Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-02-1996 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, October 2, 1996 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Ave. TYPE: Regular Meeting 7:00 - Closed session pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION Name of case: San Francisco Baykeepers vs. City of Saratoga 7:30 - Pledge of Allegiance - Led by Councilmember Burger 1. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. Mayor Jacobs announced that no decisions had been made in closed session. Councilmembers Present: Burger, Tucker, Moran, Wolfe and Mayor Jacobs Staff Present: Acting City Manager perlin and City Attorney Riback 2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - Formal Presentation of Incense Burner to Mayor Jacobs Frank Riddle presented a copper incense burner that had been given to the Sister City Committee on July 8 by Mayor Okazaki of Muko-shi. He said there are 200 members on the Sister City Committee, 160 of whom are active. 3. REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Acting City Manager Perlin reported that pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on September 27. 4. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSION8 AND THE PUBLIC A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Lou Thorpe, 19550 Farwell Avenue, said on two occasions he had asked Council for an explanation of the wording of the Measure L ballot statement. The response had been a letter from the City Attorney stating that because of the concern regarding litigation, it is intended that any ballot measure regarding the existing utility user tax be prospective only and that the measure have no impact or bearing on the past levy of the existing tax. He said it would appear to him from the response that Mayor Jacobs and City Attorney Riback had attempted to craft the wording of the ballot statement in such a way that the City could not be held liable for the illegal collection of this tax from 1985 until the present. The City has declared that the tax is perfectly legal. He asked if that is the case, why did the Council deem it necessary to avoid simple and straightforward wording which would have allowed the continuation or termination of the tax as of the November election instead of forcing a vote on a six-month extension period in the last half of the year 2000. He said this deceiving legal maneuver will do nothing but cause voter confusion and distort the election results on this measure, and the controversy the Council has generated deserves more than a trite response and a wave of the hand. He expressed the belief that it is incumbent upon the Council to provide a written communication to the voting households of the City providing them with an explanation of the ballot statement and a declaration on the part of the City as to their planned intentions should Measure L fail at the ballot box. He requested that his statements be part of the record. Karen Anderson, 19887 Seagull Way, presented aT-shirt to Mayor Jacobs from the Mountain Winery to wear in the parade. She said she had had a shocking experience last night when she attended the San Jose City Council meeting. She congratulated those who had been incorporated 40 years ago instead of becoming part of San Jose. She said San Jose treats people who speak before them with no respect as opposed to the way the Saratoga City Council treats speakers. She said she was pleased to be a citizen of Saratoga and to be able to come before City Council Agenda 2 October 2, 1996 council and have them listen to what she has to say. She said the mayor spoke for the entire Council without looking at the other Councilmembers and had no regard for the safety of school children in her jurisdiction. She said she is very proud that Saratoga works with the Sheriff's Department, the Public Safety Commission and school administration to ensure the safety of school children on school sites. In San Jose, police will not come onto a school site and give any service to the schools to protect the children. She said San Jose spends their resources on drug addicts and other malcontents, and the safety of school children on the west side is of no concern to them. She said she is proud to be a Saratogan and most residents probably have no idea of how much better it is to be a resident of Saratoga. Mayor Jacobs responded to Mr. Thorpe and gave other Councilmembers a copy of his remarks. He said that in his absence Mr. Thorpe had come to Council with the seemingly odd question of why the City had worded Measure L in such a way that the voters could not terminate the utility tax in November. It seemed to him that Mr. Riback' s response did not answer Mr. Thorpe's question. He said he had figured out that Mr. Thorpe had read the proposed measure as dealing with nothing more than an extension of the tax for an additional six months from June 1, 2000 to January 1, 2001. The interpretation that the only thing that they are asking the voters is whether or not they agree to continue the tax may be a technically correct interpretation but is one that was not contemplated by the Council, City Manager or the City Attorney and should not be alleged to be the Council's intent or interpretation. When the language was agreed upon, none of the Councilmembers dreamed of the possibility of such an interpretation. The explanation for the language is simple: They told the City Attorney they wanted to draft a measure asking the voters if they wanted to continue the existing utility tax. He did that. In the course of discussion it became apparent that the existing expiration date of June 1, 2000 made no sense because the City has shifted its elections from June to November and the tax would expire five months before the November election in 2000. The language was revised to allow for a new expiration date-- January 1, 2001. The unintended anomaly discovered by Mr~ Thorpe was created. The simple interpretation is the one the Council has always intended, that is, a yes vote means that the tax continues until January 1, 2001, and a no vote means that the council will repeal the tax immediately. No other interpretation makes sense and the Council believes that the voters will see it the same way. He said he thought he spoke for all Councilmembers when he said they will act in accordance with that intent. He said he had not discussed his response with the rest of the Council but was convinced that this accurately reflects what happened. Councilmember Burger added that she had an extensive telephone discussion with Mr. Thorpe and she had made it clear to him that she had no problem saying to the public, in public, that the interpretation was that if the utility users tax is turned down by the voters on November 5 that the Council would immediately cease collecting that tax. She said that the Mayor's statement clarifies exactly what Council had in mind from the beginning. Councilmember Moran said she had talked to Mr. Thorpe. She said she thought his core question was whether the collection of the utility users tax would stop as soon as the voters state that they no longer want to pay the it and receive the services provided by the tax. She said the answer to that question is yes. Councilmember Wolfe thanked both the Mayor and Mr. Thorpe for being analytical. He said he thought the response given was very thorough · and well thought out. He agreed that if the voters pass Measure L the. tax will live on until January 1, 2001 but if they vote against it, it dies on November 6. Mayor Jacobs clarified that he understands that in order for the tax to "die", Council is required to take a legal action and the vote alone does not end the tax. If there is a no vote, it will end as soon after the election as Council can legally and practically terminate it. He assumed it would be terminated within a matter of weeks, perhaps sooner, but Council must wait for the County Clerk to certify the election results. City Council Agenda 3 October 2, 1996 Mr. Thorpe asked if Council thought it was possible to look at this ballot statement and misinterpret that Council wanted them to continue the tax for six months. Mayor Jacobs said it took him some time to figure out what Mr. Thorpe was getting at, but the ballot statement does not indicate that the tax ends on June 1. He said if someone was opposed to the tax, they would vote against it and he did not think anyone would read Mr. Thorpe's interpretation into it. Councilmember Wolfe added that anyone who is watching the meeting or reads the minutes or the newspaper will know Council's intention. If they vote for the measure, the tax is continued until January 1, 2001, and if they vote against it, it dies within days. Mr. Thorpe said his only problem was that people he had talked to weren't aware they were paying a utility tax and might not be concerned if they interpret the measure as only continuing it for six months. Mayor Jacobs said if people aren't aware they are paying the tax, they will not be aware that it ends on June 1, 2000. Mr. Thorpe thanked Mayor Jacobs for the response. B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS - None. C. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Previously-Discussed Items 1) Ordinance Prohibiting Alcohol in E1 Quito Park without Special Permit (second reading and adoption) BURGER/TUCKER TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 71-166 ADDING SECTION8 TO AND AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA RELATING TO-USE OF ALCOHOL IN EL QUITO PARK, GROUP USE PERMITS, AND OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING READING IN FULL. PASSED 5-0. 2) Resolution denying Vidanage Appeal heard 9/18, (REMOVED FROM AGENDA, CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 16, 1996) C. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY - None. B. New Items 1) Planning commission Actions, 9/25 - Note and file. 2) School Resource Officer Meeting Minutes, 5/14 - Note and file. 3) Public Safety COmm~ssiOn Minutes, 8/12 - Note and file. 4) Finance Advisox7 Committee Minutes, 8/19 - Note and file. / 5) Approval of Check Register 6) Award ~f Contract to update 63 Speed Surveys to Traffic Data service in the Amount of $6300 (Removed from Consent Calendar) 7) Final Map Approval for Tr. 8876 (6 lots at 13145 Pierce Road) -owner, Blackwell Bros. Development (Removed from Consent Calendar) 8) Authorization for City Manager to Execute Agreements with Humane society for Animal Control Services 9) Resolution 96-55 Accepting Offer of Dedications for Storm Drainage Easements at 20825 Pemela Way and 20820 City Council Agenda 4 October 2, 1996 Big Basin way 10) Award of Construction Contract for Minor Drainage Improvements to Ed Boyan Construction in amount of $39,625 and authorisation for staff to issue change orders up to $5,000 Councilmember Moran requested removal of Item 6 and Mayor Jacobs requested removal of Item 7. TUCKER/MORAN TO APPROVE ITEM8 5.B.1 THROUGH 5 AND 8 THROUGH 10 OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. PASSED 5-0. 6) Award of Contract to update 63 Speed surveys to Traffic Data Service in the Amount of $6300 Councilmember Moran acknowledged the work of staff and the Public Safety Commission and said she was glad to see that 62 existing speed surveys will be updated and an additional survey will be done on Baylor Avenue to address concerns raised by residents. MORAN/TUCKER TO AWARD THE CONTRACT TO UPDATE 63 SPEED SURVEY8 TO TRAFFIC DATA SERVICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $6300. PASSED 5-0. 7) Final Map Approval for Tr. 8876 (6 lots at 13145 Pierce Road) - Owner, Blackwell Bros. Development Mayor Jacobs said he wished to recuse himself from consideration of this item because the subject property is located within 500 feet of his property. MORAN/TUCKER TO APPROVE THE FINAL MAP FOR TR. 8876 (6 LOT8 AT 13145 PIERCE ROAD) - OWNER, BLACRwzLL BROS. DEVELOPMENT. PASSED 4-0 WITH JACOBS ABSTAINING. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 8:00 p.m. - None. 7. OLD BUSIMES8 - None. 8. NEW BUSIMES8 A. Flood Control Ordinance (first reading by title only, waiving reading in full, and introduction) (REMOVED FROM AGENDA) B. Proposition 218 Analysis Acting City Manager Perlin referred Council to the analysis which had been prepared by the City Manager and to the executive summary. Copies of the analysis are available to the public from the City Clerk City Attorney Riback informed Council that in general cities are opposed to the measure. He said the impact could be in the several hundred thousand dollar range of lost revenue to Saratoga. Individual Councilmembers agreed that they were opposed to the measure and that it would impact the ability of cities across the state, including Saratoga, to provide services because of lack of funding. Following discussion, it was agreed that Council would ask staff to provide information as to past policy, if any, in regard to Council taking a position on such measures. They also agreed that it was important to establish a policy if one does not exist. By consensus, the matter was continued until the next regular meeting. C. Oral Communications (continued) and instructions to staff regarding actions on current oral communications - None. 9. ROUTINE MATTERS A. Approval of Minutes - 9/10~ 9/18 BURGER/MORANTO APPROVE THEMINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1996. PASSED 5-0. City Council Agenda 5 october 2, 1996 Councilmember Burger asked that the first full paragraph on page 3 of the September 18 minutes be amended to read, "Councilmember Burger discussed the placement and type of a security fence. " She also asked the minutes to show that she acknowledged comments made and made a statement regarding Council's interest, not only in the security of the vineyards but of the neighboring properties. Council discussed the action taken at the September 18 meeting in regard to the fence. MORAN/BURGER TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1996. PASSED 5-0. 10. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS A. Agenda items for adjourned regular meeting 10/22 1) Quarterly budget review 2) Issues relating to Relinguishment of saratoga-Sunn~vale Rd. 3) Discussion of Underground Utility District Location Options 4) Discussion of Permit Issues concerning Alcohol in Parks 5) Allocation of Funds from Lease Agreements for Wireless Communication Antennas (from 9/1S) Council agreed to begin the meeting at 6:30 p.m. B. Other Mayor Jacobs invited the public to the Town Hall meeting on Saturday, October 5 from 10:00 a.m.-12:00 noon. At that time there will be representatives from the Sheriff's Department and the Fire District present. He also invited the public to the parade at 1:15 p.m. on Sunday which will be followed by a barbecue celebrating the City's 40th birthday party. 11. Adjournment At 8:27 p.m., the meeting was adjourned to a Town Hall Meeting at 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, October 5, in the Community Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue, then to 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 16, in the same place for a workshop on the Brown Act. Respectfully submitted, W~o~lfe~.I