Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1995-07-19 Mayor Robert Yee Council: Jack Drago ~Joseph A. Fernekes John R. Penna Roberta Cerri Teglia MINUTES City Council Municipal Services Building Community Room July 19, 1995 SPECIAL MEETING CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO JULY 19, 1995 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of California, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Wednesday, the 19th day of July 1995, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room, City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: Public Hearing - To consider the adoption of Stormwater Management Program Fees for Fiscal Year 1995-96; Conduct Public Hearing; Motion to adopt a resolution - Public Hearing Opened and continued from the 7/12/95 meeting. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SERVICE CHARGES TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995~1996 2. Report from BART Subcommittee on the station site plan design. 3. Status report on the BART Extension by BART Representatives. 4. Adjournment. City Clerk City of South San Francisco Dated: July 13, 1995 -:ALL TO ORDER: ',OLL CALL: AGENDA (Cassette No. 1) ACTION TAKEN 7:30 p.m. Mayor Yee presiding. Council Present: Drago, Fernekes, Penna, Teglia and Yee. 7/19/95 Page 1 AGENDA ROLL CALL - Continued. Public Hearing - To consider the adoption of Stormwater Management Program Fees for Fiscal Year 1995-96; Conduct Public Hearing; Motion to adopt a resolution - Public Hearing Opened and con- tinued from the 7/12/95 meeting. 50 'g 7 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SERVICE CHARGES TO PRO- VIDE REVENUE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996 Council Absent: None. Councilman Drago felt public hearings should be scheduled for regular meetings that the public sees on television. He stated he was not going to repeat the arguments and the abuses of the taxpayers, but proceeded to cite his reasons for opposition: he believes the Federal mandate has been blown out of proportion; he feels the entire issue of parcel taxes are questions to circumvent Proposition 13 and he has been saying this for two years. Interim Director of Public Services Town stated the program is mandated by the Federal Govern- ment, enforced by the State and Regional Quality Control; it is a five year program and there are three years left; the administration of the plan is done by C/CAG and there is a sharing of information and filing of annual reports; there are training programs developing the public outreach by the media; moni- toring for the prevention plan; inspections and moni- toring of illegal discharges; catchment basin inspec- tions; proposed rates; the appeal process; there is an urgency factor in getting the resolution to the Coun- ty and applying it to next year's property taxes; etc. Discussion followed: staff recommends that we maintain the street sweeping program; whether a rebate should be done in a lump sum or over three years; if the money is repaid then there is not a reserve; reducing the street sweeping routes and reducing some would be reduced in frequency; there is an existing Capital Improvement Budget with millions of dollars; Mayor Yee suggested putt- ing the budget on hold in the reserves and have the City Manager come back at a later time; the stormwater budget is over $500,000; Vice Mayor Drago wanted, if there is a surplus, for the money to go back to the taxpayer and not find ways to spend it; Councilwoman Teglia would rather have the streets swept if she has a choice; there are more necessary things than street sweeping, such as im- provements to the drainage system; the reason for the surplus results from the lack of staff during the first year of the budgeted program and this year were only on board for four months; the sweeper should be paid out of City funds; those funds were cut from the budget; this fund will not allow you to spend every dime; part of the program is cleaning Colma Creek and Mayor Yee wanted to know how much money is earmarked for Colma Creek; the 7/19/95 Page 2 ~ENDA ACTION TAKEN ....1. Public Hearing - Continued. Status report on the BART Extension by BART Rep- resentatives. .5-0 ~, ~ mandate was to get a plan to do something which the twenty cities have done; if we don't we will be mandated by the Federal Government for our own program and that could be a costly endeavor; etc. Mayor Yee closed the Public Hearing. M/S Teglia/Fernekes - To adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 68-95 Vice Mayor Drago stated his opposition to this Program. Discussion followed: what was handled at the last meeting was the County program that went to the Board of Supervisors, otherwise we are liable for the program; would have to come up with $419,000 if we say no; there would also be fines if we say no; League of Ca. Cities is always recommending op- posing unfunded mandates; etc. Carried by majority roll call vote, Councilman Drago voted no. Mr. Takis Salpeas, BART, stated the Federal Government awarded the last grant and he provided a status report for the Council's information. He stated BART has the grant and is ready to proceed with that decision in addition to that the House Appropriations Committee appropriated $10 million and that is insignificant in comparison to what is needed for the project. However, it earmarks that the project is in the running for funding - which is the good news, the bad news is we do have other environmental work to do on the internal Airport property. He stated the Airlines, ATA, put the language into the appropriations bill to look for a cheaper project and that was for the piece within the Airport prop- erty south of San Bruno and Millbrae without impact to the cities and BART made a strong case. Shortly there will be a focused EIR and tomorrow we are briefing for a specific work shop with SamTrans and County Supervisors. He stated they are meeting around the clock with the engineers and architects with a contract. He spoke in detail: they applied to the Federal Government and SamTrans and this is the rest of the 7/19/95 Page 3 AQENDA AC_TIQN TAKEN 3. Status report - Continued. 7/19/95 Page 4 money we need to put the job on the street and that was awarded two hours after the full Committee of the Congress voted on the $10 million. Discussion followed: how does this affect the Air- port contributions to the system; it remains un- changed; BART has a financial plan that has not been approved, but are comfortable that the final plan will be approved; this is the first installment for $10 million for the construction; there are only three projects that made it through construction; they are looking to reduce the project cost by $2 million; if we reduce the scope of work then the price will go down and they are aborting the tunnel; are there cost estimates for the overhead system; that is what BART is going to study for the next couple of months; the rule of thumb is that undergrounding is more expensive and at-grade is the cheapest; most of the people want to ask a question for there have been many meetings with BART about the cities contribution will not take place because it is going to be within the funding package within S.S.F. for the undergrounding costs, however, is that a given, can the Council count on that; etc. Mr. Howard Good, BART, stated basically the financial plan is premised on Federal, Samtrans and Airport money and $73 million is funded. Discussion followed: then the City does not have to come up with $43 million; that is Mr. Good's un- derstanding; Mr. Salpeas stated BART's financial plan did not depend on financial aid from the cities; Councilman Fernekes again asked, no cost and it will be underground through Spruce; by September Colma will be completed, but BART is not going to make it because of the rains, but hopefully by Christmas will be open; how soon after that will it go through S.S.F.; two years from today BART can have construction going on; BART only has $10 million to do construction - how far will that go; don't relate that to the $10,000, that is symbolic until they go to the record decision and approve the financial plan to allow you to go to the con- struction; the Federal Government cannot piecemeal a project; alternatives to find another construction method rather than the tunnel; two years from now when construction is started, what is the estimated time through S.S.F. from Colma and exit in San Bruno; before the year 2,000, if it is okay, we will be on the same train to the Airport; BART will AGENDA _ 3. Status Report - Continued. 7/19/95 Page 5 _ACI!QN TAKEN focus on going from Colma to Burlingame; Council- man Penna understood BART was only going to be running one or two trains or will they be running all three trains from Colma to the Airport; BART will make that decision four years from now; all three trains will operate and provide a train every seven and a half minutes; it is three minutes or less in Daly City, but BART will only get two thirds of the service; assumptions were made on ridership and trains from Concord and Richmond will pass through Daly City to the Airport; etc. Mr. Jim Keegan, 1244 Crestwood, stated that the then Director of Economic & Community Develop- ment Director Costello on 1/22/92 reported: who is going to pay for the BART undergrounding and again expressed preference for the undergrounding; she reiterated the City's desire for a subway and the representative of BART was adamant that BART would not pay for that - we must pay and the ques- tion is still not settled even though he has copies of the staff report. Discussion followed: FDA, SamTrans and the Airport are the ones involved; Alternative 6 has only the four contributors; five years ago that was BART's position; not five years ago, two years ago and San Bruno was one year ago; Mr. Salpeas had a document that said, in 1992, the subway construc- tion was to be paid by the local entities; later on there was a political realignment of the four sources; there has never been anything put in writing that BART will pay, even though it was voiced tonight; Mr. Salpeas stated they did not have to put it in words because there are four funding sources - Federal, State, the Airport and SamTrans; Ms. Burke was not convinced that BART was not going to do this piecemeal; she agreed with Mr. Keegan there are no guarantees that they will not begin this project Until its fully funded; Mr. Salpeas stated the green light is for the project proposed from Colma to Burlingame as one project; the better guaranty is from the Federal Government rather than BART. Mr. Gary Orton, Belmont, related: he agrees the project will not start until the Federal Government says there is money; there are four sources as stated; the unfunded parts of the project are assumed to come from the Airport; the City should be con- cerned about the unfunded portion; Alternative 6 is the most expensive being considered; the Metro is to AGENDA ACTION TAKEN 3. Status Report - Continued. 7/19/95 Page 6 24u pursue the local funding sources while recognizing the Airlines are already participating in the expan- sion; Congress figured out the funds are not there and directed they look for the local money; Mr. Salpeas did not address the new design aerial into the Airport with BART and no people movers, so BART would have to do this with two transfers; this will not solve the congestion on the expansion itself; even if BART addressed the $72 million from other sources there are still financial impacts on Samtrans; BART has acknowledged that bus services will be cut down in this County and Caltrain will not be expanded beyond the 60 trains a day; Mr. Keegan read from the DEIR; etc. Councilman Penna questioned: traffic congestion from the moving of employees to other areas and the time factors involved in doing that; the formula for ridership; what can S.S.F. say to say, no and say you can't go through S.S.F. - how can we stop them; what happens if we are $25 million on the alignment and the decision comes back this is going to be an open trench and we won't pay for it; etc. Discussion followed: Mr. Keegan related BART is not required, by State law, to conform to local policies; there is a 1966 precedence in Berkeley, CA where they insisted that the entire line be under- ground, they went to Court and lost, approved $20 million dollars in bonds for the subway; Vice Mayor Drago reiterated that this Council made an agreement to fund the undergrounding, during the issue of trenching, to the tune of $23 million and formed a redevelopment district along the El Camino corridor to pay for the undergrounding; the City is obligated and when the Airport entered it took us of the hook; should the City fall back with no funding we can go back and review the redevel- opment district; Millbrae and San Bruno are also involved; Councilwoman Teglia felt Mr. Takis Salpeas is an extraordinary individual, a man of honor and professional and did not agree with some of the comments made earlier; Mr. Good stated BART has met with at least one of the Air Transport people, but the key is coordination with the Airport; the people movers should be extended out to Millbrae which BART is examining; BART has the ability to condemn property for its own use; Coun- cilman Penna was concerned that the SamTrans connecting lines servicing areas north of Millbrae is AQENDA ACI!QN TAKEN _3. Status Report - Continued. RECESS: RECALL TO ORDER: 2. Report from BART Subcommittee on the station site plan design. ~ ~,'~' ADJOURNMENT: going to diminish and that will affect S.S.F. in the industrial areas for Genentech and Toshiba if the train services are curtailed, which he felt was needed the most and the other is the ridership of BART to the Airport; it takes 29 minutes to get to Daly City from the Embarcadero; a more realistic figure for the undergrounding is $43 million; Airport money cannot be used off of Airport property; etc. Mayor Yee recessed the meeting at 9:08 p.m. Mayor Yee recalled the meeting to order at 9:43 p.m., all Council was present. Discussion followed: BART staff met informally with City staff to preview BART's responses to the City's EIR comments and most significant comment was the line's vertical alignment at Spruce; BART disagreed witht he City's consultant's comments on the inadequacies of the EIR's traffic study numbers and discussed their responses to the City's proposals for the station site plan; suggested changes are add- ing a "kiss-and-ride" drop off on the El Camino frontage rather than the interior of the station site, and the retail pad at the north-west corner of the site has been expanded by moving the midday parking lot to the site of a smaller retail pad on Mission Road to create a larger more marketable retail site; what happens to Evergreen; Hickey Blvd. would be a clean alternative combining the vacant land; etc. Consensus of Council - To go with the plan. M/S Teglia/Drago - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Time of adjournment was 10:08 p.m. 7/19/95 Page 7 A~ENDA ACTION TAKEN ._.~RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Barbara A. Battaya, Cit~ City of South San Francisco APPROVED. Robert Ce'e,~a~yor City of South San Francisco 242 The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to dispose of an item. Oral communica- tions, arguments and comments are recorded on tape. The tape and documents r~lated to the items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for inspection, review and copying. 7/19/95 Page 8 Mayor Robert Yee Council: Jack Drago Joseph A. Fernekes '-'-lohn R. Penna Roberta Cerri Teglia MINUT_ES City Council Municipal Services Building Community Room July 19, 1995 S P__EC! A L MEETING CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO JULY 19, 1995 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of California, that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Wednesday, the 19th day of July 1995, at 8:00 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room, City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9; threatened litigation regarding Measure A rebuttal argument signatures. Dated: July 18, 1995 City Clerk City of South San Francisco AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1) ROLL CALL: Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, conference with legal counsel - anticipated litiga- tion. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdi- vision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9; threat- --~ed litigation regarding Measure A rebuttal argument gnatures. RECALL TO ORDER: &~I!~ TAKEN 10:08 p.m. Mayor Yee presiding. Council Present: Council Absent: Drago, Fernekes, Penna, Teglia and Yee. None. Council adjourned to a Closed Session at 10:09 p.m., to discuss the items listed.' Mayor Yee recalled the meeting to order at 10:24 7/19/95 Page 1 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN RECALL TO ORDER: - Continued. ADJOURNMENT: RESPECTFULLY SUBMITI'ED, Barbara A. Battaya, City City of South San Francisco p.m., all Council was present, no action was taken and direction was given. M/S Teglia/Fernekes - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. Time of adjournment was 10:25 p.m. APPROVED. City of Soutl San Francisco The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to dispose of an item. Oral communica- tions, 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. 7/19/95 Page 2