Loading...
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