HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - unsigned - 1991-11-191
11/19/91
City Council, Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
Redding, California
November 19, 1991 7:00 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by City Attorney Hays.
The Invocation was offered by Reverend Greg Tyree of the First Presbyterian
Church.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Dahl with the following Council
Members present: Arness, Buffum, Moss, and Dahl. Council Member Fulton was
absent.
Also present were City Manager Christofferson, Assistant City Manager McMurry,
City Attorney Hays, Director of Electric Utility Lindley, Director of Public
Works Galusha, Director of Planning and Community Development Perry, Chief of
Police Blankenship, Director of Finance Downing, Principal Planner Keaney,
Director of Recreation and Parks Riley, Electric Utility Field Foreman Smith,
City Treasurer Linville, Director of Information Systems Kelley, Housing
Manager Maurer, Senior Planner King, Airports Director Ruff, Director of
Utilities/Customer Service Vokal, Assistant Planner Manuel, Public Information
Officer Bachman, Energy Conservation Specialist Winter, Housing Specialist
Haddox, City Clerk Nichols, and Secretary/Stenographer Rudolph.
Public Power Week Essay Awards
(A-050-125)
Electric Utility Director Lindley related that this year's Public Power Week
essay topic was "How Public Power Benefits Redding." He indicated that each
of the three local high schools participated in the essay contest and each
essay was judged on the merits of its material presentation, organization,
research and reader interest. In addition to the plaque being presented, a
certificate will be presented to each of the students at their Scholarship
Awards night, and a $500.00 scholarship will be awarded to one qualified
winning contestant from each high school upon graduation with a 2.8 minimum
grade point average and acceptance at an institute of higher education.
Mayor Dahl presented plaques to the following essay winners:
Enterprise High School: 1st Place - Celeste Draisner
2nd Place - Titia Ann Grant
Shasta High School: 1st Place - Molly Lorentz
2nd Place - Melissa Peters
Pioneer High School: 1st Place - Sarah Hall
2nd Place - Andrea Brown
CONSENT CALENDAR
The following matters were considered inclusively under the Consent Calendar:
Approval of Minutes
- Regular Meeting of November 5, 1991
Approval of Payroll and Accounts Payable Register
(A-050-100-500)
It is recommended that Accounts Payable Register No. 09, check numbers 175601
through 176027 inclusive, in the amount of $4,273,535.43, be approved and
paid, and Payroll Register No. 10, check numbers 326964 through 327718
inclusive, in the amount of $1,088,655.82, for the period October 27, 1991,
through November 9, 1991, be approved.
TOTAL: $5,362,191.25
Treasurer's Report
- October, 1991
(A-050-100-600)
Total Treasurer's Accountability - $37,454,274.49
Total City of Redding Funds, Funds Held in
Trust, and Funds of Related Entities - $58,472,023.30
2
11/19/91
Annexation 91-7 - Clear Creek/Westside Road Area
(A-150-241)
It is the recommendation of the Planning Director that staff be authorized to
contact other property owners in the area to determine interest in annexation
and that Annexation 91-7, Clear Creek/Westside Road Area, be referred to
Departments for review and comment and to the Board of Administrative Review
for preparation of an environmental impact determination.
Set Public Hearing
- re Amendment to Redding Municipal Code Section 18.38.010,
by the City of Redding
(L-010-500-050)
It is the recommendation of the Planning Director that a public hearing be set
for 7:00 p.m., December 3, 1991, to consider an amendment to Section 18.38.010
of the Redding Municipal Code, a request to create a Combining District that
would establish minimum lot sizes based upon an approved subdivision or parcel
map.
Resolution
- Contract Amendment with Henwood Energy Services, Inc.
Resolution
- Appropriating Funds
* (B-130-070 & E-120)
It is the recommendation of the Electric Utility Director that Resolution No.
91-485 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
approving and authorizing the Mayor to sign the (first) amendment to
Professional Services Agreement between the City of Redding and Henwood Energy
Services, Inc. (Hesi Contract No. 910709) for additional services required,
increasing the contract price from $47,400 to $92,400.
It is also recommended that Resolution No. 91-486 be adopted, a resolution of
the City Council of the City of Redding approving and adopting the 39th
amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 91-253 appropriating $45,000 from the
Electric Utility Fund for utility planning services.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2567, 1992 State of the City Report
(B-050-100 & P-145-800)
It is the recommendation of the Public Information Officer that Bid Schedule
No. 2567, 1992 State of the City Report, be awarded to the low bidder, Redding
Printing Company, in the amount of $9,141.99. Funds for this purchase are
included in the 1991-92 budget.
Resolution
- Shasta Interagency Narcotic Task Force (SINTF) FY 1991-92 Budget
and Budget Supplement
(P-150-150)
It is the recommendation of the Chief of Police that Resolution No. 91-487 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving the
fiscal year 1991-92 budget, July 1, 1991 through June 30, 1992, of $70,790 and
a $23,000 supplement for the Shasta Interagency Narcotics Task Force (SINTF).
Funds for this are available through asset forfeiture and have no impact on
the City's budget.
Resolution
- Transfer of Funds for Purchase of Carpet for Police
Administrative Unit
* (B-130-070 & A-050-270)
It is the recommendation of the Chief of Police that Resolution No. 91-488 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving and
adopting the 41st amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 91-253 transferring
$2,400 for carpeting to Capital Outlay from the operating budgets of various
Police Divisions.
Resolution
- Change Order to Contract with Lawrence & Associates re Landfill
Closure Plan to Incorporate Benton Airpark Runway Safety Overrun Project
(A-090-020 & S-020-300)
It is the recommendation of the Airports Director that Resolution No. 91-489
be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving
and authorizing the City Manager to sign the following in connection with
performing additional tasks for the Benton Landfill Closure Plan:
"Authorization and Contract for Professional Services," together with Contract
Modification (Change Order) 011, between the City of Redding and Lawrence &
Associates (Project No. C91.11.02A; Contract No. C-2457), to provide services
to incorporate the conceptual safety overrun of the Benton Airpark Runway into
the Closure and Postclosure Plans, in an amount not to exceed $6,730.00.
Funds are in the existing budget to accommodate the change order.
3
11/19/91
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2560, Chain Link Fence for Benton Transfer
Station Sump Area
(B-050-100 & S-020-650)
It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that Bid Schedule
No. 2560, chain link fence for Benton Transfer Station sump area, be awarded
to the low bidder, Strange and Son Fencing, in the amount of $7,404.42. Funds
for this project are available in the 1991-92 budget.
Resolution
- Rescinding Award of Bid Schedule No. 2547, One 8,000 Pound
Forklift for Solid Waste
(B-050-100 & S-020-100)
It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that Resolution No.
91-490 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
rescinding the November 5, 1991 award of Bid Schedule No. 2547 to Clark Lift-
Team Power of Sacramento in the amount of $30,021.41; and authorizing the
rebidding of Bid Schedule No. 2547 and the execution of the necessary
documentation by the City Manager.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2559, Trommel Screen for Benton Transfer
Station/Compost Facility
(B-050-100 & S-020-550 & S-020-650)
It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that Bid Schedule
No. 2559, trommel screen for Benton Transfer Station/Compost Facility, be
awarded to the second low bidder, Fuel Harvesters, in the amount of
$159,266.25. The low bidder did not meet the requirements of the
specifications. Annual lease/purchase payments are budgeted in 1991-92 in the
amount of $39,100.
Resolution
- Destruction of Documents
(A-050-055-750)
It is the recommendation of the City Clerk that Resolution No. 91-491 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding authorizing
the destruction of certain documents.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2562, Painting Project at Martin Luther King
Community Center
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Recreation and Parks Director that Bid
Schedule No. 2562, painting project at Martin Luther King Community Center, be
awarded to the low bidder, Larry's Custom Painting, in the amount of
$5,283.30. Funds were previously transferred from the Park Development Fund
to cover this project.
Resolution
- Authorizing City Manager to Sign Financing Documentation re
Offset Printing Press
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Utilities/Customer Service Director that
Resolution No. 91-492 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City
of Redding authorizing the execution and delivery of a lease/purchase
agreement for an offset printing press, not to exceed $20,600.00, to be
entered into between the City of Redding and the Redding Bank of Commerce.
Funds for this lease purchase are included in the Print Shop's 1991-92 Capital
Lease Fund.
Award of Bid
- Bid Schedule No. 2521, Thermoplastic Applicator
(B-050-100)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2521 (Job No. 9152-40), thermoplastic applicator, be awarded to the third low
bidder, Highway Marking Systems, in the amount of $10,183.39. The low and
second low bidder did not meet the requirements of the specifications. Funds
for this purchase are included in the Equipment Financing Program.
Resolution Accepting Streets
- Acceptance of Improvements for Sunridge
Estates, Unit 2 (S-3-87) (West of Shasta View Drive and south of State Highway
44)
* (S-070-230 & S-100-714)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 91-
493 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
accepting for maintenance and operation Danbury Drive, Stetson Way, Natomas
4
11/19/91
Way, Ballard Way, and Juarez Lane in Unit 2 of the Sunridge Estates
Subdivision.
It is also recommended that improvements in the Sunridge Estates Subdivision,
Unit 2, be accepted as satisfactorily completed, and the City Clerk return the
securities to the developer, Steven Kamisky.
Resolution Accepting Streets
- Acceptance of Improvements for River Park
Highlands, Units 5 and 6 (East of Quartz Hill Road and north of Benton Drive
on River Park Drive)
* (S-070-230 & S-100-654)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 91-
494 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
accepting for maintenance and operation Ironwood Lane, Trailview Court, and
River Park Drive in Unit 5, and Ironwood Lane in Unit 6 of the River Park
Highlands Subdivision.
It is also recommended that improvements in the River Park Highlands, Units 5
and 6, be accepted as satisfactorily completed, and the City Clerk return the
securities to the developer, Eckelman & Scarbrough.
Payment for Oversizing Water Main
- Country Heights Subdivision, Unit 8
* (B-130-070 & S-100-108)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the Finance
Department be authorized to make payment to Signature Northwest, in the amount
of $9,378.74, for the cost of oversizing the water main in Country Heights
Subdivision, Unit 8. Funds for this project are available in the 1991-92
Water Budget under Minor Extensions and Oversizing Account #143-869-3511.
Buckeye Water Treatment Plan
(W-030-600)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Council accept the
status report regarding the Buckeye Water Treatment Plant. The status of the
Bureau of Reclamation's (Bureau) additional requests, which must be completed
prior to the finalization of the Land Lease Agreement, is as follows: 1)
Staff is currently in the process of completing an Agreement with Western Area
Power Administration (Western), which will take approximately two months to
complete; 2) The Amendment to the Buckeye Water contract has been initiated
and the Bureau has indicated it will require up to six months to complete the
amendment; and 3) The Bureau provided a finding of no significant impact for
the environmental portion of the project, thereby, providing environmental
clearance. Staff is currently negotiating with Boyle for the final design
phase of the project. The Bureau has indicated they will review the drawings
without the amendment to the contract being completed.
Resolution
- Shasta County's Proposed Congestion Management Plan
(E-020-010 & T-080)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 91-
495 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding
supporting the elements contained in Shasta County's Proposed Congestion
Management Plan.
Notice of Completion
- Bid Schedule No. 2461, Slurry Seal Program
(B-050-020)
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No.
2461 (Job No. 5115-66), slurry seal program, awarded to California Pavement
Maintenance, be accepted as satisfactorily completed, and the City Clerk be
authorized to file a Notice of Completion. The final contract price is
$108,947.71.
Resolution
- Abatement Proceedings on Property at 2780 Reservoir Lane, owned
by Andrew J. Vranich and Carl L. Vranich
(A-030-070)
It is the recommendation of the City Attorney that Resolution No. 91-496 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding of intention
to begin legal proceedings of abatement under Chapter 9.36 of the Redding
Municipal Code on certain real property in the City of Redding located at 2780
Reservoir Lane (rear house), owned by Andrew J. Vranich and Carol L. Vranich,
husband and wife, as joint tenants.
5
11/19/91
Resolution - Abatement Proceedings on Property at 5406 E. Bonnyview Road,
owned by Harrell Davis and Louise M. Davis, Roger H. Cowling and Adrienne F.
Cowling, and David A. Shoffner and Kathleen S. Shoffner
(A-030-070)
It is the recommendation of the City Attorney that Resolution No. 91-497 be
adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding of intention
to begin legal proceedings of abatement under Chapter 9.36 of the Redding
Municipal Code on certain real property in the City of Redding located at 5406
E. Bonnyview
6
11/19/91
Road, owned by Harrell Davis and Louise M. Davis, as to an undivided one-half
interest; Roger H. Cowling and Adrienne F. Cowling, as to an undivided one-
fourth interest; and David A. Shoffner and Kathleen S. Shoffner, as to an
undivided one-fourth interest.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Arness, seconded by Council Member Buffum,
that all the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved and adopted
as recommended.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, Moss and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
Resolution Nos. 91-485, 91-486, 91-487, 91-488, 91-489, 91-490, 91-491, 91-
492, 91-493, 91-494, 91-495, 91-496, and 91-497 are on file in the office of
the City Clerk.
- - - - - - - - -
REDDING TENNIS CLUB
- re Donation for Resurfacing of Sequoia Middle School
Tennis Courts
* (B-130-070 & B-050-020)
The following officers of the Redding Tennis Club presented Mayor Dahl with a
check, in the amount of $1,250.00, to be used towards the resurfacing of the
Sequoia Middle School tennis courts: Michael Sauer, President, Reta Lovett,
Secretary, and Ruth Campbell, Vice President.
Mr. Sauer explained that the members of the Redding Tennis Club rely heavily
upon the public tennis courts and realize the efforts and costs related to
their maintenance. He stated that, through various fund raising activities,
the Club was able to allocate $1,000.00 from its 1991-1992 finances, and to
collect an additional $250.00 from individual club members.
Mayor Dahl expressed the City's appreciation of the Club's generous donation.
Council Member Arness commended the group for its "make it happen" attitude.
REDDING YELLOW CAB COMPANY
- New Rate Schedule
(T-100-500)
City Clerk Nichols related that a letter was received from Redding Yellow Cab
Company notifying the City of their new rate schedule, thereby, fulfilling
their requirements under the Redding Municipal Code.
This was an information item and no action was required.
LETTER OF RESIGNATION
- Tourism and Convention Commissioner Kit Hamblin
(B-080-540)
City Clerk Nichols stated that a letter of resignation was received from
Tourism and Convention Commissioner Kit Hamblin.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Buffum, to
accept the resignation of Tourism and Convention Commissioner Kit Hamblin.
The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
CHRISTMAS PARADE
- City Co-Sponsorship of Parade and Prohibiting of Parking
and Vehicular Traffic
(P-030-250 & P-010-050)
City Clerk Nichols indicated that a letter was received from Kit Hamblin,
Chairman of the Greater Redding Chamber of Commerce Christmas Parade
Committee, requesting permission to hold the Annual Christmas Parade on
Saturday, December 7, 1991, along Redding Parade Route No. 2.
In addition, Ms. Nichols related that in order to meet Caltrans' insurance
requirements, the City is again being requested to co-sponsor the parade with
the Greater Redding Chamber of Commerce.
It is the recommendation of staff that Council approve the co-sponsorship of
the Christmas Parade and adopt a resolution prohibiting parking and vehicular
traffic along Parade Route No. 2 on December 7, 1991.
7
11/19/91
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Arness, that
the City co-sponsor the Christmas Parade with the Greater Redding Chamber of
Commerce, and that Resolution No. 91-498 be adopted, a resolution of the City
Council of the City of Redding prohibiting parking and vehicular traffic along
Parade Route No. 2 in association with the Greater Redding Chamber of
Commerce's Christmas Parade to be held December 7, 1991.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, Moss and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
Resolution No. 91-498 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
- re Rezoning Application RZ-4-91, by James Gironda
(North of Oasis Road and east of Twin View Boulevard)
(L-010-230)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor Dahl opened the public hearing
regarding Rezoning Application RZ-4-91.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Continued Public Hearing
Planning Commission recommendation dated November 11, 1991
City Clerk Nichols advised that no protests were received.
Planning and Community Development Director Perry related that, in conjunction
with its approval of the Victoria Knolls Tentative Subdivision Map, the
Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning of 160 acres located
north of Oasis Road and east of Twin View Boulevard from "R1-B10" Single
Family Residential District with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet to
"RM-9" Multiple Family Residential District and "R-1" Single Family
Residential District.
Mr. Perry indicated that in light of the Planning Commission's pending review
of a new zoning district that would reflect the lot sizes as an approved
tentative map, rather than define a single minimum-lot size, Council at its
November 5, 1991, meeting approved the continuance of the public hearing. As
this new zoning is not be applicable to the multiple-family residential parcel
of the subdivision, the applicant has asked that the request to rezone the
parcel to "RM-9" Multiple Family Residential District proceed.
It is the recommendation of both the Planning Commission and staff that
Council approve the rezoning of the subject property to "RM-9" Multiple Family
Residential District, ratify the negative declaration, and offer the ordinance
for first reading. For that portion of the rezoning proposal to "R-1" Single
Family Residential District, it is recommended that it be continued to
December 17, 1991.
Mayor Dahl determined that there was no one present who wished to speak on
this matter.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Buffum, seconded by Council Member Arness,
that the public hearing regarding the "RM-9" rezoning be closed and the public
hearing regarding "R-1" be continued to December 17, 1991. The Vote:
Unanimous Ayes
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Arness, that
Council make the following findings regarding Rezoning Application RZ-4-91
from "R1-B10" Single Family Residential District to "RM-9" Multiple Family
Residential:
1. Project is compatible with the Redding General Plan;
2. Project will not significantly alter existing land form;
3. Project is compatible with surrounding land use;
4. Project is compatible with the Code of the City of Redding,
California; and ratify the Negative Declaration authorized by the Board of
Administrative Review on September 18, 1991. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
Council Member Moss offered Ordinance No. 1974 for first reading, an ordinance
of the City Council of the City of Redding amending section 18.06.020 of the
Redding Municipal Code relating to the rezoning of certain real property in
the City of Redding (RZ-4-91).
8
11/19/91
9
11/19/91
PUBLIC HEARING - re Appeal of Denial of Variance Application V-18-91, by
Photon Investments (2020 Court Street)
(L-010-410)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor Dahl opened the public hearing
regarding Appeal of Denial of Variance Application V-18-91.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Mailing - Notice of Public Hearing
Affidavit of Publication - Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Department Recommendation Dated November 11, 1991
City Clerk Nichols advised that no protests were received.
Planning and Community Development Director Perry advised that Photon
Investments is appealing the Planning Commission's denial of a variance to
obtain relief from Section 18.20.060 of the Municipal Code, as it relates to
the building currently occupied by Redding Radiological Associates at 2020
Court Street. The code states that front-yard setbacks in the "CO" Office
District must be a minimum of ten feet and that a side yard adjacent to a
dedicated public street must also be ten feet.
Mr. Perry explained the various components of the variance, as outlined in the
Report to City Council dated November 11, 1991, incorporated herein by
reference.
Mr. Perry commented that in order to grant a variance, all the criteria must
be found in evidence. The following findings have been made regarding the
variance and the Planning Commission found only one factor to be in evidence:
1) There is nothing unique about this property as compared to other
properties in a like classification. The lot is larger than normal for the
area.
2) The applicant has substantial property rights without the requested
encroachments. To grant a variance for this building is to grant a variance
for any pre-1980 building in the "CO" Office District.
3) Further encroachment of the office structure into the front and side-yard
setbacks would not affect the health or safety of the public; but will simply
mean unequal treatment in the application of zoning regulations between new
construction and remodels.
It is the recommendation of both the Planning Commission and staff that the
variance be denied.
Leonard Wingate, attorney for the applicant, related that there are two issues
which need to be addressed, the variance and the encroachment. He stated that
the applicant has reviewed many possibilities regarding the improvement of the
property and the plan before Council is deemed to be the most reasonable
modification from both an aesthetic and architectural standpoint. He
explained that, in light of the fact that the building became of non-
conforming use as a result of the City's 1980 action in establishing a ten
foot set-back for Court Street, the applicant is of the opinion that the
required findings are evident.
Mr. Wingate commented that, based upon the fact that the property owners
cannot modify this property without the variance, a special circumstance has
been created. In addition, by acknowledging that a special circumstance does
exist, it is also being recognized that property rights will be preserved and
that the property owner should be able to modify or enhance the property
accordingly.
Mr. Wingate stated that the applicant is requesting that Council make the
necessary findings and grant the variance as requested.
Dr. Richard Steffans, a physician and radiologist with Redding Radiological
Associates, explained that his firm was the first specialty medical group to
open in Redding in the 1950's and has occupied the building at 2020 Court
Street since the early 1960's. He stated that the firm employs approximately
50 people, with 14 associated radiologists, and is the first and only
radiology group to service Redding Memorial/Redding Medical Center, Mercy
Medical Center, Shasta General Hospital, Shasta Primary Care Clinic, and
Redding Specialty Hospital.
10
11/19/91
Dr. Steffans related, that in addition to representing Redding Radiological
Associates, he also represents Photon Investments, which is composed of
practicing radiologists at Redding Radiological who not only own the subject
building, but the entire City block. He stated that approximately two years
ago, the group embarked on the concept of moving the practice to a new
building.
During deliberations, however, it became clear that the ideal site continues
to be the Court Street corridor. It was, therefore, decided that the facility
should remain at the current location and renovate not only the entire inside
of the building, but the outside as well.
Dr. Steffans requested Council to grant the requested variance, with the
expectation that it will remain Redding Radiological's home for the next 30
years.
Mr. Wingate commented that there is a small portion of the building which
currently encroaches approximately three inches into the right-of-way, and the
proposal adds an additional nine inches, for a total encroachment of twelve
inches. He explained that this encroachment does not constitute an increase
in the square footage of the building or any change in the sidewalk structure.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Buffum, that
the public hearing be closed. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
Council Member Buffum stated that she takes exception to staff's presentation.
She indicated that the architectural work is creative, and the fact that it
was completed with less than a twelve inch encroachment displays the
applicant's awareness and sensitivity. She opined that criteria 2, as
presented in the staff report, represents double standards and that the
granting of a variance for this building does not automatically constitute a
variance to all such buildings, but should be dealt with on a case-by-case
basis. She stated that she favors the appeal being upheld.
Council Member Arness concurred with Council Member Buffum and suggested that
the City ensure, when the encroachment permit is issued, that the applicant is
aware that should the City ever require the subject right-of-way that it, in
fact, does belong to the City.
Council Member Moss also concurred with Council Member Buffum and stated that
Court Street represents a vital area of the community which services the
medical and legal community, as well as the governmental area of Shasta
County, and the improvements being made along the street are very gratifying.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Buffum, to
uphold the appeal of Variance Application V-18-91, by Photon Investments,
approve the project as submitted, find that all three variance criteria are in
evidence and authorize staff to issue the necessary encroachment permit.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, Moss and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
PUBLIC HEARING
- re General Plan Amendment GPA-17-90, by Aksel Damgaard (5160
Sunnyhill Lane)
(G-030-010)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor Dahl opened the public hearing
regarding General Plan Amendment GPA-17-90.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Mailing - Notice of Public Hearing
Affidavit of Publication - Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Department Recommendation Dated November 19, 1991
City Clerk Nichols advised that no protests were received.
Planning and Community Development Director Perry stated that a letter was
received from the applicant withdrawing his request; therefore, no action is
necessary.
PUBLIC HEARING
- re General Plan Amendment GPA-11-90, Draft Revision to the
Land Use Element of the Redding General Plan
11
11/19/91
(G-030-070)
The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor Dahl opened the public hearing
regarding General Plan Amendment GPA-11-90.
The following documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk:
Affidavit of Publication - Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Department Recommendation Dated November 19, 1991
City Clerk Nichols advised that protests were received from the Law
Corporation of Carr, Kennedy, Peterson & Frost and the Shasta Group of the
Sierra Club.
Planning and Community Development Director Perry related that at its regular
meeting of October 22, 1991, following the conclusion of a public hearing, the
Planning Commission recommended approval of the draft revision to the Land Use
Element of the Redding General Plan to the City Council. In addition, the
Commission authorized preparation of a draft Notice of Negative Declaration
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). State law
requires that the Council must first act and approve the Negative Declaration
before it can act on the draft revision to the Land Use Element.
Mr. Perry explained that the Land Use Element is a follow-up to Judge Lund's
decision where he made several findings regarding the Redding General Plan,
some of which have been previously cured through separate action. One of the
findings made was that the General Plan contained obsolete data, principally
in the Land Use Element, which is the reason for the amendment. The attempt
of the amendment is to update the document's obsolete data and text. In
addition, policies and such that have been promulgated by the City Council and
the Planning Commission over the years are also reflected in the element. It
is important to note that neither the land use classifications, nor the land
use maps, are recommended to be changed. The amendment is basically limited
to the data, the text and the policies, and not the land use classifications
which cover neither the intensity of use, commercial versus residential, nor
the density use for the different residential categories, that aspect remains
the same. The policies are generally non-specific and do not pertain to one
area, but enable the overlapping of the foundation of the land use planning,
which has been done in recent years with the area plans on an area plan basis,
taking 6, 10 or 12 square miles that are geographically whole at a time, and
doing the land use planning within the overall framework of the overall
general plan.
Mr. Perry related that if Council wants to explore making a real change in
direction, either by allowing additional density and intensity of uses that
now exist in the plan or reducing them, it will require that the document go
back to the Planning Commission for consideration and processing and would
require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Mr. Perry stated that the recently updated Housing Element and the updated
Land Use Element are intended to provide a foundation to further amendments to
the Redding General Plan. If the proposed schedule for updating other
elements, area plans and consolidating areas, which is included in the
element, is followed, Council is making a commitment over the next ten years
to extend a certain amount of money each year, either for consultants or
staff, to continue the overall update of the plan. Upon completion, the end
product will probably be essentially the same as it is today, but it will be
in a new format in terms of the way the document is written. The document
will be based on the statistics in the Land Use Element and other things which
are currently occurring; i.e., the River and Waterways Commission is looking
in terms of river management, with the first step being the updating of the
Open Space and Conservation Element; the Master Traffic Plan is now being
finalized through the Department of Public Works and will provide a basis,
with the traffic model particularly being the most important part, to update
the Circulation Element; and the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan, which
the Recreation and Parks Department is preparing, will enable an update of the
Recreation Element. These three updates are expected to be done during the
next year on an in-house type basis without the use of a consultant. In
addition, it is the desire of staff to update at least one area plan a year,
beginning with the older ones or with areas which currently do not have a
plan, and working through until the ones which have been most recently adopted
are being updated.
12
11/19/91
Mr. Perry explained that under the California Environmental Quality Act, an
update is considered a project. To that end, a Negative Declaration was
prepared with the major consideration being that the Land Use maps and
classifications are not being amended, nor are any other Elements at this
time. What is in effect on the existing maps at this time will be the same
both before and after the amendment. He stated that quite clearly, this is a
decision that can be challenged here and in California today. Again, the
intent, at this time, is to follow through on Judge Lund's findings of
obsolescence and try to amend the document to remove those problems. He
related that this document represents neither the beginning, nor the end of
the Redding General Plan; rather, it is the evolution of a process that has
been going on for some years.
Mr. Perry said that if Council decides that the plan does have a significant
impact, even though the land use maps and the classifications are not being
amended, then, as requested by Mr. Frost and the Sierra Club, the appropriate
action would be to complete an EIR. If that is done, for all practical
purposes, it would be the same as writing an EIR on the existing plan today,
as there are no proposed changes to the land use maps or classifications. He
indicated that several things do require an EIR under CEQA: 1) Serious
public controversy on the element itself, not about some other incidental
project; and 2) Disagreement between experts.
From his perspective as Planning Director, Mr. Perry related that an EIR on
the update is not meaningful and he would rather spend the money on updating
other elements if the same amount of dollars have to be spent.
Mr. Perry indicated that as an alternative to either a Negative Declaration or
an EIR, CEQA does note two other options. The first is the requirement for
preparing an EIR on a local General Plan can be satisfied by the General Plan
itself. He indicated that he thought this only works within the context of
doing an update on the entire General Plan. In other words, it would make
sense if the task dealt with updating all the elements, or any future elements
you might do, at this particular time, however, does not make sense within
just the context of the Land Use Element itself. The second alternative is to
use a mitigated Negative Declaration, which is basically the attachment of
conditions to the Negative Declaration to modify a project. In this case, it
is the update of the adoption of policies and the update of data, eliminating
any which are felt to have environmental impacts. This would be difficult
because the policies contained in the document are expressly intended to do
just that, and basically, if there is a bias in terms of the policies that are
being proposed, they are biased toward mitigation. This is also reflected in
several of the other elements which have been completed over the last several
years, particularly in the area plans which have EIR's as part of the planned
development.
Mr. Perry indicated that the issues are whether the City should adopt the
update of the Land Use Element and if a Negative Declaration should be adopted
at this time in order to do that.
Mr. Perry stated that Council's alternatives under the Environmental Act or
CEQA guidelines are to either adopt the Negative Declaration or require an
EIR. If an EIR is required, it will require a budget allocation and the
recruitment of a consultant, unless staff is to be relieved of other current
assignments in order to work on the EIR. With the current budget deficit,
Council may want to simply look at whether there will be sufficient funds for
an EIR; although this should not by itself form the basis of either completing
or not completing an EIR.
Mr. Perry related that Council's options, in terms of the Land Use Element,
are to approve the Element as recommended or to adopt the element with some
modifications. Any changes which are made to the maps or the intensity or
density of the use of property, will require that the document be referred
back to the Planning Commission. He opined that this would then require the
completion of an EIR. If Council should choose not to do an update, this
would leave Council in a somewhat confused condition with respect to projects
occurring within the City, as the obsolescent data that one judge has already
found needs to be updated would still exist. He indicated that the last full
General Plan update which occurred in this area was the County General Plan
update and it took over a year to complete and cost approximately $300,000.
If the entire General Plan were to be updated, he stated that it would not
probably cost that much, however, it would require a considerable amount of
13
11/19/91
time and involve such things as citizens committees. Again, if the direction
of the General Plan is changed, it will require that the document go back to
the Planning Commission with both funding and direction.
At this point, it is the recommendation of staff that the public hearing be
opened to consider the draft element and comments on the Negative Declaration.
At this particular time, staff is requesting the adoption of the element,
however, Council may desire to take additional time, which is entirely
appropriate.
In response to Council Member Buffum, Mr. Perry stated that if an EIR were to
be completed, it would be similar to the one completed on the Enterprise Zone
and estimated it would cost between $25,000 and $35,000, depending on the
consultant.
Dan Frost, 420 Redcliff Drive, entered his letter of November 14, 1991,
incorporated herein by reference, into the record. He stated that in addition
to himself, he represents the plaintiffs in Phyllis Lawler, et al v. City of
Redding, Lance Mayfield, George and Mary Fowler, George and Molly Cole, Agnes
Woodford, Dennis and Carol Layman, Jim Wheeler and Linda Vasilakis. He opined
that the law clearly requires the preparation of an EIR. He stated that the
City of Redding has never had an EIR prepared for its General Plan and CEQA,
especially under circumstances where no previous EIR has been prepared,
requires an EIR so that the City and all its citizens are fully aware of all
the implications of the development which is permitted by that document. He
stated that until an EIR has been prepared, Council is not in a position to
judge whether or not the amended Land Use Element should be adopted. He asked
Council to look at the basic, reasonable requirement and to ensure that it
fully understands the implications of what the amended plan will allow.
John Stokes, 2899 Fernwood Street, stated that he is concerned about the
planning process in the City of Redding and the lack of public input into the
update of the General Plan. In addition to State mandated legal notices, he
indicated that broad advertising should be done to ensure that citizens are
aware of the opportunity to become involved in helping to establish goals
which serve to accommodate growth and maintain the existing quality of life,
which is one of the most important ingredients of this community. He opined
that the City is not coming up with the necessary innovative answers to the
crisis of growth and needs to take advantage of the tool, an EIR, which has
been provided through state law in order to make informed decisions.
Ilene McCarthy, Managing Attorney with Legal Service of Northern California,
stated that her firm represents the low and very low income population and is
concerned about the relationship between the Land Use Element and the Housing
Element of the City of Redding's General Plan. She explained that state law
requires that the policies contained in the Land Use Element must be
consistent with the policies of other elements of the General Plan, which
includes the Housing Element.
Ms. McCarthy indicated that the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) is requiring the City to make various changes to the Housing
Element which was adopted by the City on April 16, 1991. HCD suggested that
the additional information and analysis should include housing needs, a
resources analysis which provides an inventory of land suitable for
residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for
redevelopment within the timeframe of the element, and an analysis of the
relationship of zoning and public facilities to those sites. She stated that
there is concern that the Housing Element fails to designate sufficient land
for higher densities which are required in order to construct housing which
will satisfy the fair share housing needs of the low and very low income
population. As changes to the Housing Element may require further revisions
to the Land Use Element, she asked that Council defer the adoption of the Land
Use Element until the revised Housing Element is available for review.
Melinda Brown, 9951 Tilden Road, indicated that the utility users' tax was a
move made to protect Redding's future. She stated that land use is one of the
most significant areas which has local control, yet the draft plan relies on a
20 year old EIR, which shows a complete disregard for the planning process.
She urged Council to direct staff to prepare a plan which incorporates the
comments of the County, Bureau of Land Management, the Sierra Club, and Legal
Services of Northern California.
14
11/19/91
Kelly Clark, Chair of the Shasta Group of the Sierra Club, entered his letter
of November 18, 1991, incorporated herein by reference, into the record.
Ed Fowler, 19178 Gravel Plant Road, commented that it will cost approximately
an additional $1,000,000 to build the Softball Complex at the proposed
location, versus any other site, due to such requirements as the widening of
the overpass, creation of on/off ramps, police travel time, and drilling of a
well. He opined that the taxpayers' dollars can be put to better use.
Richard Johnson, 3000 Valentine Lane, stated he was pleased that the document
noted that new development can be beneficial to the City. He related that
both the State Department of Finance and Governor Wilson are noting that
growth by itself may or may not lead to positive economic benefits. He stated
that individuals who want and demand additional infrastructure and services
should be
allowed to pay for them. He indicated that the cost to maintain the quality
of life and planning for the future is not cheap and each dollar spent needs
to be closely watched and public input is important. He concluded that until
such time as land use classifications and land use maps are changed, a new EIR
should be postponed.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Buffum, that
the public hearing be closed. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
Council Member Buffum stated that the issue of the Housing Element and the
Land Use Element perhaps not being in total agreement, at this time, is of
concern to her and indicated that it might be prudent to take time and further
review the document. In addition, she thanked the citizens who took time to
participate in the public hearing.
Council Member Moss expressed his delight at the number of people who realize
the importance of the General Plan, particularly the Land Use Element.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Buffum, seconded by Council Member Moss, that
consideration of General Plan Amendment Application GPA-11-90, Draft Land Use
Element, be continued.
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, Moss and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
ORDINANCE NO. 1973
- Rezoning Application RZ-7-91, by W-4 Ltd. (Southwest
corner of Highway 37 and Caterpillar Road)
(L-010-230)
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Arness, that
the full reading of Ordinance No. 1973 be waived and the City Attorney be
instructed to read the full title: The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
MOTION: Made by Council Member Arness, seconded by Council Member Buffum,
that Ordinance No. 1973 be adopted, an ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Redding amending Section 18.06.020 of the Redding Municipal Code
relating to the rezoning of certain real property in the City of Redding (RZ-
7-91).
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, Moss and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
Ordinance No. 1973 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(B-130-070)
Mayor Dahl asked for Council's support in convening a meeting of the Council's
Finance Committee, Council Member Arness and himself, to examine the idea of a
"Fiscal Impact Statement" and to report back to Council their findings within
the next 60 days.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Buffum, for
the Finance Committee to meet and examine the idea of a "Fiscal Impact
15
11/19/91
Statement" and to report back their findings to the full Council within the
next 60 days. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
POTENTIAL GENERAL FUND BUDGETARY SHORTFALLS
(B-130-070)
Mayor Dahl recalled that at the November 5, 1991, meeting City Manager
Christofferson made a report on the effect of the economic downturn, State
legislative actions and other factors on the City's projected General Fund
budget balance.
Mayor Dahl stated that if both revenues and expenditures can be fine tuned on
a relatively immediate basis, without creating irreversible damage to public
services, the City would be in a much stronger position to cope with whatever
financial problems may face it in the future.
Mayor Dahl proposed that Council ask staff to prepare and submit a plan,
including options, as well as a list of at least $400,000 in reductions, for
its consideration. He requested that the plan include the following: 1)
What projects or programs can be deferred or abandoned, and what are the
likely
impacts of such action; 2) What measures can be taken to reduce labor costs
and what results are likely to occur and can travel expenses be deferred or
reduced; 3) What material and supply costs can be reduced without adverse
impacts; 4) To what extent is the projected PERS rebate likely to produce a
solution and will this be a one-time fix; and 5) What other measures can be
considered to reduce General Fund cost, or to increase revenues in the short-
run, to ensure that the City completes the 1991-1992 fiscal year in the black,
which is required by law and by prudent fiscal management.
Mayor Dahl asked for Council's support in calling a Special Council Meeting to
be held on Tuesday, November 26, 1991, at 5:15 p.m., in the City Hall
Conference Room to discuss the aforementioned items, with the expectation that
further action can be taken in December and January, if circumstances warrant.
Council Member Buffum concurred with Mayor Dahl's recommendation. She stated
she will not be able to attend the meeting; however, she will submit her
comments in writing to the Mayor to be entered into the record.
Council Member Arness opined that people working within the enterprise funds
should also have the same introspective goal as those working out of the
general fund, as the public views these funds as one in the same.
Council Member Moss also concurred with Mayor Dahl's recommendation.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Buffum, to
call a Special Council Meeting for Tuesday, November 25, 1991, at 5:15 p.m.,
in the City Hall Conference Room to discuss potential General Fund budgetary
shortfalls. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
STATE DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL CUTBACKS
(S-050 & A-110)
City Manager Christofferson indicated that the State of California has
announced serious cutbacks in the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control, which includes virtual closure of the Redding office, as well as a
number of other offices throughout the state. Inasmuch as alcohol is
connected to so many crimes and accidents resulting in injuries and death in
our society, this cutback is almost certain to result in some very negative
impacts over time, such as lower level of law enforcement in the alcohol area
and the shifting of the remaining burden to local law enforcement agencies.
It is the recommendation of staff that Council communicate its concerns
regarding the cutback in alcoholic beverage law enforcement to such
individuals as the Governor, Assemblyman, Senator, and possibly others.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Arness, seconded by Council Member Buffum,
authorizing that its concerns regarding the cutback in alcoholic beverage law
enforcement be communicated to the appropriate individuals. The Vote:
Unanimous Ayes
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MONTHLY STATUS REPORT
(A-050-250)
16
11/19/91
Planning Director Perry submitted the Monthly Status Report through October,
1991 for the following work areas: (1) annexations; (2) planning and zoning;
(3) building and population; (4) housing assistance; (5) Redevelopment Agency;
and (6) Cable. This was an information item and no action was required.
TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
(A-050-220-075)
Planning and Community Development Director Perry stated that the Tree
Preservation Ordinance, which staff was instructed to prepare, is before
Council for first reading.
Council Member Buffum explained that the Tree Preservation Subcommittee,
consisting of Council Member Moss and herself, has come a long way in working
with the Tree Committee, the Shasta Builders' Exchange, and various business
persons and environmentalists within the community. In order to make a few
additional changes to the proposed ordinance, she stated that Council Member
Moss and herself are requesting that the item be continued for an additional
two weeks.
17
11/19/91
MOTION: Made by Council Member Buffum, seconded by Council Member Moss, to
continue the item regarding the Tree Preservation Ordinance to December 3,
1991. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes
PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS
(T-010-650 & A-150- )
Planning and Community Development Director Perry recalled that Council
directed staff to initiate revised Property Tax Exchange Agreements on all
annexations pending at Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). These
agreements mirror the Property Tax Exchange Agreements that have been adopted
by Shasta County over the past 15 months on these annexations and provide
Shasta County with 100% of the Base Year Tax and 100% of all annual tax
increment revenue that was allocated to Shasta County prior to annexation.
The agreements also provide Redding 100% of the Base Year Tax that was
allocated to the Shasta County Fire Protection District before annexation and
100% of all annual tax increment revenue.
It is the recommendation of staff that the resolutions rescinding previous
Council action and approving new Property Tax Exchange Agreements be adopted.
In response to Council Member Buffum, Mr. Perry explained that staff has not
received formal notification from LAFCO; however, discussions indicate that
the new filing fee, rather than the filing fee at the time the annexation was
originally filed, will be required.
Council Member Buffum stated that her discussions with Shasta County Board
Members indicate that the County will hold out for additional monies. She
asked if Council wants to start proceedings, when there is not a confirmed
agreement in place.
Council Member Arness opined that he sees Council responding to the Board's
written request.
Mr. Perry explained that the Board has previously adopted Property Tax
Exchange Agreements for all pending annexations using this particular formula.
Mayor Dahl stated that informal discussions with both the Chair and Vice Chair
indicate that they are willing to move forward with the pending annexations
and that the other issues can be dealt with on future annexations. In
addition, positive signs regarding the proposed agreements were received at
the last LAFCO meeting.
In response to Council Member Buffum, City Manager Christofferson stated he
spoke with Mike Johnson, Shasta County's Chief Executive Officer, and he saw
no problem with the adoption of these resolutions, as the Board has previously
adopted agreements using the same formula. He indicated that the only issue
left is the fee which LAFCO will assess, and that is a separate issue.
In view of the General Fund deficit, Council Member Buffum asked if there is a
concern regarding the annexations.
Mayor Dahl responded that the only other alternative is no annexations.
MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Arness, that
the following resolutions be adopted:
1) Resolution No. 91-499, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-368 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 88-2 (Oregon
Gulch/Texas Springs Road Area);
2) Resolution No. 91-500, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-366 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 88-7 (Old
Highway 44);
3) Resolution No. 91-501, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-568 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 89-5 (Buckeye
Area);
18
11/19/91
4) Resolution No. 91-502, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-364 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 89-14
(Girvan/Pit Road Area);
19
11/19/91
5) Resolution No. 91-503, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-369 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 89-15 (Bond
Ridge Drive);
6) Resolution No. 91-504, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-363 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 89-16 (Rancho
Road);
7) Resolution No. 91-505, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-365 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-1 (Abernathy
Lane);
8) Resolution No. 91-506, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-569 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-2 (Quartz
Hill/Keswick Dam);
9) Resolution No. 91-507, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-367 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-3 (Clear
Creek Mobile Park);
10) Resolution No. 91-508, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-522 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-8 (Hollow
Lane Area);
11) Resolution No. 91-509, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-523 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-9 (Kisling
Road Area);
12) Resolution No. 91-510, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-524 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-10 (Posey
Lane Area); and
13) Resolution No. 91-511, a resolution of the City Council of the City of
Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 90-570 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-12 (Quartz
Hill/Keswick Dam Area II).
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, Moss and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
Resolution Nos. 91-499, 91-500, 91-501, 91-502, 91-503, 91-504, 91-505, 91-
506, 91-507, 91-508, 91-509, 91-510, and 91-511 are on file in the office of
the City Clerk.
PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE AGREEMENT
- Annexation 90-15, Tierra Oaks
(T-010-650 & A-150-237)
Planning and Community Development Director Perry recalled that Council
directed staff to initiate revised Property Tax Exchange Agreements on all
annexations pending at Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). These
agreements mirror the Property Tax Exchange Agreements that have been adopted
by Shasta County over the past 15 months on these annexations and provide
Shasta County with 100% of the Base Year Tax and 100% of all annual tax
increment revenue that was allocated to Shasta County prior to annexation.
The agreements also provide Redding 100% of the Base Year Tax that was
allocated to the Shasta County Fire Protection District before annexation and
100% of all annual tax increment revenue.
It is the recommendation of staff that the resolution rescinding previous
Council action and approving a new Property Tax Exchange Agreement for Tierra
Oaks be adopted.
20
11/19/91
MOTION: Made by Council Member Arness, seconded by Council Member Buffum,
that Resolution 91-512 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Redding rescinding City Council Resolution No. 91-483 and approving a
resolution involving property tax transfers between the County of Shasta and
the City of Redding for the City of Redding Reorganization No. 90-15 (Tierra
Oaks).
21
11/19/91
Voting was as follows:
Ayes: Council Members - Arness, Buffum, and Dahl
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - Fulton
Abstain: Council Members - Moss
Resolution No. 91-512 is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
ORDINANCE
- Conflict of Interest Code
(F-010-150)
City Clerk Nichols explained that Government Code Section 87300 requires every
agency to adopt and promulgate a conflict of interest code which designates
the positions within an agency which make or participate in making
governmental decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on any
financial interest.
Ms. Nichols related that the Fair Political Practices Commission Regulation
18730 contains provisions for the body of a conflict of interest code, which
has recently been standardized to apply to all agencies. Incorporating this
regulation by reference as the body of the City's code means that all changes
to the required provisions of a conflict of interest code will automatically
be a part of its code. By doing so, the body, or required provisions of the
code, will always be up-to-date and in compliance with the law and only
require that the appendix of designated positions and the disclosure
categories current with the organizational structure of the agency be amended.
It is the recommendation of staff that the Model Conflict of Interest Code be
offered for first reading.
Council Member Moss offered Ordinance No. 1975 for first reading, an ordinance
of the City Council of the City of Redding amending Title 2 of the Redding
Municipal Code by repealing Chapter 2.88, 2.89, and 2.90; and adding Chapter
2.90 pertaining to the Conflict of Interest Code for designated positions of
the City of Redding.
ROUTINE REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Letter from Pacific Gas and Electric Company re Rate Adjustment
(S-050-350)
Alcoholic Beverage License Applications
(A-110-140)
Holiday Quality Foods #43 (North State Grocery, Inc.)
2225 Eureka Way
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, at the hour of 8:45 p.m., Mayor Dahl declared
the meeting adjourned to 8:30 a.m., November 23, 1991, at the Cascade Room of
the Best Western Hilltop Inn, 2300 Hilltop Drive, Redding, California, for a
Council workshop.
APPROVED:
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
City Clerk