|
A Regular Joint Meeting of the City
Council and Redevelopment Agency of the City of El Cajon,
California held Tuesday, January 9, 2001 was called to order
by Mayor/Chair Mark Lewis at 3:00 p.m., in the Council
Chambers, 200 East Main Street, El Cajon,
California.
ROLL CALL
|
Councilmembers/Agency
present:
|
McClellan, Ramos,
Keegan
|
|
Councilmembers/Agency
absent:
|
None
|
|
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair
present:
|
Santos
|
|
Mayor/Chair present:
|
Lewis
|
|
Other officers
present:
|
Other Officers present: Linn,
City Clerk/Secretary Foley, City Attorney/General
Counsel Hubert, Assistant City Manager Munzenmaier,
Director of Public Works Griffin, Director of
Community Development
|
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO FLAG
led by Mayor Lewis.
INVOCATION by Pastor Donald Hamer,
Sonrise Community Church.
POSTINGS
The City Clerk posted Orders of Adjournment of the
January 23, 2001 Meetings and the Agenda of the February 13,
2001 Meetings according to State Law and Council/Agency
Policy.
PRESENTATIONS:
Commendation
El Cajon Fire Department
Mayor Pro Tem Santos presents a commendation to the
El Cajon Fire Department for their cooperation,
commitment to protecting the lives and property of East
county residents, and their selfless contributions in
batting the recent Viejas fire. Richard O. Henry, Fire
Chief, accepts the commendation and introduces the
following members of the El Cajon Fire Department:
Engineer Larry McKim, Firefighter Dave Alexander, Captain
Dan Lerch, Firefighter/Paramedic Sam Rihan, Engineer Al
Giesecke, Engineer Walt Jones, Captain Gary Buchholz, Fire
Safety Specialist Donna Adams, Captain Mark Shipley,
Engineer Mike Sisk, Firefighter/Paramedic Alan Hazelton, and
Captain Phil Snow.
Proclamations
National Patriotism Week
Mayor Lewis presents a proclamation to Phil Raney,
President of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, El
Cajon Lodge 1812, proclaiming February 19-25, 2001, to
be "National Patriotism Week" in the City of El Cajon.
Mr. Raney accepts the proclamation.
R.E.C. (Recreation Enhances our
Community) Campaign
Lori Beliveau, Director of Recreation Department,
informs the R.E.C. Campaign is an annual campaign
inviting the community to support the City's recreation
programs. Two business partners from the 2000 campaign are
recognized for contributing more than $1,000 to the
campaign, qualifying them for the Bronze Bat Award.
Director Beliveau presents the Bronze Bat Award to
the managers of three El Cajon Vons Grocery Stores
&endash; Doug Smith, Bob Crowther and John Woods.
Hometown Buffet is recognized for their donation in
2000 and their pledge to continue to support the 2001
campaign. Cindy Harlan, Promotions Manager, and
Randy Young, Store Manager, accept the Bronze Bat
Award.
R.E.C. Kick-Off &endash; 2001
Campaign
Councilmember Ramos states the community has many
caring people who donate money and time, and the City truly
appreciates their help. Councilmember Ramos presents
the proclamation for the kick-off of the 2001 R.E.C.
Campaign in the City of El Cajon. Director
Beliveau accepts the proclamation.
Commendation
Tony and Kris in the Morning
Mayor Lewis presents a commendation to Tony
Randall and Kris Rochester of KSON's Tony and
Kris in the Morning radio show for giving so much to so
many, not only in their professional obligations, but on a
personal level as well. Tony Randall and Kris
Rochester accept the commendation and urge everyone to
support their St. Jude's Radiothon at Parkway Plaza on March
15-16, 2001.
MINUTES
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
approve the Minutes of the January 23, 2001
Meetings.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA:
Councilmember Ramos requests Item
9.1 be considered immediately following Item 3.4.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Keegan to
approve moving Item 9.1 for consideration after Item
3.4.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
1. CONSENT ITEMS (1.1 &endash;
1.13)
City Clerk Linn informs there is a speaker regarding
Item 1.7.
Councilmember McClellan disqualifies himself from
participation in Items 1.2 and 1.10 due to a possible
financial conflict of interest in accordance with California
law.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
approve Consent Items 1.1 &endash; 1.6 and 1.8 &endash;
1.13.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, with the following vote on
Items 1.2 and 1.10:
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
1.1 WARRANTS
Approve payment of Commercial Warrant Nos. 176819-177373
in the amount of $2,070,120.33 issued on January 19, 2001
through February 7, 2001; Commercial Warrant Nos.
177386-177546 issued on February 7, 2001 through February
12, 2001; Payroll Warrant Nos. 412131-412274 in the amount
of $109,361.56, Direct Deposit Nos. S22389-S22384 in the
amount of $539,898.00 issued on December 13, 2000, and
Payroll Wires in the amount of $198,893.61 issued on
December 18, 2000; Payroll Warrant Nos. 412275-412277 and
412283-412440 in the amount of $113,385.29, Payroll Direct
Deposit Nos. S223857-S224309 in the amount of $522,745.42,
and Payroll Wires in the amount of $191,274.97 issued on
December 28, 2000; Payroll Warrant Nos. 412446-412581 in the
amount of $113,515.61, Payroll Direct Deposit Nos.
S224322-S224767 in the amount of $557,974.13 issued on
January 12, 2001; and Payroll Wires in the amount of
$212,274.36 issued on January 12, 2001.
1.2 SPECIAL OPERATION LICENSE - SWAP
MEET SALES OF JEWELRY, CLOTHES AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS -
ANTONIO ORTEGA
Approve the application by Antonio Ortega to sell
used clothes, costume jewelry and miscellaneous items at the
El Cajon Swap Meet at 1470 Broadway, as recommended by the
Police and Planning Departments and the City
Manager.
1.3 RESOLUTION NO. 14-01: CITY
ATTORNEY STAFF MEMBERS (Report: City Attorney)
Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 14-01 appointing staff members for
the City Attorney's Office.
1.4 DONATION OF FUNDS FOR A PINE TREE
(Report: Director of Parks)
Accept the donation from Joseph and Audrey Risser to
purchase one Canary Island Pine Tree to be planted at
Hillside Park in memory of Rita McGuiness.
1.5 RESOLUTION NO. 15-01: AWARD BID
FOR PICKUPS, VANS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES (Report:
Purchasing Agent)
Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 15-01 to award portions of the bid
to North County Ford in the amount of $137,199.62, Burch
Ford in the amount of $74,560.30, City Chevrolet in the
amount of $22,130.23 and Villa Ford in the amount of
$20,899.99.
1.6 RESOLUTION NO. 16-01: REJECTION OF
BID FOR COPIER PAPER (Report: Purchasing Agent)
Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 16-01 to reject the bids for copier
paper.
1.7 Pulled for
Discussion.
1.8 SPECIAL OPERATION LICENSE -
DUMONTS TAVERN
Approve the application for a Class "F" Cabaret License
(no dancing permitted - entertainment may be a single or
double act) submitted by Maurice Peter Eunice for Dumonts
Tavern at 457 El Cajon Boulevard as recommended by the
Police and Planning Departments and the City
Manager.
1.9 QUITCLAIM DEEDS - VACATED ALLEY
NORTH OF BROADWAY BETWEEN NORTH ANZA STREET AND FIRST STREET
(Report: Director of Public Works)
Authorize the execution and recordation of the
Quitclaim Deeds along the vacated alley north of Broadway
between North Anza Street and First Street.
1.10 ACCEPT GRANT DEED FOR SECOND
STREET WIDENING PROJECT, I-8 TO EAST MAIN STREET (Report:
Director of Public Works)
Accept the Grant Deed executed by Roshan and Sheela
Gupta for public street purposes (490 N. Second Street) and
authorize the City Clerk to have the document executed and
recorded.
1.11 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT AND FINAL
PARCEL MAP FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 600 - 1441 S. MAGNOLIA
AVENUE (Report: Director of Public Works)
Approve the Subdivision Agreement and Final Map for
Tentative Parcel Map 600 at 1441 South Magnolia
Avenue.
1.12 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT AND FINAL
SUBDIVISION MAP - TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 487 AND PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT 184 - FIRST STREET TOWNHOMES (Report:
Director of Public Works)
Approve the Subdivision Agreement and Final Map for
Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) 487 on the west side of
First Street north of East Main Street.
1.13 ADDITIONAL STAFF AND FUNDING
ALLOCATION FOR NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION
SYSTEM COMPLIANCE (Report: Director of Public Works)
Approve the addition of two Engineering Technician
positions and additional funding by amending the current
Wastewater Operations budget.
1.7 RESOLUTION NO. 17-01: AWARD BID
FOR FIRE TRAINING FACILITY REMODEL (Report: Purchasing
Agent)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 17-01 to award the bid to Hankins Corporation
in the amount of $489,899.00.
DISCUSSION
Mark Stevens, 3320 Pegleg Mine Road,
Jamul, CA states that Stevens Construction submitted a
low bid of $420,000 for the Heartland Fire Training Facility
project. Their bid was deemed to be non-responsive because
the total value of their non-specialty subcontracted work
listed on their bid exceeded 50%. The subcontracted
percentages they submitted were approximations; after the
bid, they calculated the actual percentages and the actual
percentage of non-specialty sub-contracted work is 34.39%,
below the 50% threshold. He presents a breakdown of the bid
to Council. His company spent many hours preparing the bid,
but many of the subcontractors do not submit their bid to
the General Contractor until the final half-hour before the
bids are due. The delay of the subcontractors caused Stevens
Construction to wait until the final minutes to compile the
total bid for submission. By accepting the bid of Stevens
Construction, he is not asking the City to compromise any
legal aspect of the bidding procedure and the cost savings
to the City would be approximately $70,000.
In response to Councilmember Keegan, Mr. Stevens'
states his company was aware of the subcontracting
requirement prior to submitting the bid. However, they still
wrote in a percentage of more than 50%.
Councilmember Keegan questions if Mr. Stevens
was aware of the requirement of not more than 50% of the
project subcontracted, why did he write 52%?
Mr. Stevens states that due to the time constraints,
they were ballpark figures. Many other agencies allow 24
hours to tighten up the percentages and list
subcontractors.
Councilmember McClellan questions if this project is
the City's or if it is shared with others who might have a
voice in accepting a lower bid.
Assistant City Manager Hubert informs the Heartland
Facility belongs to the City of El Cajon.
City Attorney Foley advises this question has been
reviewed and if the rules were changed, the City or the
contractor could be accused of bid shopping. In fairness to
all the bidders, it is the opinion of the City
Attorney that this is a non-responsive bid.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Keegan to
approve Item 1.7.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
2. WRITTEN
COMMUNICATIONS:
2.1 LETTER: POWAY COUNCILMEMBER BETTY
REXFORD &endash; REQUEST FOR DONATION TO ESCONDIDO HUMANE
SOCIETY
Councilmember Rexford requests Council consider a
donation to the Escondido Humane Society as a symbol of
community support in light of the fire that destroyed the
animal shelter.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis states he has no
problem with assisting the Escondido Humane Society, because
El Cajon's animal shelter is being expanded and perhaps they
could help with that.
Councilmember McClellan states because there are
budget constraints within the City regarding Capital
Improvement Projects and vehicle replacements, perhaps the
City's money should not be spent for another city's benefit.
The Escondido Humane Society was probably
insured.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY McClellan
to file the letter.
AYES: McClellan, Ramos, Santos,
Lewis
NOES: Keegan
MOTION CARRIES.
2.2 ARTS CENTER FOUNDATION - CONTRACT
(Report: City Manager)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review the
letter from Bud Hamilton, Chairman, Arts Center Foundation,
and approve an extension, with amendments, of the contract
to June 30, 2007.
DISCUSSION
Assistant City Manager Hubert
informs the Arts Center Foundation contract will expire in
2002 and they request their five-year extension. There is
also a change concerning when they would make their payments
to the City, because their revenue stream is not constant
and it is not easy for them to meet the 30 day requirement.
That would be changed to 90 days. The only other change is
that the City contact be changed from the Recreation
Director to the City Manager's Office.
In response to Councilmember Ramos, City Clerk
Linn advises Bud Hamilton is available for
questions.
Councilmember Ramos states the Arts Center Foundation
is doing a wonderful job and is trying to raise money. One
of their problems is that people are questioning if the Arts
Center Foundation will be out of business in two years
because the contract will expire. Therefore, it is probably
necessary to move forward with this.
Bud Hamilton, 2031 Euclid Avenue, El Cajon, CA 92019,
Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Arts Center
Foundation, advises Councilmember Ramos is
correct. As the Foundation grows, it is contacting larger
foundations and corporations and individual donors, seeking
donations to put on shows such as Neil Sedaka, earlier this
week, and George Jones tonight &endash; those types of
productions in El Cajon which bring numerous people from
outside the area into the downtown area. When prospective
donors are informed there is only two years remaining on the
Foundation's contract with the City, it is a deterrent for
them to make a donation. If the 5-year extension is
formalized, which was the intent of the City Council and the
Arts Foundation in 1997, it would be helpful for the
Foundation in soliciting donations.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
approve according to the staff recommendations and subject
to approval of the agreement by the City
Attorney.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
2.3 LETTER: CRISIS HOUSE RE:
COLDWEATHER EMERGENCY SHELTER
Sue Christopher, Executive Director of Crisis House,
asks that Council request the County allocate $40,000 to the
Crisis House for a cold weather emergency shelter to house
single men.
DISCUSSION
Sue Christopher, 1034 N. Magnolia, El
Cajon, CA 92071, states there is an extreme emergency in
East County. The Homeless Task Force has been meeting and
has had several plans which could not be implemented to
provide emergency shelter. At the Task Force meeting on
February 5, a representative with the Regional Task Force
and the County of San Diego informed that unless a specific
plan was established at that meeting, the $40,000 from the
County would be reallocated to other sections of the County.
The proposal is not an ideal plan, but is the best emergency
plan so that the opportunity to assist those people is not
lost. The time frame does not allow two months to go through
the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. Initial
information indicates that City Council can waive the CUP
process due to the time response needed and that this is of
an emergency nature.
In addition, there is the question if the money can be used
in the way requested. According to those knowledgeable in
these issues, the money can be used on a cold weather basis,
so it could be used to set up an emergency shelter at Crisis
House. The budget shows Crisis House can be open every night
for approximately the same amount of money as operating just
on a cold weather basis. That could be done as the City
determines.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos states the money is to be used
or it will be lost. He questions how many people Crisis
House will shelter.
Ms. Christopher informs it would be 20-25 people.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Santos, Ms. Christopher
states it would be single men &endash; the priority would be
those men who are working and the next priority would be
those who are actively seeking employment and/or being
case-managed by an agency. It will be a collaborative effort
to serve the needs of these people.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos questions if Council can waive
the CUP amendment if this is deemed to be an emergency.
City Attorney Foley advises the process of waiving
the procedures for Conditional Use Permits would apply if
there were a catastrophic natural disaster, when the
emergency system requires prompt action to adopt emergency
ordinances that would take effect immediately. This case is
not an emergency, because it is a situation that has existed
and the Conditional Use Permit has been in place for some
time. The necessity of finding housing for these individuals
was known previously and there has been no catastrophic
disaster.
Councilmember Ramos commends Ms. Christopher
for moving forward with this and he does not want to lose
the $40,000. However, he is disappointed the Homeless Task
Force has not been able to come up with a plan, even though
they have worked diligently. It was his understanding that
cold weather shelter would not come back into El Cajon this
year, after being at the armory last year. The City needs to
show compassion to take care of these people, but the Task
Force must do something for next year, because he will be
reluctant to put this homeless and cold weather shelter in
El Cajon. Other communities must be willing to do their fair
share. To speed up the process, he questions if Council can
move forward with the request and by the time this goes to
the County, have Ms. Christopher come forward with a
CUP and bring it directly to Council.
City Attorney Foley advises the process for amending
the CUP requires the notice, provisions of approval, and
recommendation by the Planning Commission. It is in a
Specific Plan Area, which requires Council approval.
Director of Community Development Griffin states
occasionally an item has been jointly noticed &endash; the
Planning Commission Hearing is on date "A" and the City
Council Hearing is on date "B." The Zoning Ordinance clearly
states the Planning Commission has the authority to review
and grant Conditional Use Permits and there is no provision
that it come to Council without going to the Planning
Commission. Approximately six weeks would be required to get
this to a Planning Commission agenda, and it would not come
to Council until two months from now.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos, in response to Councilmember
Ramos' earlier remarks, advises the Homeless Task
Force did real estate surveys long before winter, there was
a business plan, a budget, and they worked with Ron Miller
with Crisis House. But someone cannot be forced to provide a
building if they do not wish to do so. That has been the
problem. There was a firm date and at the last minute it
fell through. The Task Force did its job and did it early.
He defends the people who worked so hard on the Task
Force.
Councilmember Keegan questions how this can be
implemented immediately. Can Council make a finding that the
health and possible lives of people are endangered by
sleeping outside and if that finding would be enough to
waive the CUP. If this goes back through the process, it
will not open this year.
City Attorney Foley states if Council directs that a
resolution be drafted that would bring back appropriate
findings to amend the CUP to allow this, that will be done
as quickly as possible with the appropriate findings that
are being expressed today, particularly the lateness and
harshness of this cold weather. The Zoning Ordinance
requires 10 days notice to the public for purposes of
amending the Conditional Use Permit before it goes to the
Planning Commission.
In response to Councilmember Keegan, City Attorney Foley
advises it still is required to go to the Planning
Commission, but if Council is finding an emergency, he will
look at circumventing that process and come directly to
Council immediately.
Councilmember Keegan states he was considering a
special meeting.
City Attorney Foley comments if Council directs that
a special meeting be held next week, it could be brought
back at that time.
Mayor Lewis states it is very important for human
safety and health to get this as fast as possible. Ms.
Christopher stepped up to help until there is a more
permanent solution and the City would not want to lose the
opportunity to institute this. He questions if Council
directs staff to work with Ms. Christopher to
implement the program this week, if it could come back next
Tuesday.
City Attorney Foley responds if that is Council's
direction, staff will do it.
Mayor Lewis requests Ms. Christopher get
clarification regarding the money.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Keegan to
direct the City Attorney to report back at a special meeting
on February 20, 2001 at 12:00 p.m. noon with necessary
documents to implement the program.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
3. ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORTS
3.1 POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT
Monthly Report from the Chief of Police.
Chief of Police Davis comments the new D.A.R.E. vehicle,
a PT Cruiser, is parked outside.
Chief Davis reports on handicapped parking citations
and generated revenue, reviewing the red light camera data
in cooperation with Traffic Engineering to evaluate
effectiveness, driving while intoxicated checkpoints, and
interactive cooperation.
Application has been made for a $99,983 grant from the
Office of Traffic Safety that will provide equipment for
running DUI checkpoints and some overtime to assist in
staffing them. In response to Councilmember Ramos'
questions, the Police Department will work with Traffic
Engineers to have the California Institute of Traffic Safety
look at the City's engineering, staffing, or enforcement
that may help with traffic accidents and speed
complaints.
Fifty-three warrants were served in January &endash; 25
felonies, 24 misdemeanors and 4 infractions for a variety of
vehicle code, penal code, and other violations.
Councilmember McClellan states the "Driving While
Intoxicated" program has been very effective, and questions
when will there be more of this.
Chief Davis informs they will be scheduled on at
least a monthly basis. They will also work with bordering
agencies regarding arrangements to look at major arteries
that connect with the areas served by the California Highway
Patrol, La Mesa, San Diego, and the Sheriff's Office.
Councilmember McClellan questions why they are not
done every weekend. If someone is driving at 1:00 or 2:00
a.m., chances are they might have been consuming
alcohol.
Chief Davis informs the problem is that the
checkpoints are very labor-intensive. Schedules must be
altered and overtime paid, depending on the circumstances to
bring the appropriate work force to deal with the situation.
If the application for the grant is successful, it will
provide funds for overtime.
Councilmember Ramos commends Chief Davis for
his report, which goes far beyond what he requested. He is
interested in the statistics, especially the number of
citations for speeding, which is a prime concern of the
citizens. He requests the statistics be continued.
Councilmember Ramos states that recently the local
news reported on the cities abiding by the no-smoking in
bars. El Cajon ranked last. Councilmember Ramos
questions what will be done about it.
Chief Davis states one of the problems with the
report is that some of the places attributed to the City are
in the unincorporated area. Everything that has an El Cajon
mailing address is attributed to El Cajon. The Police
Department plans to increase its enforcement in the area of
ABC laws, including smoking violations.
Councilmember Ramos remarks he recently visited three
bars and smoking was blatant.
Chief Davis states they would like to know about that
so the Police Department can look at them. Members of his
staff have met with the County Health Department, the
District Attorney's Office, and the City Attorney's Office
recently to devise strategies to deal with the concerns
Councilmember Ramos brought up.
Councilmember Keegan thanks Chief Davis for
providing the handicap parking violation statistics. The
revenue collected for the full year was $20,743.
Chief Davis comments that 90-95% of citations are
voided.
Councilmember Keegan states he understands if someone
shows their placard, the citation is voided. Are there other
reasons citations are voided? The average is $30 per
citation for a ticket that is usually $365. There are 585
citations issued, and fewer than 60 were paid.
Chief Davis informs the citations are voided only if
there is proof that they have a handicap sticker. There is a
high level of non-compliance in terms of displaying the
placard. That is why a couple of years ago, the Police
Department said they needed the $30 or $35 fee for
processing. Accounting for the money is difficult because it
can be paid to three different locations. Much time was
spent on this initial report to determine the numbers and
they will find a better way to keep track of it.
Councilmember Keegan states he questions the money
because the amount is very low. What is more important is
that people who do not qualify should not park in handicap
spaces. He states his appreciation for what RSVP
does.
3.2 RESOLUTION NO. 18-01: AWARD BID
FOR PHOTOCOPIERS (Report: Purchasing Agent) (Continued from
January 23, 2001 Meeting)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 18-01 to award the bid to IKON Office
Solutions, in the amount of $57,348.23.
DISCUSSION
Stan Roberts, 6010 Cornerstone Court,
San Diego, CA 92121, representing Minolta, states
Page 3, Section 8 of the bid document states, "The City
reserves the right to make the award to the overall low
bidder." In the award letter and subsequent attorney
opinion, it is stated the decision is based upon "the lowest
bid for the base copiers." The verbiage is clearly
different. His pricing is based upon meeting the
specifications and his total package must be as inexpensive
as possible. Minolta's package is less expensive to the
taxpayers and the City of El Cajon, with equipment that is
as good if not superior. The bid document did not state that
the decision would be made on a partial equipment
configuration. Perhaps the Invitation to Bid contained
grounds to make a decision legally any way the City sees
fit. He questions what is the moral decision and what is
right. He requests Council reconsider the decision.
Councilmember Keegan states this is not the first
time someone has come in with something like this. He
questions if it happens as often in other cities or should
the City's bid documents be clearer.
Assistant City Manager Hubert comments the bids
Council sees are the ones that have problems. Many bids are
done every year. The specifications can be reviewed over and
over to make sure they are clear, but they may not be clear
to everyone. The City is always open for questions from
prospective bidders.
Councilmember Keegan questions if the package could
state clearly a contact the bidders may speak with if they
have any questions.
Assistant City Manager Hubert informs if it is not
already there, it will be highlighted and bolded.
Mayor Lewis questions if there are pre-bid meetings
on large bid items. Bidders would be able to receive answers
to any questions.
Assistant City Manger Hubert informs there are
pre-bid meetings on construction contracts and more
complicated bids.
Purchasing Agent Dawson advises the City has pre-bid
conferences when it would be of benefit to the City or the
bidders. When off-the-shelf or clearly definable merchandise
is ordered, it is not necessary to have a pre-bid. If
something that is custom-built is ordered, complicated in
nature, or requires the vendor to have an understanding of
details, there is a pre-bid conference.
Mayor Lewis requests that this be monitored, because
if bidders continue having problems, pre-bid conferences may
be required or a waiver that the bidder understands.
Purchasing Agent Dawson informs the Instructions to
Bidders includes a paragraph explaining that if bidders have
any questions, they are to be submitted to the Purchasing
Agent in advance. If something is unclear, an addendum is
issued and forwarded to all registered bidders.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 18-01 to award the bid to
IKON.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
3.3 APPLICATIONS FOR COMMISSION ON
AGING AND COMMISSION ON DISABILITIES (Report: City
Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review the
applications submitted and schedule interviews, if
appropriate, to consider appointments to the Commission on
Aging and Commission on Disabilities.
DISCUSSION
Councilmember Keegan comments it
is not necessary to have interviews for the Commission on
Disabilities because only one person applied.
Mayor Lewis remarks he has not met the applicant and
wishes to conduct the interview.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
have interviews at the February 27, 2001, 3:00 p.m.
Meeting.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
3.4 REMOVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSIONER
FROM SERVICE
As a result of action taken by a majority of the City
Council at the January 23, 2001 Meeting, consideration to
remove Planning Commissioner Gary Kendrick from service on
the Commission upon completion of term on January 31, 2001,
according to Section 2.24.060 of the El Cajon Municipal
Code
DISCUSSION
City Clerk Linn informs there are
17 speakers regarding this item.
Ramzi Murad, 8745 Burkshire Place, Lakeside, CA
92040, states Gary Kendrick is his friend as well as
Councilmember Keegan and Mayor Lewis. He supported
Councilmember Keegan for his bid in the recent campaign and
also supported Gary Kendrick. He was hoping for a unanimous
vote for Gary Kendrick, who is doing a great job in his
position. Mr. Murad does not know the reason Councilmember
Ramos and Mayor Pro Tem Santos did not vote for him. If Mr.
Kendrick was not doing his job, the public should be
informed. Mr. Murad does not live in El Cajon, but it is not
right to remove the Chairman of the Planning Commission. It
is his belief that the reason Councilmember Keegan did not
support Mr. Kendrick is because he believed Mr. Kendrick is
pro-churches &endash; not all, but a couple of them. In
addition, Mr. Kendrick was on the slate with another
Councilmember present. Mr. Kendrick is qualified, skillful,
knowledgeable and has high integrity; he should be kept on
the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Keegan states he appreciates Mr. Murad
calling him his friend, but wants to correct the comment
regarding being "pro-church." Councilmember Keegan is
pro-church and does not have a problem with anyone else
being pro-church. What was discussed was fairness to
everyone who came before the Planning Commission &endash; no
bias. It was not a pro-church/anti-church discussion.
Mike Kumeta, 8813 Clearview Way, La Mesa, CA 91941,
states he is an attorney-at-law. Everyone knows the
allegations in this matter, it has been in the newspaper.
The legal issues are equally simple. Mr. Keegan has violated
Gary Kendrick's first amendment right to free exercise of
religion by voting against someone because of his church
attendance and religious affiliations. Mr. Keegan has
violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment by discriminating against someone on the basis of
his religion. Mr. Keegan's actions have also violated
Article 6 of the United States Constitution by requiring a
religious test as a qualification for public office.
In the event that Mr. Keegan votes to remove Mr. Kendrick
from his position, the City will be liable for all damages
that result from these numerous civil rights violations. Mr.
Kumeta states he is astounded that Mr. Keegan would stoop to
the level of religious bigotry to thwart the retention of
the knowledge, experience, and skills of Gary Kendrick. He
states he is not surprised because of the sleaze factor
involved, this type of tactic is expected from Mr. Keegan, a
man who lacks any appearance of integrity. Mr. Keegan is
known for his public drunkenness, has been married five
times and has been fined thousands of dollars for violations
of the Fair Political Practices Act. Such conduct is
expected.
Mr. Kumeta states he is surprised that Mr. Keegan has
placed himself in the position of being personally liable in
a civil rights action for the consequences of his religious
bigotry. Normally, Mr. Keegan allows the taxpayer to foot
the bill for his irresponsible actions. In this case, Mr.
Keegan has placed his own financial security in jeopardy.
While perhaps unintended, it is ironically refreshing.
In addition, if Mr. Ramos and Mr. Santos vote to condone Mr.
Keegan's unlawful actions, they may also be personally
liable for violating Mr. Kendrick's constitutional rights.
Any member of the Council, sued in their personal capacity,
would have a conflict of interest that would prohibit them
from voting to have the City pay for their legal defense. It
is unlikely that Mr. Lewis or Mr. McClellan, as the only
members entitled to vote on such an issue, would vote to pay
for such a legal defense.
In conclusion, Mr. Kumeta states Mr. Keegan needs to recuse
himself in this matter, if not for the taxpayers of the
City, then to protect himself from the personal liability
that flows from his intolerant religious bigotry.
Charles Woodrow Hicks III, 14433 Rios Canyon Road, El
Cajon, CA 92021, states approximately two years ago, he
sat on a task force dealing with the needs of the homeless.
Mr. Keegan also sat on the task force for a short time. It
was apparent to Mr. Hicks that Mr. Keegan was biased against
people of the faith due to statements made and innuendoes.
Mr. Keegan made it clear he did not have much use for these
people. The First Amendment makes it very clear that people
are guaranteed religious freedom without the worry of
discrimination or bias. Mr. Hicks is disturbed that a man
with such bias could have any part in a decision concerning
Gary Kendrick, a man of the faith. Mr. Keegan should exclude
himself from the process because his prejudice towards
religious people hinders his ability to make a fair
decision.
Bob Baker, 15385 Andorra Way, San Diego, CA 92129,
states he is an attorney; he does not represent Mr.
Kendrick in this matter but has represented him in other
matters. He and Mr. Kendrick are friends; this situation may
be his fault and he apologizes to Mr. Kendrick. When Mr.
Kendrick was appointed to the Planning Commission, he spoke
with Mr. Baker about an issue that was before the Planning
Commission. Mr. Kendrick stated a church wanted to put in a
parking lot. There was opposition and he requested Mr.
Baker's opinion. Mr. Baker states he is not a religious
person, but has a strong belief in the First Amendment, most
important to the framers of the Constitution. It is Mr.
Baker's belief that Mr. Kendrick took that idea and went to
the Planning Commission and talked about the First Amendment
and how important it is that religious groups are given the
freedom to practice and congregate. They cannot congregate
if they cannot park.
Mr. Baker states Mr. Kendrick's problems are
primarily not based on his religious beliefs, and his
religious beliefs do not interfere with his judgment. Mr.
Kendrick's strong belief in the Constitution of the United
States motivated him to do the things he has done. That same
Constitution states there shall be no religious test for a
person to hold public office and that is what is happening.
Mr. Keegan may lie about that, but that is what is happening
and there are witnesses.
The same Constitution was the grounds for the passage of the
Ku Klux Klan Act in 1866 to protect black people from
persecution and that law was expanded in a case that handled
against the Oakland Police Department to cover protection of
people in religious discrimination from government action
under 42USC 1985 and 1983. He suggests looking at 512 F Sub
563, the case against the Oakland Police Department. What is
happening here is religious persecution and he encourages
people here today to show they are present to support Gary
Kendrick.
Al Rountree, 470 N. Mollison Avenue, El Cajon, CA
92021, states he is the pastor at Central Assembly of
God. He does not know Mr. Kendrick personally or his
religious affiliation, but knows he is a religious man. His
church had an issue with the Planning Commission and the
City Council regarding a skate park. Gary Kendrick provided
advice to Pastor Rountree and the church's opinion is that
he was very fair in reaching a settlement. It was a heated
issue for them, as a local business. Now there is a skate
park used by hundreds of children a week. When Pastor
Rountree was at an impasse, Mr. Kendrick provided counseling
to help resolve the matter. The church is in favor of Mr.
Kendrick remaining on the Planning Commission.
Jim Kelly, 9453 Debbie Court, El Cajon, CA 92021,
states he is the senior member of the San Diego County Board
of Education, a member of the San Diego County Republican
Party Central Committee, and was just appointed to the State
Republican Central Committee. Gary Kendrick is his friend
and he is proud Mr. Kendrick is a member of the El Cajon
Planning Commission. He is a perfect fit for the community,
has complete integrity, is fair and professional, loves
people, and is beyond reproach. He is an excellent husband
and father and a faithful member of the El Cajon religious
community and twice has been elected a member of the
Grossmont-Cuyamaca College Board, of which he is now
president, in addition to being chairman of the Planning
Commission. Mr. Kelly is disturbed that an effort has been
made by those who are intolerant of people of faith trying
to subvert Mr. Kendrick's reappointment. News reports state
that one of the Councilmembers here has referred to some
churches as "racist," yet there is no evidence to support
such vicious attacks. The same Councilmember also felt it
was acceptable to ask Mr. Kendrick which church he was a
member of and immediately denounced Mr. Kendrick's choice of
church affiliation and announce his opposition to his
reappointment, based upon the church affiliation. This
outrageous bigotry must be clearly rejected or a message
will be sent to the City's religious community. He urges
that dirty politics be put aside and do the right thing for
the community by reappointing Gary Kendrick.
Councilmember Keegan comments the "racist churches"
quote came from Mr. Sami Jihad in the newspaper.
Councilmember Keegan has been called by the newspaper and by
television &endash; he has stated that was not his quote
over and over. He has never asked Gary Kendrick which church
he attends and does not care which church he attends. He
expresses his hope that Sami Jihad will speak later because
it is his quote that has turned this matter into something
more than it is. It has turned into a religious battle and
had Sami Jihad not either misquoted Councilmember Keegan or
decided to say what he did and attribute it to Councilmember
Keegan, this would not be happening now.
Sylvia Sullivan, 7892 Hillside Drive, La Mesa, CA
91941, informs she is the president of the East County
CRA, a grassroots volunteer organization. Recently they were
alarmed at the vicious intolerant attacks during the
confirmation hearings of Attorney General John Ashcroft and
they are dismayed to find the roots of religious intolerance
in this community. Vigilance against bigotry begins in the
home communities. Gary Kendrick's commitment, dedication and
excellent work is well known, and his record shows he
deserves to continue in his service to the community. There
is no question that the seeds of anti-Christian bigotry have
taken root in El Cajon. A vote for Gary Kendrick is a stand
for tolerance and respect for all people of faith.
David Hoffman, 8729 Cordial Road, El Cajon, CA 92021,
states he is increasingly concerned about what he
perceives as prejudice and bigotry against people of faith
by one El Cajon City Councilmember, Todd Keegan. Religious
freedom is one of the most cherished rights of United States
citizens, and that a person's civil rights cannot be
violated because of his religious beliefs. He has come to
the conclusion from statements Councilmember Keegan has made
beginning in December of 1993 where he talks about coming
against or balancing the religious agenda in El Cajon, that
he does not appreciate people of faith being involved in
helping solve the City's problems.
Councilmember Keegan requests David Hoffman
read the second quote, about not wanting people of faith to
be a part of solving the City's problems.
Mr. Hoffman states after reading these things, it is
his opinion Councilmember Keegan does not appreciate
people of faith being involved in helping to solve the
City's problems.
Mr. Hoffman continues that religious prejudice cannot
be tolerated by the City Council. If only half of what he
has heard recently is correct, it would be difficult for
Councilmember Keegan to make an objective decision where a
person of faith is concerned. He is bothered by the alleged
comments by Councilmember Keegan that friends of Gary
Kendrick and churches he supports are racist. Since that
comment is aimed at Mr. Hoffman, since he is Gary Kendrick's
friend, he assures that all are created by God and have
equal value in his eyes. No one's skin color is superior
over another. His church has a high school principal and
assistant youth pastor who are Afro-American. The fact that
he has to mention these things today troubles him
considerably. He questions councilmembers if Councilmember
Keegan can effectively evaluate Gary Kendrick as a Planning
Commissioner, when Councilmember Keegan is prejudiced
against him because he is a man of religious faith. Mr.
Hoffman urges Councilmember Keegan to abstain from the vote
on Gary Kendrick, as his recent comments reveal a prejudice
which could cloud his ability to vote objectively.
W.L. Clark, 749 Hacienda Drive, El Cajon, CA, states
he supports Gary Kendrick and is disturbed about what is
happening. He does not know if Councilmember Keegan has ever
been asked the questions that he asked Gary Kendrick, but
questions where Councilmember Keegan received his religious
training that gives him five wives. Is that a character flaw
that Councilmember Keegan has?
Councilmember Keegan states if Mr. Clark is here to
disparage Councilmember Keegan's parents, he would
appreciate his not doing that. If Mr. Clark wants to talk
about Gary Kendrick, that is fine.
Mr. Clark questions what religion Councilmember
Keegan's parents brought him up in.
Mayor Lewis states Councilmember Keegan need
not respond.
Councilmember Ramos states personal attacks are not
necessary.
Mayor Lewis instructs Mr. Clark to present his three
minutes, but not ask for a response unless it is voluntarily
given.
Mr. Clark continues he was offended when he read the
newspapers. Now others are offended and Councilmember Ramos
gets offended, but Councilmember Ramos should be offended at
the person who started it, not Mr. Clark.
Beverly Clark, 342 Patrick Drive, El Cajon, CA, points
out Gary Kendrick's background is outstanding to be a
Planning Commissioner. He has a master's degree in Business
Administration and Real Estate, teaches continuation classes
to attorneys and CPAs in revenue and taxation code, teaches
Business and Finance and Business Management at Southwestern
College. He was elected Chairman of the Planning Commission
the last two years by the other planners. He has a State
Board of Equalization appraiser certificate, important for
planning commissioners. Most planning commissioners do not
have this background. The City is fortunate to have someone
so knowledgeable in planning matters. She urges
reappointment of Gary Kendrick and getting over the bad
feeling in the community that there is prejudice against
people of faith.
Michael Horvath, 750 Medford Street, El Cajon, CA
92020, states approximately one year ago, St. Ephraim
Church began the process of attaining a Conditional Use
Permit to open a school. Their first encounter with Mr.
Kendrick was at their hearing, which was fair to both
proponents and opponents alike. Those whose ideas or
concerns were valid were allowed to express themselves while
those off-track were told so kindly. Mr. Kendrick, as Chair
of the Commission, displayed good leadership. Mr. Horvath
asks the City Council to allow Mr. Kendrick to continue as a
member of the Planning Commission.
Mark Hoffman, 7629 Circle Drive, Lemon Grove, CA,
states he pastors Foothills Christian Fellowship in El
Cajon, and he speaks representing that church. Eight or ten
years ago, church requests for Conditional Use Permits were
routinely turned down. Although it is legal for churches to
locate in industrial space, there had never been one before
his church. The City General Plan did not contain direct
reference to a church and it is inexcusable that churches,
which are a vital part of the community, could be left out
of the General Plan. That was not corrected until several
years ago. Pastor Hoffman hopes no one wants to return to
those days.
He interprets Councilmember Keegan's comments as
reported in the San Diego Union and Daily Californian as
saying he would not support Gary Kendrick as long as Gary
Kendrick supported churches. Councilmember Keegan has stated
he is not anti-religious but he campaigned in 1993 saying he
would oppose the religious agenda. When Councilmember Keegan
won the campaign in 1994, he reiterated that comment and in
1998, said he was against the religious and for the
community agenda, as though there is a difference in the
agenda of religions and that of the community. He questions
what Councilmember Keegan's considers the religious agenda.
Their church contributes more than a half million dollars
every year in direct benefits social services to people not
affiliated with their church.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos comments in response to Mr.
Hoffman's remarks concerning the General Plan Amendment, the
Planning Commission voted 5-0. When it came before Council,
Councilmember Keegan voted for it also. He defends
Councilmember Keegan regarding that matter.
Mark Jappe, 109 Willow Pond, Santee, CA 92071, states
his church came before the Planning Commission approximately
17 months ago to seek a Conditional Use Permit. They were
novices and Gary Kendrick and Sami Jihad helped them work
through the issues. They took extra time to work out the
details, and consensus was reached, being fair to all
concerned. Since then, Gary Kendrick has joined their
fellowship, Gateway Church, and he is a man of integrity, a
man of honor, and Mr. Jappe supports him.
Mario Tilaro, 751 Mundy Terrace, El Cajon, CA 92020,
states he has been a resident of El Cajon since 1977. As a
businessman, he uses a simple and practical rule, "If it's
not broke, don't fix it." He has heard no allegation that
the Planning Commission has done a horrible job or is broken
in some way. Removing the Chairman of the Planning
Commission is being considered. It makes no sense. There
have been Planning Commissions in El Cajon that have given
the City this mess on the valley floor &endash; he questions
if Council would like a reversion to that kind of planning.
Mr. Kendrick has been on the Commission that has made more
than 500 decisions and Mr. Tilaro has not read anything that
says that a percentage of those decisions have been bad. Mr.
Kendrick is one of the most qualified Planning Commissioners
regarding land-use issues that the City has ever had, and
Council is considering removing him. If Council does that,
it needs its head examined.
John Gibson, 14907 Montana Serena, El Cajon, CA,
states each Councilmember has given tremendous amounts
of hours to public service. He has appeared before both the
Planning Commission and the City Council for 30 years and
there have been good Councilmembers and Planning
Commissioners over those years. There have been times he has
not agreed with certain votes, but Gary Kendrick is someone
like Harriet Stockwell. Mr. Gibson knew that she researched
everything that came before her and she put her heart into
the decision. Gary Kendrick is a person like that and for
him to be singled out, a person who is qualified and active
in the community, is sending a rebuff to people who would be
qualified and would step up to do the job. The City cannot
afford to send that message out to the businessmen.
Gary Cass, 9951 Cristobal Drive, Spring Valley, CA,
states he was before Council previously and received a
donation from Councilmember McClellan to help a group of
churches to feed the homeless in the Center at Thanksgiving.
He was very favorably disposed towards the attitude Council
had towards the activities and the work of the church. He is
a member of the Grossmont School Board and has an interest
in the community at large and also as a member of the
California Pro-Life Council, which actively promotes the
values they stand for. Four of the Councilmembers have
received their endorsement, along with Gary Kendrick,
because of the values Mr. Cass thought they agreed on. Mr.
Cass comments support should be given one another,
especially in this situation. Otherwise, it would seem that
this is political spite. This has the appearance of some
Councilmembers having something against Mr. Kendrick. He has
heard no valid complaints and questions if anyone can
respond to what Mr. Kendrick has done to deserve being
removed from office. Gary Kendrick has done a great job and
it is a mistake to remove someone of his qualifications.
Stephanie Hopping, 415 D Street, Chula Vista, CA
91910, informs her godson attends St. Ephraim's Academy
in El Cajon. The school opened last fall, thanks in part to
Gary Kendrick's vote. If Gary Kendrick is removed from the
Planning Commission, it is likely that the support in the El
Cajon City Government for the school's possible expansion or
other faith-based initiatives in this community could be
jeopardized. Over the last 20 years, there has been a trend
in increasing overt hostility in local government toward
churches and traditional Judeo-Christian morality in
general. That seems to be what is occurring here. Such a
trend violates and contradicts everything that is noble in
the American political tradition. She urges Council to
abandon its plan to remove Gary Kendrick and its plan to
amend the City ordinance so the Mayor would no longer
nominate candidates for the Planning Commission.
RECESS CALLED AT 4:53
P.M.
MEETING CALLED BACK TO ORDER AT 4:57 P.M.
City Clerk Linn states she has
received another speaker card.
Sami Jihad, 1673 Avenida Cherylita, El Cajon, CA 92020,
states this is a very emotional issue for him, because
both Councilmember Keegan and Gary Kendrick are his friends.
He is here in God's name and speaks nothing but the truth.
He supported Gary Kendrick and campaigned for him; Mr. Jihad
is Republican and crossed party lines to support a Democrat.
Mr. Jihad was sorry to see Gary Kendrick lose, but he cannot
speak out of emotions. Mr. Jihad told Mr. Kendrick that it
was time that he should iron out some of his problems with
Councilmember Keegan. He invited Councilmember Keegan to
have dinner, and stated Councilmember Keegan was his friend
and would always be his friend. They had dinner with Ramzi
Murad, the first speaker on this matter, and started
talking. Councilmember Keegan said Mr. Jihad could call Gary
Kendrick and he would talk with him. There was conversation
and Councilmember Keegan asked if Mr. Kendrick was a member
of the Christian Coalition. Mr. Kendrick responded he was
not. There were other questions that were asked. Mr. Jihad
stated he would appreciate it if Councilmember Keegan could
support Gary Kendrick, because the Planning Commission has
an excellent team. There is a lawyer, Mr. Jihad is a PhD,
there are two master's degrees and a master's degree in
architect and city planning. There has never been such a
Planning Commission with such unanimous thinking, thinking
of moving the City forward. Mr. Jihad told Councilmember
Keegan that he had a great working relationship with Gary
Kendrick and it would be a loss if Councilmember Keegan did
not vote for him. Councilmember Keegan said, "How can I
support you, when you belong to a church that practices
racism?" Mr. Jihad asked how Councilmember Keegan could say
something like this. Mr. Jihad brought Councilmember Keegan
to speak on issues that could mend fences. Gary Kendrick was
very upset and there was some exchange of language. Mr.
Jihad said perhaps Councilmember Keegan had a grudge against
Gary Kendrick because he brought items to the Planning
Commission which he should not have brought, but it was not
said in a malicious way.
In response to Mayor Lewis, City Clerk Linn informs
there are no more speakers.
Councilmember Ramos remarks that the public has had
its say and he has comments he would like to make, but does
not want the public to come up to make rebuttal or
arguments.
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY Santos to
limit further discussion to the City Council and not have
any further testimony from the public.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION
Councilmember Ramos states he
personally resents the comments that he or any
Councilmembers vote strictly on religious grounds. He is
perhaps more religious than the majority of people who are
in this room. He does not wear it on his sleeve and when his
own church comes to this Council for renewal of the bingo
license, he recuses himself because it may give the
perception that he has bias.
Councilmember Ramos comments the public has asked for
reasons why he will not support Mr. Kendrick, and he will
provide them. On October 21, 1997, this Council was faced
with a decision of allowing churches in the industrial zone.
Mr. Kendrick sent a letter to all the El Cajon churches,
with his name on it as a Planning Commission member,
informing that he supported the changes proposed by
then-Councilmember Lewis, and they should also do so. That
is a bias, any Commissioner who does that is showing bias
and should not be voting on those issues.
That issue was brought to City Council and Councilmember
Ramos reads verbatim the minutes from that City Council
meeting on October 21, 1997. "Councilmember Ramos feels it
is unethical for any Councilmember or Commissioner to
declare how he will vote on any issue before testimony has
been heard from the public. While what Planning Commissioner
Kendrick did may be legal, he (Councilmember Ramos) feels it
is unethical and suggests Commissioners not to do it. If
they are going to do that, and there is an opportunity to
vote to reappoint them, he will not support them."
Councilmember Ramos states he will not support Gary
Kendrick.
Councilmember Ramos continues that for those who are
attorneys, they must know there is an issue regarding an
incompatible office. Mr. Kendrick is a Trustee of the
College Board, and it is Councilmember Ramos's opinion that
that is an incompatible office, another reason he will not
support him.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos agrees with many of the speakers
who spoke on behalf of Mr. Kendrick, that he is qualified,
knowledgeable and skillful. There are also other people who
applied for the Planning Commission post who were equally if
not more qualified. There have been other Planning
Commissioners who were not reappointed, and there was not
that much attention brought to it then. One person asked for
findings and Councilmember Ramos has the same ones Mayor Pro
Tem Santos has. When Mr. Kendrick first came on the Planning
Commission, they got along very well and still do, up until
today. One of the first things Mr. Kendrick did was to look
into a fellow-Planning Commissioners residence notification
line regarding a church's land-use issue. Mayor Pro Tem
Santos voted on behalf of that church, but Mr. Kendrick
tried to eliminate the other Commissioner because she was
within the notification line. Sometimes Commissioners must
state there is a conflict of interest when they cannot vote
on it. That Commissioner found out about it and approached
Mr. Kendrick and took him to the woodshed on it. Mr.
Kendrick's act was wrong and unethical.
A second point is the faxing. A member of the Planning
Commission, Mr. Ambrose, went to church where his pastor
approached him and asked who Mr. Kendrick is. The pastor
informed Mr. Kendrick was faxing him on an issue that was
not in his notification line, asking him to pack Council
Chambers. That is unethical. Not once, as a Planning
Commissioner for seven years, did Mayor Pro Tem Santos do
that. When he came on the Planning Commission, the previous
Planning Commissioner, Steve Connor, told him to learn the
Planning Commission - and that is not to be an advocate
unless a General Plan Amendment is to be offered for a vote.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos states he is one of the few
Councilmembers who sits in the lobby during a Planning
Commission meeting to listen and get a better feel for what
is happening. There is a different inflection when you read
something than when you hear it. He hears a bias and sees it
in the minutes, and it is wrong. Commissioners should be
impartial at a hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Santos states there
were occasions when he was a Planning Commissioner that his
mind was made up. Someone would come up and make a valid
point &endash; some church members made good points
regarding their land-use sites &endash; and changed his
mind. Do not make up your mind until all the testimony has
been heard. Do not be politicking as a Planning Commissioner
&endash; it is an advisory commission and that is all. It is
not an elective office.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos states this is not religious
persecution. He has never heard Councilmember Keegan say a
bigoted thing about anyone. He has never asked Councilmember
Keegan what his religion is and Councilmember Keegan has
never asked him. It is not about religion; it is about
ethical standards. Christian or non-Christian, Commissioners
must stand up to those. He reiterates that there were no
problems between Mayor Pro Tem Santos and Mr. Kendrick on
the Planning Commission, but Mayor Pro Tem Santos has a
great affinity for the Planning Commission. He tried to be
ethical, but does not think Mr. Kendrick has been ethical
&endash; that is his finding on removing him from the
Planning Commission.
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY Santos to
remove Gary Kendrick effective immediately from the Planning
Commission.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis states he will vote
against the motion. He nominated Mr. Kendrick for the
Planning Commissioner because he is the most qualified,
based upon his experience, and has been appointed Chairman
twice. Mr. Kendrick has voted a majority of the time. If the
other Commissioners thought something was unethical back in
1997, they would not have reappointed him. Mayor Lewis
states Mr. Kendrick is still the best qualified and if
someone else is nominated, he hopes the media and citizens
compare Mr. Kendrick's background to whoever is
selected.
Councilmember McClellan states he cannot support the
motion. He has known Gary Kendrick for a long time and they
ran their campaigns together. Mr. Kendrick's ethics and
morality are above reproach and he is the best
qualified.
Councilmember Ramos comments Mayor Lewis continues to
refer to qualifications, and while that has some bearing on
it, he and other Councilmembers came to the Planning
Commission without qualifications. In addition, there was a
Traffic Commissioner, Mr. Fred Herrera, who was most
qualified who Mayor Lewis did not reappoint. It made no
difference at that time.
Mayor Lewis remarks qualifications are very important
because it shows the experience. That is why there is
another item on the agenda, Item 5.3, that if Mr. Kendrick
is removed, Mayor Lewis is prepared to go down the list of
others who were interviewed. Item 9.1 was moved to follow
this item. He requests the audience stay for Item 5.3 in the
event Gary Kendrick is removed. Mayor Lewis is prepared to
make other nominations.
VOTES ARE NOW CAST ON MOTION BY Ramos,
SECOND BY Santos to remove Gary Kendrick effective
immediately from the Planning Commission.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan
NOES: McClellan, Lewis
MOTION CARRIES.
9.1 (Considered at this time in
accordance with Changes to the Agenda) ORDINANCE: FIRST
READING - AMENDMENT OF EL CAJON MUNICIPAL CODE - APPOINT
MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION (Report: City
Attorney)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council introduce
the Ordinance and request the City Clerk to recite the title
and waive full reading of the text.
City Clerk Linn recites the title of the ordinance
under Item 9.1.
First Reading of Ordinance Repealing Section 2.24.030 of
Chapter 2.24 of the El Cajon Municipal Code and adding new
Section 2.24.030 to Chapter 2.24 authorizing a majority of
City Council to appoint members of the Planning
Commission.
In response to Mayor Lewis, City Clerk Linn
advises there are no speakers regarding this
item.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis informs he will vote
against the Amendment. If authority is removed from the
Mayor and put in the hands of Councilmembers, it will be
very difficult to bring the authority back to the Mayor's
office. It is a lot of work to remove Mr. Kendrick from the
Planning Commission.
Councilmember Ramos comments he does not know how to
resolve this issue. Mayor Lewis refused to make a nomination
and left Mr. Kendrick on the Commission. Mayor Lewis could
have resolved the problem at that time. Councilmember Ramos
does not want to go through this process and did not want to
put this item on the agenda, but Mayor Lewis left the
majority of Council with no choice. He does not want to go
through this every time Planning Commissioners are
appointed. He questions if he can direct the City Attorney
or staff to come back with a method of voting, such as is
used by the City of Escondido, and consider a ballot with
all Councilmembers and the Mayor participating. He requests
suggestions at the next Council meeting or before this
ordinance becomes final, so it can be done as a policy.
City Attorney Foley states he can come back with a
review of selection processes of other cities.
Councilmembers have been informed the Brown Act does not
allow secret ballots for appointments, and Councilmembers
have followed that. Escondido has written ballots that are
read following the vote and made available to the public. If
Council desires, a policy can be developed and brought back
to be implemented at the next selection of
Commissioners.
Mayor Lewis reiterates he will vote against the
motion. Mr. Kendrick is the best qualified and Mayor Lewis
sees no reason to remove him from his position. He
reiterates that under Item 5.3, he will go down the list of
those who were interviewed and Council can make the
appointment to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember McClellan states he will vote against
the Amendment because it is unnecessary due to the fact
Mayor Lewis is appointing someone other than the
person who was removed. The process of appointing
commissioners will be changed for all future Mayors and will
be difficult to put it back to the way to the Mayor making
the initial recommendation followed by the vote of the
Council. That is the proper way to do it and the way it has
always been done in El Cajon.
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY Santos to
waive full reading of the ordinance.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan
NOES: McClellan, Lewis
MOTION CARRIES.
4. COMMISSION REPORTS
4.1 FINDINGS AND REPORT FROM PERSONNEL
COMMISSION ON DISCIPLINARY HEARING (Report: City
Attorney)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider
the findings and decision of the Personnel Commission.
Council may move to affirm, modify or revoke the Personnel
Commission's recommendation. If Council feels the necessity
to deliberate this matter, it may do so in Closed Session. A
motion may be made to adjourn to Closed Session
pursuant to Government Code § 54957 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE
DISCIPLINE/ DISMISSAL/RELEASE.
City Clerk Linn advises there are four speakers
regarding this item.
DISCUSSION
Brad Fields, 8388 Vickers Street, San
Diego, CA 92111, requests 15 minutes to address Council
regarding this issue.
Councilmember Ramos comments three minutes is
sufficient; information has been provided and a 15 minute
dissertation is not necessary.
Mr. Fields informs he wishes to highlight some of the
important points that were made in the Commission
hearing.
Mayor Lewis remarks Council has that information.
Councilmember Keegan states that since Council is
dealing with someone who has been terminated, Council should
give at least 10 minutes.
Councilmember Ramos questions if Council must then
listen to the City's highlights. Council must be fair. It is
all in writing and Council has read it.
Consensus of Council agrees to grant seven minutes for the
speaker.
Mr. Fields states there are a number of violations of
the law that occurred at the Commission Hearing and
throughout the administrative process, but Council has the
final say whether or not the employee should be terminated
from the Police Department. It is a case of common sense,
but the Commission failed to use its common sense. The case
is straightforward and most of the material facts were not
in dispute. His client met with the Supervisor, Sgt. Tim
Henton, at a radio call on June 13, 2000, when he was given
a kickback report to make changes. The changes were
discussed and Officer Stine returned the report to Sgt.
Henton on his next shift, as they agreed, and made the
changes that were requested of him. These facts were not in
dispute. He did nothing wrong. The only thing the City
brings before Council to recommend the termination is that
Officer Stine did not give the report to the Sergeant in the
manner that the Sergeant says he requested.
Mr. Fields states Officer Stine was consistent
throughout every interview and every hearing and maintained
that he did not recall that portion of Sergeant Henton's
statement that he allegedly made regarding handing the
report back to him personally rather than putting it in the
Sergeant's in-basket. It was undisputed that most reports
are handed back in the in-basket. He hopes Councilmembers
will question why this is a termination and why there is any
discipline whatsoever. The answer is that there are people
in the Department who wanted to get him.
Mr. Fields relates he was here several months ago on
a 40-hour suspension. That case started off as a
termination. Lt. Clay Setzer recommended a termination and
it was then reduced to a 40-hour suspension by then-Chief
Moreau. From testimony at the hearing, it was clear that Lt.
Setzer and others within the Department were upset that he
was returned to work. When he was brought back to work, he
was again put under Lt. Setzer's command. On his first shift
back to work, this episode takes place between Officer Stine
and his sergeant. There was evidence at the hearing, in live
format and by declaration, that there have been
disagreements between Officer Stine and Lt. Setzer and other
people in the command.
Mr. Fields reiterates that the corrections were made
appropriately, in the time frame requested. The only issue
is the manner in which Officer Stine returned the report to
the Sergeant. The easy explanation is that there probably
was some statement made by Sgt. Henton to Officer Stine
about getting the report back to him, but the circumstances
must be understood. Sgt. Henton is getting a kickback
report, it is a graveyard shift, they are out in the field,
and there are officer safety issues, making sure they are
aware of their surroundings, trying to monitor the radio.
There are a lot of things going on and it is unlikely that
anyone could remember verbatim everything that was said.
More than likely there was some mention of it and Officer
Stine did not hear what Sgt. Henton says he said. That does
not make him a liar or failing to recognize command, it just
means that in the reality of police life, those things are
going to happen occasionally.
Mr. Fields states Chief Moreau testified at the
hearing that there was an inconsistency in what Officer
Stine said from hearing to hearing, but there was none. The
actual testimony, not the excerpts which were taken out of
context, shows differences in how the questions were asked.
If a question is asked one way, the answer will be yes; if
it is asked another way, the answer will be no. There was no
deceit or lying.
If everything is examined, it will show that Officer Stine
did nothing wrong. The fact is that no one knows what
happened out there; it was Officer Stine versus Sgt. Henton
with no corroborating evidence. On that basis, it should be
not sustained as a matter of course. Even the circumstantial
evidence does not add up for the City. He reiterates these
reports are normally returned into the Sergeant's in-basket,
which Officer Stine did. What Sergeant Henton said he said
to do was out of the ordinary. Officer Stine testified that
sometimes a report is given directly back to the Sergeant,
but that is when there is a long kickback. That was not the
case here, it was a very short kickback.
Important for the level of discipline, then Captain, now
Chief Davis testified that had this happened to anyone else
in the Department, it would have been handled differently,
probably with an oral reprimand or oral counseling. Officer
Stine, on his very first shift back from a suspension, is
whapped by the people who proposed the termination. He had
no chance. It is up to Council to send a message to the
Commission and the Department that that is not appropriate.
Employees must be given a fair chance. The termination was
reversed in-house by Chief Moreau, but there were people
below him who did not give him a fair chance. There was
evidence at the hearing about how he was treated by some of
his superiors and some comments that were made to him and
about him during the disciplinary process.
Mr. Fields continues that there are a number of legal
issues that came up at the hearing as well. There were
Skelly violations and the City relied heavily on the issue
of prior discipline. No prior discipline was entered into
evidence at the hearing, so it cannot be relied on. It was
vaguely referred to because they were trying to get around
the fact that they had not provided the documents and that
would have been a Skelly violation.
Mayor Lewis informs Mr. Fields his time is up.
Additional time is granted for a final issue.
Mr. Fields states the Commission last time attempted
to raise the discipline from a 40-hour suspension to a
termination, calling Mr. Fields' client a liar. Council did
not agree with that and Officer Stine was returned to work.
Mr. Fields brought a motion to recuse three of the four
members on the Commission who made that decision last time
and they would not recuse themselves. They were tainted
against Mr. Fields' client. The fourth member who sat and
was not tainted because he was not on the Commission last
time, Commission Copeland, fell asleep during Mr. Fields'
final argument. That was witnessed by Human Resources
Director Ward. It is not reflected in the transcript, but
was witnessed by Director Ward. It shows how little respect
was given Officer Stine at the hearing and was not given a
fair hearing. At the least, Mr. Fields requests that a fair
hearing be ordered before an impartial panel, but he really
asks that that Officer Stine be returned to work with the
City of El Cajon.
Raymond Walton, 3054 Sylvia Street, Bonita, CA,
states that he is a retired police officer and has known
Jeff Stine for some time. When Officer Stine was young, he
went for ridealongs with him. Mr. Walton knew then that
Jeff, at 14 years of age, wanted nothing more than to be a
Police Officer. He recalls Jeff's pride when he went to Mr.
Walton's residence to show him his El Cajon Police Officer
badge. Officer Stine called him during his first problems
and said his termination had been reduced to a 40-hour
suspension and was ecstatic because he had not lost his job.
He could not wait to get back to work. Mr. Walton tried to
warn him that there could be some hostility towards him
because he had fought the system. Mr. Stine was not worried
about it because he trusted the Police Administration and
felt he would be okay if he did nothing wrong. Mr. Walton
was surprised that the Police Department returned Mr. Stine
to the same supervisor who recommended his termination. That
is not something that is normally done; the officer must be
given a chance and returning him to the same hostile
environment is not a way to give anyone a chance. Mr. Walton
states he is also surprised at the swiftness of the
retaliation. Jeff believes he is right. Mr. Walton knows
Jeff well enough that if he was wrong and knew he was wrong,
he would be the first one to admit it. Jeff is not calling
anyone a liar or making anyone look bad, but he is here
hoping that someone will ask the question as to what really
happened and what was going on at the time. Everyone here
has been accused of something they did not do and the
accusation hurts enough, but the punishment is even
worse.
Kevin Sullivan, 613 W. Valley Parkway, Suite 345,
Escondido, CA 92025, informs he is the Attorney/Special
Counsel for the City of El Cajon Personnel Commission. The
City Clerk has a declaration for Councilmembers from
Commissioner Copeland, refuting the allegation raised for
the first time tonight that he was sleeping during the
Commission hearing. Commissioner Copeland's declaration,
under penalty of perjury, is very detailed and explains why
he was not sleeping. Even if Commission Copeland was
sleeping, that fact would not provide any legal impediment
to the Commission's Statement of Decision for three reasons:
1) There is no allegation that Commission Copeland was
sleeping during the presentation of any evidence. The
allegation is that he was sleeping during the closing
argument. 2) Even if Commissioner Copeland's vote is
discounted, there is still a majority of the Commission (3
members) who voted unanimously to uphold the recommended
disciplinary action for Officer Stine. 3) Officer Stine and
his counsel had an obligation to bring this allegation to
the attention of the Commission when there was an ability to
do something about it. At the January 17 hearing, no
allegation was made; Mr. Fields did not stop his
presentation or ask if there was argument that he could
repeat because he thought Commission Copeland was sleeping.
Instead, he waited for the Statement of Decision and when it
was against him, the allegation is raised. There was another
hearing on January 25, where the Statement of Decision was
presented. Neither Officer Stine nor Mr. Fields were present
at that hearing and did not give any of the Commission
members, including Mr. Copeland, an opportunity to rebut
these allegations.
Don Hamer, 9041 Lamar Street, Spring Valley, CA
91977, states he is the pastor at Sonrise Community
Church. He is very pro law enforcement. He has known Jeff
all his life and Jeff has never wanted to be anything but a
policeman. There is a brotherhood in the Police force, and
sometimes someone is marked as a person they do not get
along with. Sometimes there is no possibility for fairness
when that group of people has marked someone that they will
not get along with. He questions how Councilmembers would
feel if there were closing arguments about their livelihood
and the person who was about to make a decision was asleep.
There is a lady in the room who can tell Council he was
asleep, in spite of what the declaration says. A young man's
life is being discussed, something he has wanted to do his
entire life, and being dismissed from his position because
he put a piece of paper in a basket instead of handing it to
the Sergeant. There were one or two minor corrections on it
that the Sergeant's name was on, that was going to come back
to Officer Stine anyway. It is not in keeping with the
leadership in the City and it is worth a second
look.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
adjourn to Closed Session at 5:37 p.m.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
Meeting called back to order at 6:03
p.m.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Keegan to
grant the appeal in part, modifying the discipline to
include 60 hours suspension, mandatory attendance at EAP
program as determined by the Director of Human Resources
within two weeks of reinstatement.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
Mayor Lewis states if there are
questions regarding the action, please see the City
Attorney.
5. REPORTS OF MAYOR MARK
LEWIS
5.1 LETTER: CAJON VALLEY JAMBOREE -
BANNERS
Permission is requested to place advertising banners
around the City in locations similar to the locations used
by the Mother Goose Parade Committee.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
approve as a community event.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
5.2 LETTER: UNITED DOMESTIC WORKERS OF
AMERICA - IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES (IHSS)
Council is requested to write a letter to the Board of
Supervisors urging them to vote in February to adopt the
IHSS home care ordinances.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis comments there is an
item in the San Diego Union today stating the IHSS is
seeking recognition because they get minimum wage. He has no
problem with that and requests direction from Council.
Councilmember McClellan questions if this would raise
the cost for San Diego County and taxes may have to be
raised to pay for it. Low income people do not have the
benefits they request. He will not support this item.
Mayor Lewis informs it is people who are getting
minimum wage jobs to keep people out of hospitals because
they provide a service to people who are staying at home.
They are trying to raise the scale.
Councilmember Ramos states he has concerns about
recommending to the County what they should do, just as he
has concerns if the County were telling the City what to do.
The issue is valid, but he cannot support it because he does
not want to interfere with the County's job.
Councilmember Keegan remarks he supports sending a
letter of recommendation to the County. Homecare workers are
hard-working people and work for very little money. The
quality of the care tends to improve as the salaries
do.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Keegan to
send a letter of support as requested.
AYES: Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: McClellan, Ramos
MOTION CARRIES.
5.3 APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING
COMMISSIONER
RECOMMENDATION: That an item be placed on the
February 13, 2001, 3:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Agenda to
consider an appointment to the Planning Commission for a
four year term to expire January 31, 2005, in the event that
Gary Kendrick is removed from the Commission.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis states that that he
can still nominate a Planning Commissioner and, as
Councilmember Ramos stated, anyone can be
trained.
Councilmember Ramos comments that Council has gone
forward and an ordinance change is coming up.
MOTION BY Ramos to continue the
Planning Commission appointment until after the Ordinance is
effective.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis states it is his
belief he still has the authority to appoint a
Commissioner.
Councilmember Ramos states he has a motion on the
floor.
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY Keegan to
continue the Planning Commission appointment until after the
Ordinance is effective.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis states he still has
the authority to appoint. Every person was interviewed and
there are qualified people.
Councilmember Ramos remarks those people were not
notified and when they left three weeks ago, they were under
the impression Council would continue this and change the
Ordinance. None of the applicants are present and he
suggests the applicants come back and have a short time to
express their desire for that position. He is not prepared
to vote on anyone tonight.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos agrees with Councilmember
Ramos because Council would be voting in absentia when
the applicants are not present.
Mayor Lewis states Council has heard the interviews
of the applicants and has their applications. He does not
know what would change but has no problem with notifying
them and bringing them back in two weeks.
Councilmember Ramos comments the Motion is to
continue the item until after the new Ordinance is in
effect.
Mayor Lewis remarks the Planning Commission will be
one person short for a long time. He will vote against the
Motion because the testimony has been heard and he is
prepared to offer the names of people right down the list
until there are three votes, so the Planning Commission is
at full complement. He does not see that anything could
happen between now and a month from now to change
anything.
VOTES ARE NOW CAST ON MOTION BY Ramos,
SECOND BY Keegan to continue the Planning Commission
appointment until after the ordinance is
effective.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan
NOES: McClellan, Lewis
MOTION CARRIES.
6. REPORTS OF MAYOR PRO TEM and
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mayor Pro Tem Santos:
None
Councilmember Ramos:
None
Councilmember Keegan:
None
Councilmember McClellan:
None
7. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
7.1 League of California Cities
Legislative Bulletin - Priority Focus
NO ACTION TAKEN.
8. GENERAL INFORMATION ITEMS FOR
DISCUSSION: None
9. ORDINANCES: FIRST READING (9.1 -
9.3)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council introduce
the Ordinances and request the City Clerk to recite the
title and waive full reading of the text.
9.1 Considered after item
3.4
9.2 AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC PLAN 31 -
900 N. CUYAMACA STREET
As a result of Public Hearing and action taken at the
May 23, 2000 City Council Meeting (McClellan -
disqualified), First Reading of Ordinance to approve
Amendment of Specific Plan 31 to increase the height of an
existing office building to 41.5 feet for a wireless
communications facility in the C-1 Zone at 900 N. Cuyamaca
Street.
City Clerk Linn recites the title of the ordinance
under Item 9.2.
Councilmember McClellan disqualifies himself from
participation in Item 9.2 due to a possible financial
conflict of interest in accordance with California
law.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
waive first reading of Item 9.2.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
9.3 AMENDMENT OF EL CAJON MUNICIPAL
CODE - BUILDING CODE
First Reading of Ordinance, adopting Section 15.04.235
of the El Cajon Municipal Code amending Chapter 32 of the
California Building Code, 1998 Edition allowing construction
to project over the public property adjacent to a building
site.
City Clerk Linn recites the title of the ordinance
under Item 9.3
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
waive first reading of Item 9.3.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
ORDINANCES: SECOND READING AND
ADOPTION (9.4 - 9.5)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council request the
City Clerk to recite the title, waive full reading of the
text and adopt the following Ordinances.
9.4 AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC PLAN 160 -
DELETION OF ALLEY - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND NORTH
SECOND STREET - 1289-1299 BROADWAY AND 880-898 N.
SECOND STREET
Adopting Ordinance No. 4659 to delete an alley in the
C-2 (General Commercial) Zone located on the southwest
corner of Broadway and North Second Street, addressed as
1289-1299 Broadway and 880-898 N. Second Street.
City Clerk Linn recites the title of the ordinance
under Item 9.4.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
waive second reading and adopt the Ordinance.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
9.5 AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC PLAN 462 -
PARKING STANDARDS - SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA #10
Adopting Ordinance No. 4660 modifying parking standards
for motor vehicles sales and service uses within Special
Development Area #10, which includes the corridor along El
Cajon Boulevard between West Chase Avenue and West Main
Street and the corridor along Johnson Avenue between El
Cajon Boulevard and I-8 Freeway.
City Clerk Linn recites the title of the ordinance
under Item 9.5.
Councilmember McClellan disqualifies himself from
participation in Item 9.5 due to a possible financial
conflict of interest in accordance with California
law.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
waive second reading and adopt the Ordinance.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Lewis adjourned the
Regular Joint Meeting of the
El Cajon City Council and El Cajon Redevelopment Agency held
this 13th day of February, 2001 at 6:13 p.m. to Tuesday,
February 13, 2001 at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council
Chambers, 200 East Main Street, El Cajon,
California.
_______________________________
City Clerk/Secretary
JOINT MEETING OF THE
EL CAJON CITY COUNCIL
AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MINUTES
CITY OF EL CAJON
EL CAJON, CALIFORNIA
February 13, 2001
An Adjourned Regular Joint Meeting of the
City Council and Redevelopment Agency of the City of El
Cajon, California, held Tuesday, February 13, 2001, was
called to order by Mayor/Chair Mark Lewis at 7:00 p.m., in
the Council Chambers, 200 East Main Street, El Cajon,
California. This meeting was adjourned from the Regular
Joint Meeting held at 3:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 13, 2001,
by order of the City Council and Redevelopment
Agency.
R O L L C A L L
Council/Agencymembers present:
McClellan, Ramos, Keegan
Council/Agencymembers absent: None
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair present: Santos
Mayor/Chair present: Lewis
Other Officers present: Linn, City
Clerk/Secretary; Foley, City Attorney/General Counsel
Hubert, Assistant City Manager Munzenmaier, Director of
Public Works Griffin, Director of Community
Development
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO FLAG and
MOMENT OF SILENCE
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA:
None
PUBLIC COMMENT:
City of Santee
Randy Voepel, Mayor of Santee, formally introduces
himself as the newly-elected Mayor of Santee, representing
hands across the hills. He has admired the El Cajon city
seal, because the two hands shaking represent brotherhood,
cooperation and teamwork. Santee looks forward to working
closely with the City of El Cajon. Mayor Voepel states
Council is running a wonderful City and he admires everyone
on the Council, especially the Mayor. He looks forward to
working with the Council the next four years.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
100 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) (Report: Director of Community
Development)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the
Public Hearing, accept and review testimony, close the
Public Hearing and allocate funds to projects and programs
that will be funded from the FY 2001-02 Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The staff will bring
back a funding schedule reflecting the City Council's
decisions for final adoption at the next Public Hearing on
March 27, 2001.
DISCUSSION
Director of Community Development
Griffin informs this is the first of two hearings to be
held on the next round of Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) allocations. These funds are for the year 2001-2002
and will be available the first of July, 2001. Late last
year, applicants submitted proposals as well as City
Department applications to be evaluated for compliance with
the CDBG regulations and policies contained in the
Consolidated Plan and Housing Element. Staff requests
Council take public testimony and make preliminary decisions
on how the funds are to be allocated and direct the staff to
come back to Council at the second hearing at the afternoon
meeting on March 27, 2001.
The requests for funding exceed the available dollars. The
Public Service component is limited to 15% of the grant, the
Administration component is limited to 20%, and the Public
Facilities or Capital Items is the remainder.
There were a number of requests for City projects for
Capital Items. Staff recommends that because there is a
limited amount of funding in the City's budget for Capital
items, that the CDBG money should be used as far as possible
to fund staff projects. These are summarized in Attachment
B, showing the requests, the amount, and staff
recommendation. Staff did not recommend several requests in
the Capital group because the City proposals utilize all the
funds that are available. They are projects Council has
funded before &endash;the Boys and Girls Club, Lutheran
Social Services and Labor's Community Service Agency.
Director Griffin continues that the Public Service
group (15%) received six requests. Each year, the City
Council has considered the Community Policing Program as
being the beneficiary of all the money, although last year
Council allocated some of those funds to Meals on Wheels and
the County's Motel Voucher Program.
This year there were additional requests for Public Service
funds and several of those were new programs. Council's
policy has been to not start funding new programs, because
there is no guarantee CDBG money would be available in the
future. If a program starts that is reliant on CDBG funding
and it is reduced or eliminated, programs have been created
that no longer have a funding source. Staff considered that
in its Public Service funding recommendations.
The final grouping is Administration &endash; funding
necessary to operate the program and used to pay City staff
who administer the CDBG Program. It also partially funds
Heartland Human Relations, which does the Fair Housing work
for the City. Staff recommends partially funding them from
CDBG and partially from the HOME Program, which is the next
public hearing tonight. Staff recommends $23,000 for
Heartland Human Relations from the CDBG Program. Fair
Housing is a requirement, and the City would have to do it
if Heartland Human Relations did not do it.
The requests received for Public Facilities exceeded the
amount of money available. One of the proposals is from the
City's Parks Department to complete the renovation of Cajon
Valley Park. There is a way to pre-allocate future CDBG
funds. It is not the Section 108 Program, but is a different
way of pre-allocating funds up to two years in advance.
Staff recommends Council consider pre-allocating $540,000 of
future CDBG Public Facilities money and put it into the
Cajon Valley Park project. That is not listed on Attachment
B because this would not be for 2001-02, but for 2002-03 and
2003-04. That money would come out of the City's General
Fund and be repaid to the General Fund in those two fiscal
years from future CDBG funding. That is a new ability the
City has to pre-allocate money that has not been utilized in
prior years.
Director Griffin suggests taking comments from the
public and follow Attachment B, which has each of the
projects listed. Council can then make preliminary
recommendations for the staff.
Councilmember Keegan requests Director Griffin rank
by importance and urgency the four city projects: Renovation
of Fire Station No. 9, Mobile Home Rehabilitation, Community
Center Roofing, and Renette & Wells Center Upgrades.
Director Griffin informs the staff's recommendation
would be if Council wishes to fund the Boys and Girls Club,
Labor's Community Service and Lutheran Social Service
Programs, that those funds be taken from the Mobile Home
Rehab recommendation of the staff.
Councilmember Ramos questions how many ballfields are
being considered in the Cajon Valley item.
Director Griffin informs there are two major fields
for pony and/or little league and a soccer field. Those
fields are used frequently and the turf is a problem for the
City's Parks people to maintain. This proposal would
completely replace all the turf and reconstruct the dugouts.
The dugouts at present are under water when it rains, so the
elevation around the fields must be raised. A new
maintenance building, which was approved, would also be part
of the project.
Councilmember Ramos questions when it would be done
and how it would interfere with the use of the park. Is
there anything to utilize during the time the reconstruction
is being done at the park?
Director Griffin advises the intent is to initiate
the project as soon as possible in July to minimize the
effect on the users.
Councilmember McClellan inquires about the
pre-allocation of funds.
Director Griffin explains if Council agrees to
pre-allocate, the money would be transferred from the
General Fund to the program now. In future CDBG years, those
moneys would be paid back to the General Fund in two
increments.
Councilmember McClellan remarks that if Congress
decides to do away with the CDBG money, it would take away
from Police and Fire and other services that the General
Fund money is used for.
Director Griffin agrees that is a danger.
Councilmember McClellan states he cannot accept that
gamble. CDBG funds have been available for several years,
but there is a new administration in Washington whose intent
for the future is not known. One of the platforms was
smaller government and less spending.
Director Griffin states that would be a risk Council
is taking.
Mayor Lewis announces the Public Hearing is now
open.
Peggy Goldstein, 3989 Ruffin Road, San Diego, CA
informs she represents San Diego County and requests funds
for next year for the County Hotel/Motel Voucher Program,
which El Cajon has supported for the last three years.
Approximately a half million dollars will be spent on the
program this year. They request that all cities, according
to their block grant distribution, make small contributions
to the program.
El Cajon's contribution is approximately $8,000.
The budget is approximately half a million dollars and more
will probably be spent because of the severity of the
weather. Crisis House runs the program and provides case
management. Many times people move directly from the program
to transitional housing and perhaps to independent living.
Those who refuse to comply with the County's requirements
are not enrolled in the program.
Lesa Mitchell, 1171 East Madison, El Cajon, CA 92020,
Director of Development for the Boys and Girls Clubs East
County, requests CDBG funds in the amount of $68,000 to
renovate and upgrade the restrooms, kitchen, and dance room.
To make the restrooms ADA compliant, the toilets, sinks,
plumbing, partitions, and hardware will be replaced. The
kitchen requires new cabinetry, appliances, electrical
fixtures and windows. Conversion of the rain-damaged dance
room into a computer study lab for the teens would provide a
learning center.
Councilmember Ramos questions if there is a breakdown
of the cost of each item and if there is any preference.
Ms. Mitchell informs they would like to do the
restrooms first, the kitchen second, and the dance room
third.
Ken Hanson, 1154 East Main Street, El Cajon, CA
92020, represents the Alliance for African
Assistance, which helps low income individuals and
families from all over the world. He requests the City fund
$109,376 to provide help in housing and assistance to low
income individuals and families in attaining a level of
self-sufficiency. The Alliance will operate a program which
will assist low income individuals and families in opening
their own micro-businesses.
Regina Larsen, 5940 Kelton Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91942,
represents Lutheran Social Services, the East County
program of Caring Neighbors for low income seniors and the
disabled. Through the City's funding, they provide free
minor home repairs and yardwork. Lutheran Social Services
requests $29,000.
In response to Councilmember McClellan, Ms. Larsen
confirms the funds pay for materials and all labor is
donated.
Michael Ellis, 1068 Broadway, El Cajon, CA 92021, is
the Director of Heartland Human Relations and Fair Housing
Association, which provides mediation services and actively
combats discrimination in housing, provides counseling,
conducts testing for discriminatory practices by management
of rental properties, and follows up with training to
prevent any future occurrence.
Charles Espinosa, 2615 Caminito del Rio South #200, San
Diego, CA 92108, Program Manager for the Home Security
Rehabilitation Program conducted by Labor's Community
Service Agency, states their program benefits low income
families, seniors, and handicapped homeowners. The project
proposes to provide and install security screen doors with
locksets, motion sensitive security lights, and deadbolts to
qualified homeowners residing in the City of El Cajon. The
grants fund all labor, materials and program
administration.
Councilmember McClellan states this program is
similar to Lutheran Social Services and questions if there
is a charge for labor or if the City is paying mostly for
materials.
Mr. Espinosa states it is pretty much materials. They
work with mostly younger families in the City of El
Cajon.
Councilmember McClellan questions how much is "pretty
much"?
Mr. Espinosa states they submit materials.
In response to Councilmember McClellan, Mr. Espinosa
states there is no labor charge at all.
Karen Amoroso, 2254 San Diego Avenue, San Diego, CA,
represents Meals-on-Wheels. They serve 60-90 El Cajon
residents a day and many of these people would otherwise be
institutionalized. They have approximately six routes
running in El Cajon. They are a volunteer-driven agency and
a fee is charged for service, but no one is turned away
because of an inability to pay. There is a sliding fee scale
and clients are charged a maximum of $5.00 a day for two
meals. Their budget is supplemented through the CDBG funds
and through fundraising.
Sylvia Evans-McKinney, 32 Jicama Way, Chula Vista, CA
91911, Executive Director of Suits You San Diego
and Dress for Success, requests a grant in the
amount of $16,800. Suits You San Diego is a non-profit
organization that provides interview attire to low income
San Diegans who are actively seeking employment.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
close the Public Hearing.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis suggests considering
funding by section &endash; Public Service, Capital Items,
and Administrative.
Councilmember Ramos comments everyone who comes
before Council has a worthwhile cause and deserves the
funding, but there are more requests than the City has
money. It is not policy, but in the past the city has funded
only those agencies that were funded previously. Regarding
Public Services, there is no reason to change the staff
recommendations.
Mayor Lewis suggests taking tentative
votes.
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY McClellan
to tentatively support funding Community Policing in the
amount of $209,550.00, Winter Shelter Voucher Program in the
amount of $8,068.00, Meals on Wheels in the amount of
$6,500.00, and the Shared Housing Program (from ECRA) in the
amount of $23,000.00.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis states Capital Items
will be next.
Councilmember Ramos states he will continue with the
same philosophy the City has had in the past. He supports
funding the Boys and Girls Club for the full amount
requested, and Lutheran Social Services for $29,000. Labor's
Community Services has been funded in the past, but this
time they are asking for twice the amount of last year. He
supports funding the same amount as last year ($5,000) and
the rest, he goes along with staff recommendations. With
these that he has asked to be funded that have not been
recommended by staff, he does not know where the money will
come from. Director Griffin noted previously it could be
taken out of the Mobile Home Rehabilitation.
Director Griffin confirms that is correct. It is Line
11 on the spreadsheet.
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY McClellan
to tentatively support funding for the Boys and Girls Club
in the amount of $68,000, Lutheran Social Services for
$29,000 and Labor's Community Service Agency for
$5,000.
DISCUSSION
Councilmember Keegan comments
there was some confusion as to whether Labor's Community
Services actually pays for labor out of CDBG funding.
Director Griffin informs staff's understanding is
that the funding is entirely for the labor and the materials
were donated from another source. Tonight was the first time
he has heard the program was different.
Councilmember Keegan recalls that labor was paid for
in their previous proposals. Apparently it is again now. He
supports funding the Boys and Girls Club and Lutheran Social
Services, but until it is clear where the money is going to
for Labor's Community Services, he cannot support
it.
MOTION MAKER and SECOND agree to
withdraw their motion.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY Keegan, SECOND BY
Ramos to tentatively approve the staff recommendation for
Capital funds, with funding to the Boys and Girls Club in
the amount of $68,000, Lutheran Social Services for $29,000
and Labor's Community Services Agency for $5,000 (upon
verification regarding whether funds are used for labor
costs or not) from Mobile Home Rehab
Allocation.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION
Director Griffin remarks that
pre-allocation of funds for Cajon Valley Park was proposed.
It would be $540,000 from future CDBG grants.
Mayor Lewis inquires if Council can pre-allocate
something that may be under consideration by another
Council.
Director Griffin responds it was staff's
understanding previously that it could not be done on the
CDBG funds. They have learned, however, that the dollars can
be pre-allocated.
Councilmember Keegan comments it is a project that
must be done, whether it is allocated tonight with repayment
from CDBG or whether CDBG disappears and the City has to use
General Funds. It still has to be done and he does not have
a problem with pre-allocating funds.
Councilmember Ramos remarks he does not have a
problem because it needs to be done. He questions how many
years will this amount be spread out.
Director Griffin states it will be spread over two
years.
Councilmember Ramos questions if Council can just
allocate from the first year and after that money is
received, then allocate the second year. Or does the whole
thing have to be done now?
Director Griffin informs if Council pre-allocates
now, all that money would be available right now and the
project could go forward.
In response to Councilmember Ramos, Director Griffin
states completion of the project is projected to be the
end of the year if it is started in July. But the money that
comes back will not be received until July, 2002 and then in
July, 2003.
Councilmember Ramos states a two-year allocation
should be safe. His opinion is that CDBG funds will not go
away in two years.
Mayor Lewis comments that he does not want to get
caught by pre-allocating and taking money out of General
Funds; if something happens, the City would have to make a
choice between using General Funds for Police Department and
Fire Department or turf at the park.
Councilmember Ramos remarks that is a consideration,
but the odds are in the City's favor that it will not go
away
MOTION BY Ramos, SECOND BY Keegan to
tentatively approve preallocation of $540,000 for Cajon
Valley Park Ballfields.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
Mayor Lewis states Administrative
allocations will be next. He agrees with the staff
recommendations.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
tentatively approve funding CDBG Administration in the
amount of $279,400.00 and Heartland Human Relations in the
amount of $23,000.00.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION
Director Griffin informs staff
will bring this item back on March 27, 2001, after it has
been advertised for public review. If desired, Council can
then make a final adjustment.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
confirm previously taken tentative votes.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
101 HOME GRANT PROGRAMS -
REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING SET-ASIDE FUNDS (Report: Director of
Community Development)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council and
Redevelopment Agency Open the Public Hearing, Accept and
review testimony, Close the Public Hearing and allocate
funds to projects and programs that will be funded from the
Redevelopment Agency Housing Low and Moderate Income Housing
Set-Aside Funds and HOME funds as indicated in Attachment
"A" of the report, and authorize the City Manager or
designee to execute affiliated documents.
DISCUSSION
Director of Community Development
Griffin informs that this item includes home funds that
the City will be receiving from HUD as well as some
Redevelopment Agency set-aside low and moderate income
dollars. Three proposals responded to the City's Request for
Proposals. Staff is also proposing the addition of funds to
ongoing projects and has evaluated them in a reasonable
manner. Staff recommends funding the second half of
Heartland Human Relations in the amount of $14,400 along
with the staff administration portion which is limited to
10% of the amount of the grant totaling $771,000 of the home
funds.
The three proposals submitted are as
follows:
1. Decker Court Project, submitted by
David Weiland. This proposal is to construct 12 new
single family residences, four of which will be subsidized
with Home funds that would go into their mortgages as silent
seconds. There would be $415,000 in Redevelopment Agency
Set-Aside aside funds and $200,000 of Home funds.
Mr. Weiland has requested $100,000; however, in
reviewing his request, staff determined that it would not
allow enough of the support to accommodate low income
residences moving into the area. The amount would limit
qualifications to a family of five instead of four. The
total amount would be $615,000
2. Condominium Project, submitted by
E3CPO (a joint venture of Jon Wayne Construction, Wright
Consulting, Castle Breckinridge Management, Anderson &
Kriger and ECP Commercial Real Estate). This proposal is a
request to take the Home Funds and Redevelopment Agency
Funds to convert apartments to condominiums. The request is
for $1.2 million dollars of the combine dollars. The
applicants do not have a project in hand but have submitted
a model of their proposal which was reviewed by staff. The
proposal did not include relocation assistance or lead based
paint mitigation.
Staff is of the opinion that the applicants' recommendation
is a reasonable funding source to rehabilitate some
apartments and convert them to condominiums, however,
disagrees with some of the aspects of the proposal one of
which is that the City would own the property at any point,
and that the project would revert to apartments at the end
of the process. Staff recommends that if the project is
funded, that clarification be made that the apartments would
become ownership units at the end of the process.
3. Center City Apartments and Park
Village - Southern California Housing Development
Corporation. The applicants are requesting all of the
money to acquire and rehabilitate a 68-unit apartment
complex near the corner of Ballantyne and East Park. This
property was before the City Council last year in a larger
size including two other properties for a total of 81 units.
The total price of this project is a little over $6 million
and the City's contribution would be about $2.4 million. In
reviewing this proposal staff felt that the cost per unit of
the project was much higher than the previous proposals
approximating $100,000 per unit, and that the money would be
tied up for a minimum of 30 years. Council in the past has
directed staff to turn the money over sooner so that it
would be available for other projects.
This is the only project that proposes
development within the downtown focus area as requested in
the Request for Proposal. If approved, proposals submitted
by David Weiland and E3CPO would not be funded due to the
applicants' request for total use of the funds.
Staff is recommending additional proposals should the
Council concur with staff on the Weiland and E3CPO projects
that would fund the multiple family rehabilitation programs
for smaller apartment projects with $200,000, and the City's
first time home buyer program for $350,000. Both of these
programs, especially the first time home buyer program, has
become very popular assisting people with the purchase of
their first home. Staff recommends funding these programs
along with the Weiland and E3CPO proposals with this year's
home grant and Redevelopment Agency Set Aside funds.
The East County Council Aging would also be receiving
$23,000 in Redevelopment Agency funds out of this proposal,
Heartland Human Relations $14,400, and the administration of
the project of the HOME programs $63,450.
Councilmember Ramos requests clarification on the
amount for Home Administration, $62,700 or $63,450?
Director Griffin clarified that the amount is
$62,700. There was a minor change in the dollar amounts that
was not consistent between the CDBG and the HOME funds on
Heartland Human Relations.
Councilmember Ramos requests Director Griffin
explain the entitlement, asks if this is the first time
home buyer program for Weiland and E3CPO, how does the City
get its money back, and over what period of time.
Director Griffin responds that the Redevelopment
Agency money, $415,000 in the Weiland proposal, would come
back upon project completion which Mr. Weiland is
projecting to be about 15 months. The $200,000 in HOME funds
will remain in the project as long as those owners own their
units. If the unit is sold funds would come back to the
City. The $1.2 million from E3CPO would come back once the
project conversion has been completed.
Councilmember McClellan inquires if money came back
from other projects approved in the past.
Director Griffin responds that the bulk of funds
approved by the Council have gone out and come back to be
utilized through the Redevelopment Agency Set Aside funds.
HOME funds have been locked up a little bit longer because
they have been placed in silent second deeds, therefore,
they have not been returned as quickly as Redevelopment
Agency funds.
Mayor Lewis announces that the Public Hearing is now
open.
Tom Wright states that he is representing a joint
venture of five companies. The group is comprised of
a developer specializing in residential and industrial
development of condominiums, a contractor specializing in
the rehabilitation of multi-family projects, an attorney
specializing in condominium association litigation, a
property manager specializing in condominium association
management, and a real estate broker specializing in real
estate sales.
Their plan is to identify a candidate project and bring it
to the City for Redevelopment Agency approval and then
purchase the property with a combination of HOME funds and
the Redevelopment Agency funds. The project's interior and
exterior would be completely renovated resulting in a
complete gutting of the units, re-roofing and landscaping.
Blighted poorly maintained projects would be upgraded and
converted to condominiums for sale to first time buyers.
Their financial model is for a 30-unit project, of which
there are many in town and many that could be candidates
right now. E3CPOs proposal for the $1.2 million dollars
would be the seed money necessary to acquire the property.
The balance of the financing which they believe would be an
equal amount of another $1.2 million, would be obtained
through conventional sources.
The desired result is, upon conversion, to sell the units to
individual families. The pride of ownership and professional
management by the condominium association would result in a
permanent upgrade for the community. Upon sale of each of
the units, the City would recover its funds.
Councilmember Ramos comments that he has been a
proponent of converting apartments to condominiums, but if
there is any provision that they might eventually return to
apartments, he will not support it. The City of El Cajon has
more apartments than any other city in the County.
In reply to Councilmember Ramos' comments, Mr.
Wright states that the reason for mentioning that in the
proposal was strictly as a safeguard. The sale price of
these units will be in an area of $100,000 to $125,000. At
this point they don't foresee any real concern that these
would not be sold. However, should the market not accept it
for any reason, E3CPO will end up with a viable
professionally managed apartment project.
Councilmember Ramos expresses concern that the City
is out on the hook with about $1.2 million dollars and there
has to be some risk on the part of E3CPO. If they continue
to request a clause regarding conversion to apartments he
will not support the proposal.
Councilmember McClellan commends Mr. Wright on
his approach to convert apartments to condominiums and
states that he also has been a proponent for conversion for
the last 8 years. Conversion will bring family/single
ownership into the City rather than multiple family
ownership and a little more pride back to the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos notes that the staff report
addresses the proposal as a model and inquires if it means
that there is no site control.
Mr. Wright explains that because of the timing and
not knowing the type of commitment they might be able to get
from the City, the proposal will be a model. They have
identified other candidate projects and with the City's
approval will seek to present them to each city.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos inquires if the models include a
permanent federal state relocation as there is a cost
involved with relocation.
Mr. Wright states his understanding of the relocation
requirement is that tenants need to be paid one month's rent
for assistance in relocating. While that is in the specific
line item cost breakdown, 8% is set aside for
contingencies.
Councilmember Ramos inquires how long will the City
have to keep this money allocated if the applicant does not
come forward.
Director Griffin responds that the HOME Program must
be allocated and committed within two years. Typically, when
the Council approves an application and the applicants have
not exercised their project, the project comes back the next
year and is considered for reallocation along with any new
money received that year. He would see this as a maximum of
one year.
Don Seymour comes forward and requests permission to
show photographs describing their proposal.
He notes that Southern California Housing specializes in
removing community blight and revitalization of specific
areas including downtown areas and neighborhoods. More than
3,500 units of the type proposed with 17 partner cities
throughout southern California have been developed. Their
latest project is with the City of Santee.
The applicants possess strong property management skills and
work closely with the Police Department evicting criminal
elements in order to permit law abiding citizens to come in
to these apartments. Citizens are required to sign drug free
and crime free lease agreements.
The company has received the national association of home
builder awards and numerous awards all over southern
California for the quality of their rehab and property
management.
They are also involved with after school tutoring, boys and
girls club, G.E.D. classes, senior activities and a variety
of other programs.
Photographs describing rehab areas in San Marcos; West
Covina; Summerwood, Palmdale, Yorba Linda, Corona, National
City, are now shown.
All requirements have been met to accommodate the disabled,
seniors, and downtown strong revitalization. The proposal
will enhance the appearance of the downtown area and fulfill
the City's goal of revitalization and investments. The
project is across the street from Cajon Valley Middle
School, and in walking distance to City Hall, Albertsons,
Sav-On and the Performing Arts Center.
On a per unit/per bedroom basis, the project is comparable.
They are 28,000 per unit compared to 29,000 and 30,000 per
unit. The project will bring $3.6 million to the City and
consist of extensive remodeling.
Councilmember Keegan comments that since this project
is the biggest investment of the requests for City
participation, is there any way to bring it in with slightly
less City participation.
Mr. Seymour responds that it could be done. In the
past, with six other cities, a certain amount was allocated
for other projects. The company went to California Housing
Finance Agency in Sacramento and asked for assistance with
the amount the City could not fund. The Agency loaned the
money with a 3% simple interest loan payable in 10
years.
Councilmember Keegan asks if that amount is feasible
for this project and Mr. Seymour responds that it is. The
company was successful in bridging that gap in the following
cities: Santee $300, 000, San Marcos $850,000 twice and $1.6
million, Corona $600,000 and Escondido $850,000.
Mayor Lewis, noting that the applicant has two
projects in the City, inquires if it is possible to fund one
project now and allocate for the other next year.
Director Griffin responds that the HOME program does
not have the same pre-allocation options discussed with
CDBG. The City would have to ask Mr. Seymour to divide the
project in half by completing one this year assuming the
money was available, complete the other next year or make an
application for consideration next year.
Mayor Lewis comments he wants to make certain
applicants know all that is available to them.
Councilmember McClellan comments that the project
looks good, however, he is concerned about putting money out
for 30 years. He would like the money go out and come back
in a year or two and keep turning over. There are more than
two apartments in trouble in El Cajon and if we can turn 60
or 120 of them over in the next 30 years, he would prefer
that instead of tying up the money for 30 years. For that
reason, he would not be able to support Mr. Seymour's
proposal. If in the future the money is placed in a pool
that gets turned over enough times with apartment
conversions to condominiums and the fund is built up, he may
be able to consider Mr. Seymour's projects. He does
not feel it would benefit the City as much as turning them
into condominiums and getting the money back right away.
Mr. Seymour responds that part of the 30 years,
typical of any high quality apartment rehabilitation, is
because the apartment will remain in perpetuity, not sold in
five or ten years, and will revert to what it was as if you
do a first time home buyer. This project will be in a
partnership with regulatory agreements and will not be sold.
The City has the ability to take it away from them if the
management goes downhill. This is a high quality investment
in the City's downtown. The City will be paid back in the
third year. It is a costly project because they don't do
paint and patch.
Councilmember Ramos states he also has some problems
with the project. As mentioned earlier, most of the City's
residents already live in apartments and the percentage is
still the same as it was last year. 51% of the citizens live
in apartments. Philosophically, his goal is to get rid of as
many apartments and convert them to condominiums. This
proposal does nothing to help in that area. He is concerned
about giving this kind of money to convert apartments and
personally believes that the apartment owner should be
brought to task by bringing the apartment up to health and
safety codes. As a Council he feels that inspectors should
be hired to go out and make certain that that these run down
apartments are brought up to Code. If the apartment owner
cannot comply, the property should be sold at a price where
it can be converted to a condominium.
Mr. Seymour suggests the City do like other cities
have done and site out a specific target area. Downtown is
the perfect example. The City has it rolling, made it the
best it can be, and in the future mushroom it out for
development
Councilmember Keegan states that there is a lot of
merit to Mr. Ramos' comments. The Council wants to encourage
single family homeownership, but at the same time, keep in
mind that there are apartments in the City of El Cajon, and
when the opportunity arises, especially in the downtown
area, consider not only aesthetics but the living conditions
of people in El Cajon. There are many blighted properties in
the City which are going to remain that way and get worse if
Council does not take opportunities to improve them.
Councilmember Ramos states he concurs with
Councilmember Keegan, however, suggests the City get
the percentage of apartments down to a workable level and
then concentrate on those apartments where a difference can
be made. Until the percentage is down to somewhere
reasonably comparable to other cities within the County,
conversions should be done more than apartment rehabs.
David Weiland, Weiland Development, 304 Front Street, El
Cajon, CA explains he is proposing 12 single family
homes in a PUD type situation. He has separated the
redevelopment funds toward those projects that would be
repaid to the City in an interest bearing situation as the
home is sold. HOME funds remaining in the project would
target the low income home buyer utilizing those funds as a
shared equity silent second type situation.
The selected site is zoned for apartments and will be
utilized for single family homes. The project has a HOA so
the assurance is there that under the CC&R's and the
management, the property would always look good. Development
will provide some home ownership within the City and pull
some people out of apartments.
Councilmember McClellan states from looking at the
plot map it appears the project will go over the street, and
trailer park behind. He inquires if the street is used.
Mr. Weiland responds that it is a paper street so
they would be working with the Engineering Department. The
street runs through the trailer park and their property.
Councilmember McClellan inquires if people would
still be able to drive through the street.
Mr. Weiland responds the street is currently
barricaded of.
Director Griffin acknowledges the street has a dead
end on both sides. The plan would be that the street would
go through unless Mr. Weiland's project is approved,
in which case the street would still dead end the way it
does today.
Councilmember Ramos inquires the percentage of homes
that will be designated as low income.
Mr. Weiland responds that the entire project, 12
units, will be for low to median income. 4 of the 12 units
are specifically designated for low income. To help
alleviate any problems with sales, those four units will not
be identified.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos inquires if Mr. Weiland
has ever applied for HOME grant funding in any other
city.
Mr. Weiland states that he has never applied for HOME
funds. He asks if Mayor Pro Tem Santos is familiar
with the Benton Place project on Washington and the Lillian
Lane project behind Mollison Portland, done through the
Redevelopment Agency.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos said he just thought Mr.
Weiland had applied in another city.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
close the Public Hearing.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY McClellan
to tentatively approve funding Staff Administration in the
amount of $62,700 and Heartland Human Relations in the
amount of $14,400.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION.
Councilmember Ramos states that he
is satisfied with the staff recommendations. While the
Center City Apartment project warrants some merit, the
amount of money needed is beyond the City's means. It does
not do anything to lower the number of apartment units in
the City. Eventually this program would have some merit and
the City would have to fund it, but now is not the right
time.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos comments that Mr. Seymour's
organization has a great track record, great deal of
experience, he has checked out some of their development and
is very impressed by them. This is the only proposal that
addresses the City's preference for the Request for Proposal
in the downtown area, and it will, in his opinion, improve
the demographics. He realizes that it is long term and that
there are some risks involved, but feels that Mr. Seymour
has addressed some of those concerns to his
satisfaction.
Councilmember Keegan comments that he would prefer to
see the project in hand before allocating the money. Two of
the applicants have projects in hand and one does not.
Because of reasons stated earlier, he feels that apartment
renovation is extremely important. He can support the Decker
Court project which will move the City toward homeownership.
He inquires of the Director of Community Development
if the amount is $2,479,700.
Director Griffin acknowledges that the amount is
$2,479,700.
Councilmember Keegan states he definitely sees the
Center City and Park Village Apartments as something he
would support.
Councilmember McClellan comments that he has tried to
get apartments converted for the past eight years and if the
Council does not act on this, they may not be converted. A
lot of time and effort has been put into this and he knows
that the Council will go forward.
A project like Mr. Seymour's with Southern California
Housing could be considered next year, however, it is
important to bring some family ownership to the City rather
than just fixing up apartments to continue to have
apartments.
MOTION BY Keegan, SECOND BY Santos to
tentatively approve allocating $1,864,700 to Center City
Apartments and Park Village (So. Calif. Housing Development
Corp.) and $615,000 to the Decker Court Project (Weiland
Development Co.).
AYES: Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: McClellan, Ramos
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Keegan, to
approve tentatively taken votes.
AYES: Lewis, Ramos, Santos,
Keegan
NOES: McClellan
MOTION CARRIES.
102 APPEAL &endash; PLANNING
COMMISSION DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1847 - Auto
Repair in the C-2 Zone at 703 East Main Street (Report: City
Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
- Open the Public Hearing, Consider
Testimony, Close the Public Hearing and
- Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 19-01 to grant
or deny the appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No.
9461, which denied Conditional Use Permit 1847 for auto
repair in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone at 703 East
Main Street.
DISCUSSION
Mayor Lewis requests clarification
if the business is going to be an auto shop, tire repair or
tire sales only. Petitions submitted mention that there are
fumes, noise, dust, explosives, poison, pollution, gasoline,
oil paint, solvents, and explosive chemicals generated from
the business.
Director of Community Development Griffin explains
that the application reviewed by the Planning Commission was
for an auto repair facility. Testimony provided by the
applicant indicated that it was not an auto repair facility
and that their intention was to operate a six bay tire
installation facility. There is concern about how many of
the service bays will be used for purposes other than tire
installation. If it is not used for tire installation, the
neighborhood would be greatly impacted.
Mayor Lewis inquires when did the change occur from
auto repair to tire sales and installation only, and did the
applicant go through the entire process.
Director Griffin responds that the applicant
mentioned at the Planning Commission meeting that his plan
was not for auto repair ( i.e., general auto repair, brake
jobs, lubrications, tune-ups, etc.) but tire installation. A
question was raised regarding other work being performed and
the applicant responded that they may consider air
conditioning service. It appeared they wanted to do tire
installation or whatever necessary to put the bays into
service to make the business profitable.
Director Griffin acknowledges Mayor Lewis'
comment that the applicant is appealing denial as an
auto repair. The Planning Commission was not willing to
grant the applicant's request for a tire installation
facility .
Mayor Lewis inquires if the applicant's word is taken
for auto tire installation only, could the Council make that
assumption tonight or would he have to go through the whole
process.
Director Griffin responds the Council has the option
to stipulate what they want to approve limiting the
applicant to tire installation only.
Councilmember Ramos comments the request appears to
go beyond a repair or tire facility. He notes that the
Council has requested that auto related developments occur
in Development Area #10, and asks the Director of
Community Development if that is still the policy.
Director Griffin responds that the General Plan
encourages auto sales and service uses in the area along El
Cajon Boulevard and Johnson Avenue going north toward the
freeway.
Mayor Lewis notes that next door to the proposed
business is a car lot and across the street is a place that
sells tires and parts.
Councilmember Ramos acknowledges that is true,
however, the Mayor and Council should
understand that those businesses have been grandfathered
in.
Mayor Lewis announces that the Public Hearing is now
open.
Terry Moore, 2635 Camino del Rio South #200, San Diego, CA
92108 states that he is one of the apartment owners. He
and three other families have put $300,000 into
rehabilitating a complex that the Council would consider a
wreck. They gambled on what was going on downtown and wanted
to make El Cajon a better neighborhood. Downtown
redevelopment and all the improvement on Main and Magnolia
demonstrates that the City of El Cajon is business friendly.
The Planning Commission and staff was correct in their
determination that the applicant's proposal was not a
compatible use. Pneumatic drills are not compatible with
toddlers trying to take naps in the afternoon.
His dad took care of his family through the automotive
business and his grandfather did the same for his dad. He
went through college on the automotive business and respects
and appreciates that business, however, the use is not
compatible. Residents from various complexes have signed
petitions that the use was not compatible.
Mr. Moore points to the City map and notes that there
are 9 miles of commercial use where the business could be
relocated to be profitable to Mr. Charry and
convenient to his customers. He feels than an ordinary
business should not be placed in a prime location.
Claire Carpenter, Executive Director, Downtown Management
District, states that she represents the property owners
in the Downtown Management District area which ends at
Avocado and Ballantyne. A sentiment that they share when
looking at the downtown vision is that they are not
convinced that just because the management district's
boundary ends at Avocado and Ballantyne that that is
necessarily where the downtown core ends. They are currently
focusing on Avocado, Ballantyne and west , and their effort
is to try and improve the entire downtown area. In the
future, they hope to be focusing even further to help other
retail businesses. What happens within the two blocks next
to their existing district is very important.
Because of the close proximity of this parcel to the arts
and entertainment focus being placed in the downtown area,
the district urges the Council to support the Planning
Commission's denial of the conditional use permit.
The use is incompatible with the vision for the downtown
area and if auto uses are allowed to continually come in,
they will never be able to see a center that expands in a
positive way. Auto uses should go where appropriate.
Steve Tucker, 906 E. Main Street, El Cajon, CA,
states that his family owns the Cash & Carry
furniture store and the Valley Furniture Store near Main and
Mollison. He is a third generation El Cajon businessman, his
daughter Tracy (present) is a fifth generation San Diegan.
They would like to have a better El Cajon and look for
businesses that will enhance the area. He does not feel that
a tire installation facility or an auto repair facility
enhances the commercial area.
He supports comments made by the previous speakers and feels
that the Planning Commission made a reasonable decision. The
only reason the Council might entertain overturning that
decision is if they feel a tire facility would enhance the
community versus detracting the community.
Salem Charry, 1956 Hillsdale, El Cajon, CA states he
is in attendance to clarify the misunderstanding of his
first presentation at the Planning Commission on November
27, 2000. On several occasions he mentioned that his intent
was for a tire shop, not auto mechanic. Plans include a very
elegant tire shop just like a gift shop, flower shop or
anything else. The tire shop will not be performing oil
changes, engine repairs, brake jobs, muffler jobs or
anything pertaining to auto repair.
There are no environmental concerns regarding the tire shop.
On the west side there is an industrial building, gift shop,
Magnolia Florist, Mexican food restaurant food, and a
variety of other businesses. To the east there is a re-sale
used car business which is exactly related to his.
The tire shop will not generate any contamination or
garbage. Laws of the State of California require mandatory
recycling programs. The company responsible would come twice
a month to collect the tires and take them for recycling.
There will be no contamination or noise. He is proposing a
very elegant tire shop with wheels and no repairs that will
benefit the community and generate income for the City of El
Cajon.
He has collected approximately 400 signatures on a petition
supporting his proposal for a tire shop and looks forward to
the support of the City Council. If not used, the vacant lot
will generate garbage in the neighborhood.
He notes that he was approached by Mr. Terry on two
occasions to purchase the property and he refused.
Mayor Lewis inquires how long has the property been
vacant.
Director Griffin responds that it has been at least
10 years or longer. There used to be a very old dilapidated
motel on the property.
Mayor Lewis notes based on
comments made he is still uncomfortable about the business
being for auto repair. He would much rather have the
applicant go back and get the truth about the proposal
because it is unclear what he is proposing to do. When you
have six tire bays, there is a possibility that the
applicant would come back to expand use of the facility. He
is also concerned about auto sales and inquires if it can be
expanded by right into that property.
Director Griffin responds that the property could not
be expanded into that property, the applicant would have to
come back.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
close the Public Hearing.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
DISCUSSION.
Mayor Lewis asks who owns the
property.
Director Griffin responds that the property is owned
by Mr. Charry and his partner.
Councilmember Ramos comments that the application is
quite specific that the applicant desires to construct a
4,880 sq. ft. auto repair facility. The real issue is that
the Council determined that they wanted to have a special
development area and should not violate it. If it is going
to be violated then we should change it.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos states he supports Mr. Moore
and Ms. Carpenter's comments on the use of the
property. Land use is always determined on the criteria of
three things: consistency, compatibility and inordinate
standards. He feels that this project does not meet the
criteria for consistency and compatibility so he cannot
support the appeal.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 19-01 to deny the
appeal.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
103 APPEAL &endash; AMENDMENT OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1544 - CALVARY CHAPEL - 698 W. Main
Street (Report: City Clerk) (Continued from
January 9, 2001 Meeting)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
1. Open the Public Hearing, Consider
Testimony, Close the Public Hearing and
(2) Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-01 to grant
or deny the appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No.
9454 granting Amendment of Conditional Use Permit 1544 for
the addition of an after-school youth center and an adult
development center in conjunction with an existing religious
facility (church) in the C-M Zone at 698 W. Main
Street.
DISCUSSION
Director of Public Works
Munzenmaier states a letter was prepared and delivered
to the property owner's attorney, explaining why the City
needed to have the dedication and what the property owner
would gain by providing the dedication. The property owner's
attorney responded that the property owner is willing to
dedicate. Based upon that proposal, it is Director
Munzenmaier's recommendation to retain only the
dedication requirement for the return and delete the
requirement for the 2' dedication along West Main Street. In
addition, delete the reconstruction of curb return and
driveways on West Main Street with the reconstructed wings.
That was the agreement proposed in exchange for the
right-of-way dedication.
Mayor Lewis announces the Public Hearing is
reopened.
Kerry Schimpf, 1052 Singing Ridge Road, El Cajon, CA
92019, states he does not recall who made the suggestion
to go back to the property owner, but it was a good one. He
thanks the author of the persuasive letter from staff that
convinced the property owner to dedicate his land. The
church appreciates the solution and agrees. He clarifies
that the church will not be responsible to participate in
reconstructing the radius and expanding the driveway wings,
which will allow them to put all their funds towards
improving the interior of the property. He thanks
Council.
Councilmember Ramos states it was a good job. Council
was unanimous in requesting Mr. Schimpf to go back to the
property owner, and miracles do happen.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
close the Public Hearing.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
adopt Resolution No. 20-01 to grant the appeal to not
require 2 feet dedication on Main Street, reconstruction of
the curb return and reconstruction of the wings on the
driveways, requiring the dedication of the
return.
MOTION CARRIES BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE.
104 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1846 -
Sports Assembly (Motocross Motorcycle Track) at Gillespie
Field - West Side of Wing Avenue between Airport Drive and
West Bradley Avenue (Report: City Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the Public
Hearing, consider any testimony, Close the Public Hearing
and
- Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 21-01 to approve
the Mitigated Negative Declaration indicating the
proposed project may have a significant effect on the
environment.
- Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-01 to
approve, modify or disapprove Planning Commission
Resolution No. 9466 granting Conditional Use Permit
1846.
Councilmember McClellan
disqualifies himself from participation in Items 104,
105, 106, and 107 due to a possible financial conflict of
interest in accordance with California law, and leaves
Council Chambers at 8:57 p.m.
City Clerk Linn states there are
25 speaker cards for this item.
Councilmember Ramos suggests one
spokesperson be selected. Staff's recommendation and the
Planning Commission recommendation is for approval, so
Council does not need to hear from everyone.
RECESS CALLED AT 8:58
P.M.
MEETING CALLED BACK TO ORDER AT 9:01 P.M.
Mayor Lewis reiterates that
Council would be appreciative if all the groups can get
together and appoint a spokesperson. Because of the number
of people present, speaking time will be limited to two
minutes, unless the speaker represents a number of people,
when more time would be allowed.
Mayor Lewis announces the Public Hearing is now
open.
DISCUSSION
James Chagala, 10324 Meadow Glen Way
East, Escondido, CA 92026, states he represents the
applicant.
Mayor Lewis questions how many people in the audience
agree Mr. Chagala speaks on their behalf. Upon a show
of hands, Mayor Lewis informs Mr. Chagala will be allowed
more than the usual three minutes to speak.
Mr. Chagala states he is a planning consultant,
representing Devin DeForest and DFS Enterprises, the
applicants. He thanks Planning staff for their cooperation
and professionalism throughout the process. Their goal is to
provide a safe place in an urban environment where children
and adults can practice their sport of motocross without
trespassing on other people's property, without creating a
danger to themselves, and without endangering the
environment. The people here tonight that he speaks for
provide evidence that there is a need for this type of
facility.
The proposed project is at a good location. It is an
industrial zone near Gillespie Field, an airport which in
1999 had 210,000 traffic control events. The Cajon Raceway
is to the west of the property, and to the south is a vacant
field and truck storage area. There is heavy industrial
zoning to the east, which is in the County of San Diego, and
none of that property is vacant. A noise study determined
that any significant noise impacts will be mitigated by the
improvements and changes the applicant has agreed to make.
When the Negative Declaration was sent out, there were no
responses. They have received approval from the Gillespie
Field Development Council and the FAA, and the Planning
Commission voted unanimously to approve the project. The
Conditions of Approval have been reviewed, and Mr. DeForest
is satisfied with those conditions as they were adopted by
the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission was concerned that there was a
limitation on the length of time this use could occur. That
is due to the way the General Plan was stated, that it would
have to be a temporary use, and because the County, who owns
the property, has indicated that they will not renew the
lease to the person who is subleasing the property to Mr.
DeForest. Mr. DeForest is aware there is approximately 4-1/2
years that this operation can go on and is convinced it is a
practical option.
Mayor Lewis questions if anyone filled out a speaker
card who is opposed to this item.
Jerry Carmody, 8336 O'Connell Road, El Cajon, CA 92021,
states his home is located in the hills to the east of
the airport at the El Cajon-Santee border, an unincorporated
area. Notification on this project was made to those within
300', but the area where he lives acts as a funnel for the
noise of the valley. The racetrack noise is an issue, as
well as the airport. His objection is to the noise that will
be generated on the weekends by a motocross track for the
next 4-1/2 years. He will be subjected to the noise, which
according to the Commission report is 70 decibels. He does
not know what enforcement effort will be there to hold down
the noise level, but noise has always been an issue at Cajon
Park Speedway also. He has no bias towards motorcycle people
and it is good to provide recreation, but the noise that
will interfere with the quiet use of his property is
objectionable. On that basis, he opposes the motocross
track. He became aware of the proposal through business
clients who object to the dust, noise, stormwater runoff and
pollution.
Bryan Quinn, 11873 Glen Hope Road, San Diego, CA 92128,
states he is the Head Coach and Director of Soccer
Operations for the San Diego Sockers. He is a soccer
emissary and Mr. Chagala did not mention that a business has
been located there for the last 14 years, owned by Mr. Tom
Higginson, who he supports. The new track will impact Mr.
Higginson's business severely and he will probably be out of
business within six months. As a soccer player, coach and
general manager for the San Diego Sockers, they have had a
long tradition and history at El Cajon Indoor Soccer Park.
Mr. Higginson is a good and honest businessman, and if he
says his business will be impacted and he'll be out of
business within a year, it is true. He urges Council to
think carefully before allowing the motor track to go
on.
Councilmember Ramos inquires how motocross will
impact the soccer. Why would it go out of business?
Tom Higginson, 5754 Antigua, San Diego, CA 92124,
owns the El Cajon Soccer Center, which opened in 1987.
They learned about this from a security guard at the El
Cajon Speedway. There may have been noise surveys, etc., but
his facility is only 50' from where this motocross track is
going to be. It is indoor soccer, but they are actually
outside. Every year since 1987, a thousand parents and a
thousand children have played at his indoor soccer facility.
To put a motocross track 50 to 75' from them on one side, a
mini-track in back of their east goal, bathrooms, etc. in
back of their west goal, and the parking directly behind
them, they are completely surrounded. This is the equivalent
of being in the center of the motocross, and there is
nothing they can do about it. Perhaps the surrounding
neighbors were contacted, but the City did not contact the
people who are next to it and neither did any of the
motocross people. There are at least 350 signatures from
people who play at their facility at present who say they
will be impacted if this happens. He has six dirt bikes at
his house and he wishes there were some place to ride, but
that place is not on top of his facility.
He listened to the first item on the agenda tonight
regarding the City's ballpark problem already in East
County. Every week between 50 and 100 teams play at his
facility; if Council allows the motocross track, he hopes
Council can tell those teams where to play. His facility is
right in the middle of the motocross. He does not know how
high their barriers are or how they are going to keep the
smoke and noise from coming over. When his facility opened
in 1987, they thought they could play on Saturday nights
with the Speedway, but they cannot. Within a year, they gave
up. They can play up until about 5:30 p.m. when time trials
start. To allow his facility to be almost completely
surrounded by motocross is insane. He urges Council to not
approve this item. Mr. Higginson has talked with the
motocross people and is willing to move, but it will take
him a year or more to do that. The cost so far is
approximately $100,000, just to move. There is only 3 or 4
more years on his lease.
Mr. Higginson, in response to Councilmember
Keegan, informs his hours of operation are Monday
through Friday from about 4:30 p.m. until midnight, Saturday
from 8:00 a.m. until approximately 5:30 p.m., when the
Speedway starts, and 8:00 a.m. to midnight on Sundays. Mr.
Higginson's understanding from the Planning Commission is
that Mr. DeForest can ride every night of the week. There
are 350 people at Mr. Higginson's facility, many women's
teams, who say that if there is motocross and smoke and
noise going across the field, they are done. This is all he
has done since 1987 and they are his people. He is a
motorcycle rider, and he would vote for this in a heartbeat
if it was located anywhere else except right up against the
side of his field. It is not logical.
Councilmember Keegan inquires why Mr. Higginson was
not noticed.
Director of Community Development Griffin advises the
soccer operator is not an owner of the property and is not
the immediate lessee of the property. Mr. Brucker, who is
the lessee, subleases to Mr. Higginson and to the applicant.
It is Mr. Brucker's obligation to convey that
information.
Mr. Higginson informs he asked Mr. Brucker why he was
not informed and Mr. Brucker responded he did not think they
had a chance of getting approval. He reiterates that he
found out from a security guard at the El Cajon Speedway. If
they had known sooner, they would have been here a long time
ago to fight it. He is amazed that no one checked with them
before it was approved.
Councilmember Ramos inquires how the dust will be
handled. Will it be oiled?
Director Griffin informs oil would not meet
environmental requirements. One of the mitigation measures
is that the motocross track area is to be watered on a
regular basis to avoid the generation of dust.
Councilmember Ramos asks for an estimate of decibels
in comparison to the Speedway noise.
Mr. Higginson states the Speedway is approximately
1,000' feet from them and the motocross track is 50-75' from
them. His business will fail, and Council needs to have a
good explanation for the 80-100 teams and the thousand of
parents and children that play at his facility, because they
will look for another place to play.
Mayor Lewis states he was at Mr. Higginson's facility
earlier watching a soccer game - he saw approximately 20
people in the audience and about 16 on the field.
Mr. Higginson informs that on average, there are 10
players on a team. There are 68 teams and youth starts in
the next week or so. They will go up to about 125-130 teams
and it will stay that way until about the third or fourth
week of July. At that time, it will fall back to just adult
teams until January or the first of February. There are
about 50-60 adult teams at most times.
In response to Mayor Lewis, Mr. Higginson informs
there are lights at his facility and teams play in the
evening, the only time they can play. Everyone is working
during the day.
Mayor Lewis inquires if Mr. Higginson has had
discussions with the motocross people and if they are
willing to work things out.
Mr. Higginson states that was his hope when Mr.
DeForest came over to see him, that they would be able to
work something out. As both a motorcycle rider and a soccer
player, he does not believe it is doable. If the motorcycle
track is a long ways away from him, 200-400 yards, or like
the Speedway is, he can deal with that because there would
not be as much noise. But from the middle of his soccer
field, the motocross track is just beyond that wall and
there is a mini-track just in back of the goal, the parking
is behind him and other motocross operations are to the left
of him.
Mayor Lewis states the City wants to provide as much
recreational activities for its citizens as possible.
Councilmember Ramos inquires if there is a layout of
the course.
Director Griffin states the final details of the
mounds and valleys, etc. is not available. That is one of
the things to be submitted and fine-tuned with the
acoustical person to minimize the noise impact.
Councilmember Ramos comments the motocross will
operate at night and inquires if it will be a lighted
course.
Director Griffin informs it will be a lighted course.
The Planning Commission has recommended that they be open
from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. daily, seven days a week.
Devin DeForest, 5955 Via Canada Del Osito, Rancho Santa
Fe, CA 92067, states he is the applicant for the
motocross track and understands Mr. Higginson's concerns.
The first time he met Mr. Higginson was at a Planning
Commission meeting where he brought up his concerns, and
they discussed a couple of items. Several people spoke in
favor of the project and Mr. Higginson did not speak against
it, but has been aware of the project. Mr. DeForest met with
Mr. Higginson later and told him he did not feel it would be
a problem.
Mr. DeForest continues Mr. Higginson states he will
be surrounded by this facility &endash; while the parking is
to one side, the engines must be off when the motorcycles
are walked from the parking place into the facility; in
effect, the only noise will be produced on the facility
grounds. Possibly Mr. Higginson will be surrounded by
parking, but he has parking next to him, so there is no
difference. Mr. Higginson also asked why the noise analysis
had not addressed a fence or a noise barrier between the
motocross and the soccer areas. That was not done because it
would not be an impact. As Mr. Higginson has stated, he is a
motorcycle rider; Mr. DeForest also played soccer for
approximately 20 years. Soccer is a noise-producing
activity. Mr. DeForest obtained a noise meter and went to
several facilities including Parkway Sports Center, which
has indoor soccer and hockey, Mr. Higginson's facility, and
La Mesa Indoor Hockey. At each facility, the meter measured
an average noise level of 60-80 decibels. The motocross is
50-100'.
The closest point to Mr. Higginson will be approximately
80-100' from the track where the bikes will be producing
noise. Around Mr. Higginson's facility, there will be
bleachers, bathrooms, and due to insurance reasons, the
track must be approximately 50' away from any fences. So it
will be farther than what Mr. Higginson feels and there will
be items in between. Based on the average noise levels he
got, the soccer facility will produce as much if not more
than the motocross will produce at Mr. Higginson's area. The
noise representative feels those averages represent noise
levels that could be produced. Mr. Quinn has played games
inside the Sports Arena and the noise in the Sports Arena
with people cheering is much more than the 70-75 decibels
that Mr. DeForest will produce. He will produce more noise
levels than what is there, but it is difficult to believe
that it will be to the point where they cannot play. Mr.
DeForest offered to Mr. Higginson to put up a noise wall
between the facilities at his own expense. In doing so, he
could bring a noise level adequate to the City of El Cajon
limits at the lease line, even though it is necessary only
at the property line.
He also told Mr. Higginson that the proposed lights will
probably not be up for six months to a year. Therefore, he
will not be able to operate when daylight ends. Mr.
Higginson will have from approximately 4:30 to 5:00 p.m.
until midnight to run almost every day on weekdays, until
Mr. DeForest puts up his lights. Mr. Higginson has stated
that he will be moving to a site in Lakeside in six months
and Mr. DeForest cannot see the operations being
incompatible until that time.
Dust is not an issue; a gentleman is present who builds many
supercrosses inside indoor stadiums, where there can be no
dust.
Motocross, like soccer, is considered to be one of the most
physically challenging sports. On his petition, Mr.
Higginson had mentioned that motocross would produce items
that would prohibit him from producing an athletic event.
Motocross is of a similar nature.
Mr. Deforest has not provided a copy, but mentioned it to
the Planning Commission before their decision, that they
have almost 900 signatures of people who are favor of the
project. He urges Council to uphold the decision of the
Planning Commission.
Councilmember Ramos inquires about the new vans
parked on the west side, closer to Bradley.
Director Griffin states it is temporary parking for
the Honda dealership in El Cajon.
In response to Councilmember Ramos, Director Griffin
states the Planning Commission had previously approved that
portion of the property to be used for temporary parking.
Tipton Honda is using it for that purpose.
Councilmember Ramos states in looking at the layout,
he does not understand why it could not be moved either to
the west on the other side and reconfigured, or moved to the
south on Wing Avenue. It would be the same amount of space.
As it is now, it is going around the indoor soccer and that
seems to be a problem.
Mr. DeForest states the Brucker's have informed him
there is no other site that is the same size. Some of what
Councilmember Ramos refers to is concreted or
asphalted property which is fenced in and is not for
lease.
Councilmember Ramos notes an existing woodyard in the
northwest corner is not paved.
Mr. DeForest states that is correct. On the other
side, between the woodyard and the airport, the area is
approximately two acres while he is on six acres. Two acres
would not be adequate. Six acres is smaller than normal.
Councilmember Ramos states it appears there could be
a track site on that side. Then the motocross would be going
around the Speedway rather than the indoor soccer.
Mr. DeForest informs a majority of the portion
Councilmember Ramos refers to is Speedway parking.
Councilmember Ramos comments they could park at the
site Mr. DeForest currently has.
Mr. DeForest states the Brucker's are not willing to
sublease that property. Even though it could be moved, they
are not willing to move it. The only areas that are
available for sublease would be the approximately two acres
west of the woodyard, the six acres he is on, and another 1
or 2 acre piece on the other side near Bradley Avenue.
In response to Councilmember Keegan, Mr. DeForest
states he is willing to build a noise wall. His concern
is if Mr. Higginson is going to be leaving in six months and
he puts up a noise wall and Mr. Higginson is no longer
there. If it comes down to it, Mr. DeForest will build a
noise wall.
Councilmember Keegan comments that Mr. DeForest has
stated there are stipulations as to when engines can be on
and off &endash; people have to walk their bikes and that
type of thing. Where exactly will the noise be coming
from?
Mr. DeForest informs noise will be coming from within
the lease line property only.
Councilmember Keegan notes at the Planning Commission
Meeting, it was a ambiguous about what hours will be
required. The Planning Commission eventually said 8:00 a.m.
to 9:00 p.m. Mr. DeForest did not ask for anything specific.
Are those the minimum hours required?
Mr. DeForest states he would like to provide the
opportunity to have a place for the residents of the City of
El Cajon and surrounding areas at any time he can make a
profit or break even. Currently, people have to drive from
1-1/2 to 2 hours to enjoy their sport. Mr. DeForest
understands what Mr. Higginson is saying, but how would he
feel to drive 2 hours to play soccer. Mr. DeForest would
like to have the availability to be open at any of those
hours and would like to run it for all of those hours as
long as he is not constantly operating at a loss. He plans
to start with Saturdays and Sundays, then possibly a Friday
night, those would be the largest of the pulls. There will
be at lest 6-8 months when he does not have his lights on
until 12:00 that Mr. Higginson will be open.. It is his
belief all the requirements of the City have been met. He
appreciates Mr. Higginson's concerns, but if Mr. DeForest is
doing everything he needs to do by the laws and the legal
limits within the City, he does not see how Mr. Higginson
will be impacted, or that his use is not compatible with the
surrounding uses of the area.
Councilmember Keegan comments that everyone would not
be present at this meeting if all agreed to the requirements
and the impacts.
Mr. DeForest comments that a basic NASCAR produces
approximately 800 hp and about 100 decibels at 100'. The
motorcycles which will be allowed on site produce around
82-85 decibels at 50'. Taking the motorcycle to 100' for a
comparison, there is a doubling of distance effect, so when
you go from 50' to 100', approximately 6-7 decibels are
dropped and there is approximately 78 decibels at 100' of
one motorcycle, as opposed to 100 decibels which is 22
decibels more which is an extremely large amount of noise.
What a motorcycle produces as opposed to what the speedway
produces is not a comparable analysis.
Mayor Lewis notes that in the Planning Commission
Meeting, Item B states one of the reasons for approval is
that with a barrier in place, the proposed motocross
facility can operate in a manner which is compatible with
surrounding uses. Can the facility be dirt-banked to help
reduce the noise level? He is hesitant to have a barrier
installed if Mr. Higginson is going to move his
facility.
Mr. DeForest informs that putting up the same size
wall with dirt would provide additional noise attenuation or
blockage. He could construct it of dirt.
Mayor Lewis states this use would provide recreation
for many people.
In response to Mayor Lewis, Mr. DeForest confirms
that potential users of the facility currently travel 1-1/2
to 2 hours to the desert. There are 5-6 similar facilities
in Riverside County, many within city limits like the one he
proposes.
Mayor Lewis remarks it would be a worthwhile facility
to have in the City of El Cajon and would be of benefit for
recreational activities.
Councilmember Keegan asks Mr. Higginson if he plans
to move to Lakeside or any other place right now.
Mr. Higginson states when he met Mr. DeForest at the
Planning Commission Meeting, he had met with Dianne Jacob's
East County Recreation Committee, to find a way to come up
with more ballfields for the East County area. He came to
the Planning Commission Meeting and tried to come down 6-8
times, but was already 45 minutes late addressing the people
next door, trying to find ballfields. When they said at the
hearing that the motocross track was to the south and the
east and the west of him, he did not worry too much about it
and figured it would be at the other end of the facility. He
went next door, addressed the Recreation Council, and then
came back to the Planning Commission Hearing. The item had
been approved during the time he was gone. He met with the
Planning Commission people and informed them it would not
work and asked if he should file an appeal. They suggested
Mr. Higginson address Council. He was here and was trying to
get more ballfields for the East County area.
Councilmember Keegan states he appreciates that. He
inquires if Mr. Higginson has plans to move his operation to
a different location.
Mr. Higginson informs they will try to move and build a
soccer complex in Lakeside. As it stands now, the bulk of
the property will not be available until September or
October, 2002. If they move, his best guess it will be 2003.
There are only 3-4 years left with the Brucker's, so they
have been working on something to go some other place. They
are a very long ways away from that.
Councilmember Keegan requests Mr. Higginson be
very specific on the impacts that a new operation would put
him out of business in six months.
Mr. Higginson questions if Council has seen a soccer
event that has made more noise than a motorcycle event or if
they have driven past Qualcomm Stadium at night and seen the
dust coming up. This is no different. Mr. DeForest says he
needs to operate at a profit, and Mr. Higginson states he
would like to do the same. On the nights Mr. DeForest is
running, Mr. Higginson will not have people who want to
play. There are 20 women-over-30 teams that are incensed
that they are going to have to breathe the smoke. To put
that smoke right next to him and drifting over, no matter
how high the noise barrier is, it is not going to make a
difference. When it is said it does not impact the
surrounding area, the industrial buildings are not open at
night or Saturdays or Sundays. Those are the hours his
facility is open.
Councilmember Keegan states it is basically noise,
dust, and exhaust.
Mr. Higginson remarks he is a motorcycle rider, and
if he thought it could be mitigated, he would do it
immediately.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
close the Public Hearing.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
Councilmember Keegan inquires if
staff has suggestions on how to mitigate the dust.
Director Griffin states the mitigation measure is
that the applicant is required to continuously water the
track, which the applicant has agreed to do.
Councilmember Keegan questions is there is any way to
mitigate the exhaust.
Director Griffin informs that has not been
demonstrated as being in violation of the requirements.
Councilmember Keegan states he is not speaking
strictly of the requirements. He questions if there is any
way to mitigate the exhaust.
Mayor Lewis comments that may be part of the watering
down process.
Director Griffin remarks the motorcycles will have
mufflers, but whether or not that will remove any of the
exhaust fumes, he does not know. It was not identified as an
issue previously.
Councilmember Keegan states the Conditions deal with
the dust and the applicant has said he will go forward with
a noise wall.
Director Griffin points out that there is also a
six-month review after his operations begin. Once someone is
in business, it is not easy to shut them down, but
fine-tuning can be done at that stage. If there are
problems, the Planning Commission will be revisiting this
and see if adjustments are needed.
In response to Mayor Lewis, Director Griffin informs
City staff will monitor it, and Mr. DeForest is required to
prove the noise issues are being resolved with the track's
design and type of motorcycles used.
Mayor Lewis notes the City could continue monitoring
it and fine-tuning it to make it compatible.
Director Griffin states that could include the issue
of the mitigation wall between the soccer field and that
part of the track. If, after six months, the noise impacts
are higher than were anticipated, perhaps that would be the
time to consider the barrier.
Councilmember Keegan comments he understands the need
for the track and also that there is a person in business
next door who feels he will be impacted. He questions when
the track would be up and going.
Director Griffin states the start time has not been
indicated, but it would be 4-5 months.
Councilmember Keegan remarks he would prefer a review
after three month's operation rather than six months.
Councilmember Ramos states the Planning Commission
has approximately four tenets they must find to approve a
Conditional Use Permit. One is compatibility; what are the
other three?
Director Griffin states there is nothing specific.
Variances have four requirements of law, but the primary one
in a Conditional Use Permit is to be assured there is
compatibility. In this case, because of noise, the Planning
Commission made additional findings. The only real
requirement is compatibility and compliance with the Zoning
Ordinance.
Councilmember Ramos comments he has no objection to
the motocross per se, but he is not convinced the Brucker's
wouldn't be amenable to moving it to the southeast corner on
Wing Avenue, moving it to the other end. It seems that
should be investigated. There is no actual layout of what
the track is going to be and how much dirt is going to be
moved. As it currently stands, he will not support it. It
can be made more compatible.
Councilmember Keegan suggests reopening the Public
Hearing so he can ask the applicant a question.
Consensus of the Council agrees to reopen the Public
Hearing.
Councilmember Keegan questions if Mr. DeForest can go
back to the Brucker's to determine whether he can get a
different location.
Mr. DeForest states he spent approximately three
months negotiating with the Brucker's. The only acreage they
offered that was adequate size was the area he has or the
area the wood yard is presently on. He was supposed to be on
the area the wood yard was on originally, and then they
offered that property to another party who did not have to
go through a CUP. There is no other place there that would
be of adequate size to house what he needs. If Mr. Higginson
is honest in his comments, Mr. DeForest has to put up a
fence completely around him anyway for security reasons and
for insurance. Mr. DeForest will, if Mr. Higginson is going
to be there longer than the estimated time, construct a
noise wall completely around him, which will be at the same
height or higher than the walls on the side.
Councilmember Keegan comments that would be a good
idea, because there will be a review in three months after
operations begin. He urges Mr. DeForest to do everything
possible to insure he is compatible if this item is
approved.
Mr. DeForest states regarding getting the noise down
to the limits of the property line, they will include the
noise consultant in the track analysis. That is why a design
is not before Council. The track will be designed to keep
the noise levels at the lowest possible level and he does
not want to provide something and then later come up with a
design that provides something lower, and the question would
come back why the design is different. The noise consultant
will be intimately included in the design so the noise
levels can be brought down along that area, the closer
impacts to Mr. Higginson. Motocross is different from auto
racing where there is maximum rpm's at all times. The track
can be designed to keep the noise levels in that area to a
minimum and they will do so.
Councilmember Ramos refers to an earlier item where a
gentleman was sure that the City could not get dedication
from a property owner and later was able to get it. The
Brucker's know they will lose their property in the next 3
or 4 years and they may be amenable to doing anything to get
as much benefit and leasing dollars out of their property
during that period as possible. He still has the problem of
compatibility and is not satisfied that what he heard this
evening will solve those issues.
Councilmember Keegan questions if Mr. DeForest would
be willing to go back to the Brucker's and whether a two
week difference in an approval of this item would harm his
operation.
Mr. DeForest states if that is the wish of Council,
it could be done. He reiterates that he talked with the
Brucker's for months in getting this lease and they have
expressed they have other people who are willing to come in
and take his place. Based upon discussions with them, this
site is the only site available for him. In addition, there
is a water pipeline easement along the line (the blue lines)
and no other usage is allowed there. Mr. DeForest has
received authority from the City of San Diego and Helix
Water District to occupy that land only because he is not
constructing anything but a fence over it. He is allowed to
ride the motorcycles but cannot change the grade along that
50' easement. There is no other usage that could occupy that
portion other than what he is doing. That is why the
Brucker's specify this site.
Mayor Pro Tem Santos comments that many times the
City uses time reviews &endash; three, six, nine months, or
a year, and they have been effective on land use sites in
the past. He supports going ahead with this item and
conducting a review after three months. If there are any
problems, there can be further mitigation.
Mayor Lewis agrees and states it will provide
recreational activity. For the amount of money on the line,
the applicant will be compatible with the use of the
area.
Mr. Higginson states that Mr. DeForest has a
significant investment in this, but in 1987 he spent
$200,000 building the El Cajon Soccer Center. At the
conclusion of three months, if Mr. DeForest makes too much
noise, what about the teams he lost during that time and his
$200,000 investment? That deserves consideration.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
close the Public Hearing.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt RESOLUTION NO. 21-01 to approve the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
AYES: Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: Ramos
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-01 to approve Conditional Use Permit
1846 according to Planning Commission Resolution No. 9466,
requiring a review in three months after operation and a
noise wall.
DISCUSSION
Councilmember Keegan notes that
regardless of earlier statements that someone is sure that
with all the money the applicant puts in that it will be
compatible in three months, that is not necessarily true, so
the applicant must work at that.
VOTES ARE NOW CAST ON MOTION BY Lewis,
SECOND BY Santos to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-01 to approve
Conditional Use Permit 1846 according to Planning Commission
Resolution No. 9466, requiring a review in three months
after operation and a noise wall.
AYES: Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: Ramos
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
Items 105, 106 and 107
are one Project - Public Hearings may be opened on all three
items for testimony, discussion and action.
105 VARIANCE 929 - San Diego
Interfaith Housing Foundation - 1958 E. Main Street (Report:
City Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the Public
Hearing, consider testimony, Close the Public Hearing
and
- Adopt Resolution No. 23-01 to approve
the Negative Declaration.
- Adopt Resolution No. 24-01 to
approve, modify or disapprove Planning Commission
Resolution No. 9473 for a six foot high wall within the
front setback at 1958 E. Main Street in the PRD-Low
Zone.
106 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 54
- San Diego Interfaith Housing Foundation - 1958 E. Main
Street (Report: City Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the Public
Hearing, consider testimony, Close the Public Hearing
and
- Adopt Resolution No. 25-01 to approve
the Negative Declaration.
- Adopt Resolution No. 26-01 to
approve, modify or disapprove Planning Commission
Resolution No. 9474 recommending approval of PRD 54 for
an eight-unit residential development in the PRD-Low Zone
at 1958 E. Main Street.
107 TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 495 -
San Diego Interfaith Housing Foundation - 1958 E. Main
Street (Report: City Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the
Public Hearing, consider testimony, Close the Public Hearing
and
- Adopt Resolution No. 27-01 to approve
the Negative Declaration.
- Adopt Resolution No. 28-01 to
approve, modify or disapprove Planning Commission
Resolution No. 9475 approving TSM 495 for a nine-lot
subdivision including one common lot in the PRD-Low Zone
at 1958 E. Main Street.
DISCUSSION
Director of Community Development
Griffin states this request is for a Planned Residential
Development (PRD) on the subject property. There will be a
private road owned and maintained by the proposed owners of
the eight units on the property. To install a block
acoustical wall across the front of the property, the
applicant is seeking a variance on the height limit because
part of the wall will be in the front yard area of the
project. The Planning Commission considered and granted the
variance.
The PRD is for the eight units which will be single family
residences on their own lots. The Subdivision Map is to
divide the interest in the property into nine pieces; the
ninth lot will be the common area, which is the private road
and open space. The Planning Commission recommends approval
of both the PRD and Tentative Subdivision Map.
Mayor Lewis announces the Public Hearing on Items
105, 106 and 107 is now open.
Brady Gunther, 2130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA
92101, representing the developer, San Diego Interfaith
Housing, states he is present to answer questions Council
may have.
Terry Moore, 2635 Camino del Rio South #200, San Diego,
CA, is a board member of San Diego Interfaith Housing.
He states the City has expressed its desire for more
affordable housing and this is one way to do
that.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
close the Public Hearing on items 105, 106 and
107
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 23-01 to approve the Negative
Declaration for Variance 929.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 24-01 to approve Variance 929 according
to Planning Commission Resolution No. 9473.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 25-01 to approve the Negative
Declaration for Planned Residential Development
54.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 26-01 to approve Planned Residential
Development 54 according to Planning Commission Resolution
No. 9474.
DISCUSSION
Councilmember Ramos states there
have been recent developments where the setbacks from the
rear yards has not been sufficient for the owners to put in
a patio or patio cover. It appears this project has a 10'
minimum setback from the property line and the doors and
windows on the back are not indicated. The minimum setback
for a patio cover is 15'. A redesign would allow the units
to be moved forward 5' and there would be enough room for a
back yard. He supports affordable housing, but families have
children who need a back yard.
Director Griffin advises the minimum setback in a PRD
is 10' and these units meet that requirement. The houses
have a sliding door on the rear elevation, but it is in the
indented portion. That gives them about 3-4 more feet that
they could put a patio cover on that they would not have if
it was on the other side of the rear elevation.
Councilmember Ramos comments the setback is 10'.
Director Griffin mentions the legal setback from the
property line to the house. When a patio is installed, the
setback is from the property line to the edge of the
stanchions.
Director Griffin states the units are more than 10'
from that property line. In order to mitigate the noise
impacts from Main Street, the houses were not pushed
forward, closer to Main Street. The consequence is that some
of the back yard space was lost.
Councilmember Ramos states Units 7 and 8 are the only
ones that are near Main Street. The others are on the west
side of the driveway. What he is looking at says it is
typical 10'.
Director Griffin informs the noise contours parallel
the street and go back quite a distance from Main Street.
With staff's encouragement, the applicant was attempting to
get as many of the houses outside of the louder noise
contours as possible.
Councilmember Ramos remarks the City needs to be
cognizant of this in the future, because there will be
problems
VOTES ARE NOW CAST ON MOTION BY Lewis,
SECOND BY Santos to adopt Resolution No. 26-01 to approve
Planned Residential Development 54 according to Planning
Commission Resolution No. 9474.
AYES: Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: Ramos
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 27-01 to approve the Negative
Declaration for Tentative Subdivision Map
495.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
adopt Resolution No. 28-01 to approve Tentative Subdivision
Map 495 according to Planning Commission Resolution No.
9475.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
DISQUALIFY: McClellan (due to a
possible financial conflict of interest according to State
Law)
MOTION CARRIES.
Items 108 and 109 are one
Project - Public Hearings may be opened
on both items for testimony, discussion and
action.
108 ZONE RECLASSIFICATION 2216 -
Broadway Animal Hospital, Inc. -
380 Broadway (Report: City Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the Public
Hearing, consider testimony, Close the Public Hearing
and
- Approve, modify or disapprove
Planning Commission Resolution No. 9476 recommending
approval of Zone Reclassification 2216 to rezone property
at 380 Broadway and the vacant parcel to the north, from
the R-E-40 and C-2 Zones to the C-R Zone.
- Refer to the City Attorney for an
Ordinance upon completion of any conditions of
approval.
109 AMENDMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 197 - Broadway Animal Hospital, Inc. - 380
Broadway (Report: City Clerk)
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the Public
Hearing, consider testimony, Close the Public Hearing
and
- Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 29-01 to
approve, modify or disapprove Planning Commission
Resolution No. 9477 granting approval of Amendment of
Conditional Use Permit 197 to construct a new animal
hospital and boarding/grooming facilities in the pending
C-R Zone at 380 Broadway.
Mayor Lewis announces the Public
Hearing on Items 108 and 109 is now open.
DISCUSSION
Kennith Chriss, 719 Pier View Way,
Oceanside, CA 92054, states he is an architect
representing Broadway Animal Hospital. He has reviewed the
site and the product they have brought forward is an
excellent addition. The manager of the facility is also
present if there are any questions.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
close the Public Hearing.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
ABSENT: McClellan
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Santos to
refer to the City Attorney for an Ordinance approving Zone
Reclassification No. 2216.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
ABSENT: McClellan
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION BY Lewis, SECOND BY Ramos to
adopt RESOLUTION NO. 29-01 to approve Amendment of
Conditional Use Permit 197.
AYES: Ramos, Santos, Keegan, Lewis
NOES: None
ABSENT: McClellan
MOTION CARRIES.
110 ITEMS CONTINUED FROM THE 3:00 P.M.
MEETING: None
ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Lewis adjourned the
Adjourned Regular Joint Meeting of the El Cajon City Council
and the El Cajon Redevelopment Agency held this 13th day of
February, 2001 at 10:18 p.m. to Tuesday, February 20, 2001
at 12:00 p.m. noon.
______________________ City
Clerk/Secretary
|
