funds for the library. She referred to Section 66477 of the Planning, Zoning, and Development Laws and questioned the possibility that libraries could qualify as recreation facilities. Mr. Genovese advised that staff would address that issue during the library update. A-2. RESPONSES TO PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Genovese, City Manager, advised that responses to public comment will be included as a department report in the agenda packet whenever public comments are received at a prior meeting. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 22 February 6, 1996 A-3. DISCUSSION OF A POTENTIAL SPECIAL MEETING REGARDING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Mr. Genovese, City Manager, suggested that an informal special meeting be held on February 24, 1 996 at the Senior Center for the purpose of discussing the progress on the Economic Development Plan. He anticipates that the meeting will take approximately two to three hours. Council concurred. C-i. REPORT ON COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARDS Mrs. Juhola, City Clerk, advised that on December 5' 1 995' the Council discussed presenting Community Service Awards for outstanding service to individuals in the community who would otherwise go unrecognized. She asked Council for direction regarding the type of award certificate to use. After a brief discussion, Council concurred on a certificate with the City Seal in a watermark and gold lettering enhancement. Council recessed to Closed Session to and until the hour of 7:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION 1. Conference with legal counsel concerning existing litigation under Government Code Section 54956.9(a) Granite Construction, Case No.086195; Refco Case No. CV-92-7626-RFK; and Thomas Buffin claim. 2. Conference with real property negotiator Public Works Director) pursuant to Government Code Section 54946.8, instructing the negotiator concerning the terms of potential acquisition of real property located at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 111. 3. Conference with labor negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6, concerning both the City?s Employees Association and all unrepresented employees regarding employment terms. City Negotiator: Tom Genovese. 7:00P.M. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 23 February 8, 1996 PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Bob Marsh, 54-165 Avenida Diaz, President of La Quinta Sports & Youth Association, spoke regarding the deteriorating condition of the fields at the Sports Complex, advising that holes need to be repaired, grass planted, and the fields leveled. He invited the Council to join him on Saturday to inspect the fields. He stated that the City has failed to respond to their inquiries and urged the Council to check into this matter to make sure that the fields are playable and safe for sports. Mayor Bangerter asked the City Manager to respond to Mr. Marsh's concerns as soon as possible. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. TENTATIVE TRACT 24890 REQUEST FOR A THIRD ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PHASE 9 OF TENTATIVE TRACT 24890 TO CREATE 37 LOTS CONSISTING OF THREE SINGLE-FAMILY, 34 DUPLEX AND FIVE LETTERED LOTS ON TEN ACRES WITHIN SP 85-006. APPLICANT: KSL RECREATION. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, requested the Council to continue this matter to February 20, 1996 due to a continuance of the Planning Commission hearing. MOTION It was moved by Council Member?rs Adolph/Sniff to continue the request of KSL for a time extension for Tentative Tract 24890 to February 20, 1 996. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO.96-21. 2. TENTATIVE TRACT 26444 AMENDMENT NO.1) REQUEST FOR A SECOND ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME AND REVISION TO THE TRACT DESIGN FOR A PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED, 98-LOT, SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON 32 ACRES LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF JEFFERSON STREET AND AVENUE 53. APPLICANT: MIKE SMITH, WARNER ENGINEERING FOR LA QUINTA 33. Ms. did. lorio, Planning Manager, advised that the applicant is requesting a second one-year extension of time on a proposed subdivision located at the northeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 53. The applicant has also filed a General Plan Amendment to remove the current designation of Rural Residential Overlay which increases the allowable number of lots from 94 to 98. The Planning Commission considered this time extension request on January 9th and voted to recommend approval based on the revised conditions BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 24 February 6, 1 996 of approval which allow a 98-lot tentative tract if the General Plan Amendment is approved. Staff recommends approval of the time extension request and the design revision of the tract map. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that no condition has been placed on this tract to widen the small bridge over the channel at Jefferson Street. He further advised that tract maps are allowed up to three, one-year time extensions. An extension was granted in 1 992 and the State allowed an additional two-year extension due to new legislation in 1993, making this the developer?s second time-extension request. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. M?. Mike Smith, 35-325 Date Palm Drive, Cathedral City, of Warner Engineering, advised that they are in agreement with all of the conditions of approval. There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO.96-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SECOND ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 26444 AMENDMENT NO.1) TO ALLOW A SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 31.5 ACRES. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.96-05 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 3. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CDBG) FUNDS YEAR 22 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROPOSALS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR THE CDBG YEAR 22 FUNDS. Ms. di Iorio, Planning Manager, advised that the CDBG program provides special funding for eligible activities to benefit low and moderate-income families, the elderly and handicapped, and aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight. The City spent the first 12 years of CDBG monies on the construction of the Senior Center and last year?s funds on the expansion and improvement of the Senior Center parking lot. Staff proposes to use this BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 25 February 6, 1996 year S public services portion of the funds for a Membership Fee Waiver/Reduction Program at the Boys & Girls Club of the Coachella Valley, La Quinta Unit, in the amount of $30,000 and $107,000 for street improvements on Avenida La Fonda from Washington Street to Desert Club. The Boys & Girls Club Membership Fee Waiver/Reduction Program will benefit 136 + children from certified low and moderate-income families in the City. The street improvements on Avenida La Fonda will help eliminate slum and blight influences identified in the City's Redevelopment Plan, as well as improve access to the Senior Center. The total project cost is $230,000 and will be phased over two CDBG program years, with this year's total being $107,000. She advised that four additional funding requests have been received in the public services category and are listed in the staff report. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Genovese, advised that the CDBG funds will be used to complete the street improvements on the south side of Avenida La Fonda with the north side being done with funds from the 1991 Series Bonds. Council Member Perkins was concerned about spending too much money on Avenida La Fonda when there's still a need for street improvements in the Cove. Mr. Cosper, Public Works Director, advised that the improvements to Avenida La Fonda were selected by Council several months ago for street improvements to the dirt roads south of Avenida La Fonda,'using Federal PM1O funds. The water and sewer lines need to be addressed at the same time and Coachella Valley Water District CVWD).has agreed to replace the water lines at their cost and set up an assessment district for the cost of the sewers that would be passed back to the property owners. However, it will be necessary to put Avenida La Fonda back into driveable condition after the water and sewer lines are installed and that's what these funds will be used: for. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Cosper advised that right-of-way negotiations for the streets south of Avenida La Fonda are in progress and no problems are anticipated. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Council Member Sniff supported staff?s recommendations and pointed out that Avenida La Fonda is part of the Cove. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 26 February 6, 1 996 RESOLUTION NO.96-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING PROPOSALS, REPROGRAMMING FUNDS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT YEAR 22 FUNDS. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.96-06, allocating $30,000 to the La Quinta Unit of the Boys & Girls Club and $107,000 for streets, curbs, and gutters on Avenida La Fonda. Council Member Henderson asked if this $30,000 is in addition to the $30,000 recently approved. Mr. Genovese advised that this $30,000 is part of the funding for the Boys & Girls Club Agreement up to June 30, 1996 and for next year this will earmark part of the funding for the Boys & Girls Club agreement should we proceed. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Perkins complimented the Public Works Department for the rapid and excellent manner in which the recent slurry-seal and striping improvements were completed. Council concurred. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS DISCUSSION REGARDING ADOPTION OF LIMITATIONS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS. Council Member Perkins wished to see the Council take an active position in limiting campaign contributions during Council elections and discuss ways to control the proliferation of political signs during election periods He recommended a limit of $100 for individual contributions and $250 for business contributions which he felt would put all candidates on an equal playing field and limit the possibilities of a candidate being put under a commitment for a contribution. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that she took a brief look at this issue and the federal laws do allow cities the ability to enact local limits on campaign BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 27 February 6, 1996 contributions because some of the abuses outweigh the First Amendment Rights. A few years ago, State Proposition 73 enacted statewide limitations and provided local jurisdictions the ability to adopt more stringent limitations. However, it was overturned by a Federal court in 1 992 because the limits were based on fiscal years and it was determined to be unfair to non-incumbents. It would be a challenge to draft a policy that doesn?t run into the same problem as Proposition 73. Council Member Sniff didn't feel that the proposed limitations had any value because he felt that if a candidate can be bought for $250, he can also be bought for $100 and he also felt that the City's candidates have been honorable and not easily influenced. He advised that a wealthy candidate can generally out spend the average candidate. He noted that mailing costs have increased with voter registrations now over 7,000. He didn't see any problem with the last election and wouldn't support any limitations. Council Member Adolph advised that campaign signs are regulated as temporary signs and the new zoning ordinance limits them to a total of 30 in the City for each candidate. Council Member Perkins commented that 1 97 signs were posted along Washington Street between Avenue 52 and Highway 111 during a campaign three years ago. In response to Council Member Henderson,' Ms. Honeywell advised that all temporary signs must be restricted equally. Under the new zoning ordinance, deposits will be required to insure the removal of temporary signs in a timely fashion. Mr. Robert Tyler, 44-2? 5 Villeta Drive, asked if spending limits had been considered. Council Member Perkins advised that he spent less than $1,000 during his campaign. His suggestion to limit contributions wasn't meant to imply that Council Members aren t honorable, but he wish?d to remove the temptation for anyone to come under the influence of a large contributor. He felt that contributions of $500-$1000 were out of order for a city the size of La Quinta and would cause an aura of suspicion should a Council Member receiving such a large contribution vote in favor of that contributor?s project or concern. He felt that now is an appropriate time to look at this issue since it's not an election year. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 28 February 6, 1 996 Council Member Henderson supported placing a limit on campaign contributions. No consensus was arrived at. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING CITY COUNCIL USE OF CREDIT CARDS. Council Member Perkins advised that he?s opposed to Council Members using City credit cards and has never used one himself during his years of service on City Councils. He felt that their use is an ego trip and lend themselves to temptation to abuse. He wished to see this Council take the position that no credit cards will be issued to Council or staff, but rather have them available in the City Manager?s office for use if necessary. Council Member Adolph understood that their use can be abused, but given the caliber of this Council, he felt that it should be left up to each Council Member's own discretion. Council Member Henderson didn't see any reason for Council Members having a City credit card. Mayor Bangerter advised that she has always refused a City credit card, but has one available to her if needed. Council Member Henderson felt that they may be valuable to staff, but that the Council doesn't necessarily need them. Council Member Perkins asked if anyone knew of an instance when having a City credit card was a necessity Mayor Bangerter felt that one would have been very helpful when she experienced accommodation problems on a recent trip to San Francisco because the hotel wouldn't accept cash. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Genovese advised that each of the City?s credit cards include the name of the City and the individual authorized to use it. He advised that staff could investigate and report back to Council the possibility of getting just one card with multiple authorized users. Council Member Sniff advised that he has had a City credit card since January 1988 and carries it in the event of a major emergency. He has never used it BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 29 February 6, 1996 and would do so only in the event of a disaster. It didn?t matter to him whether Council has one or not. Council concurred on bringing this issue back for possible development of a City Policy. MOTION It was moved by Council Members Perkins/Henderson to take the matter of the contract with Barbara Grygutis as taken at the January 16, 1996 Council meeting or add it to this agenda for reconsideration. Council Member Sniff advised that he wouldn't support the motion because the Council will be considering this action on February 20th to potentially reverse that decision. Council Member Perkins was concerned how that local artists were invited to submit artwork designs for the retention basin with a budget limit of $20,000 and then that limit was later increased to $50,000, catching local artists off guard. He also questioned the use of Art in Public Places funds for transporting an out-of-state artist to La Quinta. He felt that these actions have caused animosity toward the City among the local artists because they weren't given an equal opportunity to submit designs under the $50,000 budget. In response to Mayor Bangerter, Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that both RFP's contained a $20,000 budget limit that were distributed for this project. However, after some of the responses from the first RFP came in above the budget limit, the Art in Public Places Commission began?to feel that that amount was inadequate. The Commission and the two Council Members who interviewed the three finalists were told by one artist that he would construct a portion of his design for $20,000, but he wouldn't give a price for any additions.. Ms. Grygutis advised that she would build a nice walkway for $20,000, but anything else would cost more. The other artist wanted an additional $5,000 for lighting. Therefore, there was always a discussion as to whether or not $20,000 would be sufficient for the artwork. Of the three finalists'.designs, the Commission felt that Ms. Grygutis had integrated her artwork design into the water-retention basin and would be less obtrusive, as opposed to the other designs that would sit at the bottom of the basin and get flooded at times, causing the artwork to become stained. Council Member Henderson advised that she would support a motion to reconsider Council's action due to her concern that Ms. Grygutis was given direction to return to the Council with a model that's going to cost her time, energy, and money to prepare and the Council may decide on February 20th to reconsider the entire issue. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *%City Council Minutes 30 February 6, 1998 Mr. Herman advised that the artists are always aware that their designs may or may not be approved when they submit them and no promises have been made to Ms. Grygutis. Council Member Perkins asked if the local artists had been informed that they could submit a design for this project up to $50,000, advising that he felt that the City had acted improperly if they hadn't. Mr. Herman responded that he wasn?t sure. Council Member Sniff advised that it was understood by everyone that a $20,000 budget was insufficient and that none of the artists could live within that cap. The Commission unanimously believed that Ms. Grygutis showed the most ability to produce a complete package that would contain artwork and the required landscaping for this project. It included a bridge across to the centerpiece artwork that is visible from the street. Council Member Henderson didn't understand what basis the Commission used to decide to use APP funds for Ms. Grygutis's travel expenses. Council Member Sniff advised that it was because the Commission liked her design concept more than the other submittals and felt that it would be ot significant value for her to see the site. Mr. Herman advised that all three artists were a budget of $20,000+. Mayor Bangerter advised that she would have a problem with this if Ms. Grygutis had been given different information than the other final?finalists were given and advised that additional funding would have been necessary regardless of which artist was selected. Council Member Henderson stated that extra funds have been allocated for artwork by Ms. Grygutis that is still yet unknown and the other finalists presented models of their proposals during the interview process, advising that they could do more for additional funding. She felt that a considerable amount of terracing that is proposed by Ms. Grygutis in the retention basin would have been lost last weekend due to the water that stood there. Council Member Sniff felt that the Commission selected Ms. Grygutis as the most likely artist to design the artwork under equal-level criteria. Council Member Adolph advised that he voted for this reluctantly as he was concerned about the lack of information on the artwork and the fact that Ms. BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02 *% City Council Minutes 31 February 6, 1996 Grygutis' travel expenses were paid for. He felt that such costs should be the responsibility of the one wishing to make the proposal. However, he felt that the Council should support the recommendation made by the Commission and the members of Council who were appointed to help select an artist because he didn?t have the background from the meetings or know the basis for their decision. He voted for the additional funding because it will be needed regardless of who designs the artwork and he won?t approve any artwork until he sees it. He didn?t believe that it would accomplish anything to reconsider the motion at this time because the Council will be considering it on February 20th. Council Member Perkins didn?t believe that the local artists were given an equal opportunity, which could destroy the City's reputation with the local artists. Again, he questioned the authorization to use APP funds for Ms. Grygutis' travel expenses. Mayor Bangerter advised that she wasn't present at the APP meeting when the decision to authorize funds was made, but the Commission?s intent in making their artist selection was to select the artist with the best artistic capabilities for producing an art piece for this particular site. Motion failed with Council Members Adolph, Sniff, and Mayor Bangerter voting NO. Council recessed to the La Quinta Financing Authority meeting. Council reconvened and recessed to the Redevelopment Agency meeting. Council reconvened and recessed to Closed Session as delineated on Page 23. The City Attorney announced that the City Council concluded a Closed Session under Government Code Section 54956.8 and has approved, by unanimous vote. the appraisal dated October 30, 1995 entitled Professional Appraisal, 2 Partial Acquisitions & 3 Easements, State Highway 111 and Washington Street widening, Point Happy to Adams Street Fee simple & Easement partial takes) for City of La Quinta;" and has authorized staff to negotiate for that parcel based on the appraisal. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. R? Respectfully submitted SAUNDRA L JUHOLA C?City Clerk City of La Quinta California BIB] 05-20-1996-U01 12:20:40PM-U01 CCMIN-U02 02-U02 06-U02 1996-U02