HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1988-05-18Mayor Jack Drago
Council:
Mark N. Addiego
Richard A. Haffey
Gus Nicolopulos
Roberta Cerri Teglia
MINUTES
' City Council
City Council Conference Room
City Hal 1
May 18, 1988
0178
AGENDA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1)
ROLL CALL:
AGENDA REVIEW
City Manager Lewis Requested:
- Hand Item 2 before Item 1, in
that the Deputy City Manager/
City Engineer was having a meeting
with Homeowners Groups.
Discussion of draft ordinance
entitled "Ordinance amending,
repealing, and adding provisions of
the South San Francisco Municipal
Code pertaining to nuisance abate-
ment and enforcement of the ~.~t]o
Municipal Code."
ACTION TAKEN
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
7:10 p.m. Mayor Drago presiding.
Council present:
Council absent:
Haffey,
Nicolopulos, Teglia,
and Drago.
Addiego
AGENDA REVIEW
So ordered.
City Attorney Armento stated that this
was the long awaited revision to the code
enforcement provisions of the Municipal
Code that had been a part of the
Council's goals and objectives. She con-
tinued, essentially it had started out as
providing backup for the Code Enforcement
Officer, but in the process staff had
realized that there were a lot of
inconsistencies with various aspects
stated throughout the Municipal Code,
and an attempt had been made to pull a
lot of them together and deal with them
in a more comprehensive fashion.
She proceeded to describe the provisions
of the ordinance: would revamp the scope
of the Code Enforcement Officer's respon-
sibilities; enforcement capabilities of
the Fire, Building, and Water Quality
people were cited to enforce the Code;
it revamps what the various nuisances
are; cleans up the language of the
process; specifies more detail in regard
to the conduct of hearings; that the
upcoming appeal of the animal permit
would in future be heard by the City
Manager.
5/18/88
Page I
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 0179
Draft Ordinance - Continued.
Councilman Addiego Arrived at 7:25 p.m.
Discussion of capital improvements
for the Water Quality Control
Plant.
Discussion followed: that revisions in
the ordinance would provide that the
City Manager or his designee will conduct
the evidenciary hearings; the citation
process; that the City had many ordinan-
ces on the books that were difficult to
enforce; that this ordinance would allow
staff to do more abatement on a staff
level; how this ordinance compared with
San Bruno and other cities nuisance ordi-
nances; that the Council had wanted
enforcement backup through additional
personnel; that Title 20 of the Muni Code
was not covered by this ordinance, and
only the Code Enforcement Officer could
cover enforcement without backup;
suggestion was made that someone in
Planning assist the Code Enforcement on
Title 20 violations; that there had been
opposition from Planning on the
suggestion; that hiring an additional
Code Enforcement Officer had been
suggested; suggestion of the Code
Enforcement Officer being able to dele-
gate authority; that the Police
Department was not mentioned in the ordi-
nance; that was because the Police
felt their responsibility was defined in
the Penal Code, and those provisions that
dealt with traffic and vehicles; that
staff could do some in-house training to
alert the Police of the provisions of the
ordinance; why the PSTs were not given
authority to give citations for nuisan-
ces when they should be included; that if
they were included, in future they could
ask for a reclassification for the addi-
tional work; that the PST should refer
incidents involving nuisances that they
see to the Code Enforcement Officer; that
a formal referral period should be deve-
loped; that the $200.00 value was removed
from abandoned vehicles; the size of fen-
ces, and the use of barbed wire; that
barbed wire could be hazardous or a
nuisance; the violations provisions and
their costs by Government Code, etc.
Deputy City Manager/City Engineer Yee
stated that a few months back the Council
had discussed the Water Quality Control
5/18/88
Page 2
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
i. Discussion of capital improvements -
Continued.
Plant operations and improvements, and
sewer rate increases. He stated that
staff had suggested the Council consider
two alternatives, bonds or a pay as you
go method of funding the improvements,
and the Council had decided on a pay as
you go basis under a five year program.
He described the suggested increases:
increase from $69.00 to $76.00; the
suggestion of a seven year plan, and a
ten year plan (5 year - $76.22/unit; 7
year - $73.14/unit; 10 year plan -
$71.43/unit.
an
Discussion followed: sewer rates for the
various user groups was not broken down
for the longer range increases; that
industries moving in or out of town would
impact that category's user rates; that a
public hearing would be held on the
increased sewer rates; that the increase
for restaurants seemed to be sizable in
the first year of increases; that grease
was a significant problem in all cities;
that the restaurants should be notified
of the suggested rate increases; that the
suggested rate increases would pay for
the needed capital improvements; what
comparable cities were charging, etc.
Superintendent of Sanitation David
Castagnola stated that the first year
increase of $76.00 would keep the City in
the same range as other cities. He
stated that he had received calls from
other cities questioning why our rates
were so low, and one of the reasons for
that was the delay in effecting capital
improvements.
Discussion followed: that the Sewer Fund
had a $2,000,000 balance; that the pro-
jected improvements would utilize the
$2,000,000 as well as future revenues;
that there would be an interfund
transfer from the Enterprise Fund of
$340,000 for time spent by different
departments as overhead; $60,000 was
received yearly for general administra-
tion for the sewage plant from other
5/18/88
Page 3
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
.... 1. Discussion of capital improvements -
Continued.
(Cassette No. 2)
e
Closed Session for the purpose of
the discussion of personnel
matters, labor relations, property
negotiations and litigation. ~
RECALL TO ORDER:
'~ADJOURNMENT:
cities; an itemization was requested for
South San Francisco's charge for running
the plant, as well as the administrative
charges - that this request had been made
to two past Finance Directors and a
response had never been received by
Council; that the total sewer charges had
to be compiled with a deadline of August
lOth for it to be submitted to the County
to be put on the property tax rolls; that
Vice Mayor Teglia was not ready to commit
to a seven or ten year sewer rate plan,
and only wanted to set it for 1988-89;
that the total capital improvements were
estimated at $6,000,000; that the sewer
rates had not been raised for two years;
that Vice Mayor Teglia was concerned
because this seven and ten year plan was
Mr. Yee's, however, he would not be with
the City for its fruition; the public
hearings to be called by the Finance
Director and Deputy City Manager/ City
Engineer and the process involved; the
revenues and expenditures over the three
year plans; that regardless of what plan
Council chose, each of the expenditures
would come before Council for plant
improvements; that by law the Council had
to hold one hearing after the sewer
report was filed with the City Clerk on
7/1/88; that the Council could adjust the
rates based upon the public hearing.
Consensus of Council - To approve a
$76.22 sewer rate increase for 1988-89.
Council adjourned to a Closed Session at
8:43 p.m. to discuss the noticed items,
as well as the potential acquisition of
the Mazzanti property.
Mayor Drago recalled the meeting to order
at 11:07 p.m., all Council present, no
action taken.
M/S Teglia/Haffey - To adjourn the
meeting.
Carried by unanimous voice vote.
Time of adjournment was 11:08 p.m.
5/18/88
Page 4
AGENDA ACTION TAKEN
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Barbara A. Battaya, Cit~/Clerk
City of South San Francisco
APPROVED.
.i~ty of South San~Francisco
The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to dispose
of an item. Oral communications, arguments, and comments are recorded on tape. The tape
and documents related to the items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are
available for inspection, review and copying.
5/18/88
Page 5