Untitled

RED BLUFF

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

DATE OF MEETING: June 7, 2005

TIME OF MEETING: 6:15 P.M. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION

7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING

PLACE OF MEETING: RED BLUFF COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL

Councilmembers Present: Andy Houghton, Mayor

Wayne Brown, Mayor Pro Tem

Forrest Flynn

Larry Stevens

Councilmembers Absent: Russ Frey

Staff Present: Susan Price, City Manager

Richard Crabtree, City Attorney

Cheryl Smith, Deputy City Clerk

Michael Damon, Fire Chief

. Al Shamblin, Police Chief

Charlie Mullen, Planning Director

Margaret Van Warmerdam, Finance Director

J D Ellison Sr., Building Director/Official

Gary Antone, Public Works Director/City Engineer

Nik Reikalas, Parks & Recreation Director

Donna Gordy, City Treasurer

CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION – 6:15 P.M.

1. Public Employee Performance Evaluation – Annual Goals and Objectives, City Manager - Government Code Section 54957 (b) (1)

Mayor Houghton reported that the City Council had given direction to the City Manager.

Mayor Houghton introduced Donna Gordy, the new City Treasurer and asked that she lead the Pledge of Allegiance and the assemblage joined in.

Bev Garrett presented a signed petition to Mayor Houghton requesting that the alley between Walnut and Hickory Streets, behind La Corona, be paved and requested that this item be placed on the agenda for the June 21, 2005 City Council meeting.

John Elko, concerned citizen, spoke regarding his concern with debris that is moved around and thrown up by GreenWaste’s sweeper instead of the sweeper removing the debris from streets. A CD of photo’s that was taken was given to both the City Council and Dave Vaughn of GreenWaste for review.

Michael Damon, Fire Chief, announced that Chief Gerry Gray’s wife had given birth to a daughter, Chloe, on this date.

PROCLAMATION

Mayor Houghton presented the Proclamation to Cathy Wilson who was present to accept on behalf of Relay for Life.

Cathy Wilson thanked everyone on behalf of Relay for Life and invited everyone to drop by the 24 hour relay which would be held on June 9^th and 10^th at Vista School. She reported that as a two time cancer survivor she knows that the money raised by this event goes back into the community.

M/S/C Brown, Flynn to pull Item # 6 for discussion and approve the remainder of the consent agenda.

AYES: Councilmembers: Brown, Flynn, Houghton and Stevens

Margaret Van Warmerdam, Finance Director, reviewed with the City Council that the City had contracted with an outside firm to prepare this State Mandated Cost update. If there is a State law that requires the City to do things, then the State should reimburse the City for this work. The City is currently owed $134,956.00 by the State of California and if the City has any chance to be reimbursed this money it needs to be tracked for future reimbursement by the State, but it is not booked until it’s actually received.

Councilmember Flynn stated that he appreciated the report and that since it was informational no action was needed.

WORKERS COMPENSATION AND LIABILITY INSURANCE REFUND AND ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR ENDING 6/30/04

REQUEST TO WAIVE PLANNING FEES RELATING TO PROCESSING USE PERMIT NO. 360 FOR THE P.A.T.H. EMERGENCY/TRANSITIONAL HOMELESS SHELTER PROPOSAL AT 1407 MONTGOMERY ROAD

Mayor Pro Tem Brown questioned if the fees waived would set any type of precedence for future projects.

Charlie Mullen, Planning Director, reported that the City had made a commitment to waive fees as part of the CDBG funding.

Susan Price, City Manager, reported that the State does request that Cities consider waiving fee’s for low-income housing.

Richard Crabtree, City Attorney, responded that waiver of these fees is allowed by State law as long as there is a rational basis for doing so.

M/S/C Stevens, Flynn to waive the $1,275.00 in Planning fees relating to the processing of Use Permit No. 360 to consider establishing an emergency/transitional homeless shelter at 1407 Montgomery Road.

Susan Price, City Manager, reviewed the staff report and gave staff’s recommendation that the City Council authorize the 2005 annual rate adjustment requested by GreenWaste of Tehama in accordance with the Commercial and Residential service agreements.

Ron Nelson, citizen, spoke regarding his concerns that fees had just been raised with the implementation of Mandatory Trash.

Susan Price, City Manager, stated that this rate change was contained in the current contract.

Mayor Houghton questioned if there was an increase with the implementation of Mandatory Trash.

Councilmember Flynn stated that he did not feel that the mandatory trash had been in effect long enough to have a tracking record as to whether it’s benefiting them or do they in fact need this increase.

Dave Vaughn, District Manager for Waste Connections of California/GreenWaste of Tehama, stated that there was couple of issues that were being looked at. One was the increase of 25 cents which went to Residential customers only and that was for the enhanced recycling program. This request is 80% of the CPI as outlined in the contract and is for both Commercial and Residential Rates accordingly. Mandatory Trash was just implemented in March of this year and they are in the process of negotiating with the City on different contract rates and terms, but as it relates now the cost of fuel, health and welfare are exceeding the 2% rate increase as it relates now.

Councilmember Flynn questioned Mr. Vaughn if he felt this rate increase was justified with the recent mandatory trash implementation.

Councilmember Stevens stated that he had the opportunity to see what Mr. Elko and Mr. and Mrs. Nelson have commented on regards to the problems with the sweeper. He encouraged Mr. Vaughn to meet personally with Mr. Elko and Mr. and Mrs. Nelson to view the problems they have mentioned. Boats, campers, trailers set out on the street for weeks at a time and the sweeper can’t get to the areas to sweep. He wondered if there was anything that could be done, as far as with equipment adjustments to make the sweeper work and/or collect better. He has seen the problems they have mentioned, not only in their neighborhood, but in other neighborhoods as well.

Mr. Vaughn stated that he would be happy to meet with the Nelson’s and has been to their neighborhood because of the complaints and issues that they have had and that he was pleased to get Mr. Elko’s information and would be contacting him. As far as the street sweeping they had been working with the City and it has been an issue that the City staff has been very diligent on and discussions have been made regarding improving and/or changing in order to provide a more equitable service.

Ms. Price stated that this was part of the contract discussions that will be brought back to the City Council and that she and the City Attorney have been reviewing the draft and trying to finalize the contract.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown stated that he knows which day his street is done and he makes sure that cars are out of the way and on his street they do a very good job. He questioned if the City was required to grant these raises just because they are under contract.

Ms. Price stated that they are in the agreement, but that a new negotiated contract agreement will be brought back to the City Council and that this was something that could be discussed at that time.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown stated that GreenWaste did respond to his requests to address a couple of situations up in the Nelson’s neighborhood and they did get done. He questioned if there was a schedule.

Councilmembers Stevens stated that he did not know if they had signs posted and that he had lived in his home six years and had never seen a letter regarding the street sweeper schedule.

Ms. Price stated that one of the things that has been discussed is better education and making sure that flyers are there to make sure that people are notified of different events such as bulky item pickup day, sweeping, etc.

Councilmember Stevens questioned if a line could be added to the billing that would indicate “your street sweeping day is such”.

Ron Nelson stated that Mr. Vaughn stated it went up 25 cents when in fact it went up 50 cents.

Mr. Flynn stated that street sweeping was not an issue that was being discussed at this time, but the rate adjustment.

John Elko, citizen, stated that in Daly City the streets are swept twice a week. One day they sweep one direction and the next they sweep the opposite side. One thought is to have more sweeping and on alternate sides of the streets.

Kathy Nelson stated that they had not seen the street sweeper since they were in with their complaint.

Ms. Price stated that one idea that she had was taking the schedule sheet which would show the schedule of street sweeping etc. and actually sticking it into the lid of the garbage bin on pickup days.

Rick Crabtree, City Attorney, stated that the City was mandated to consider it, under the contract they’re entitled to submit a request for a cost of living increase on an annual basis. But the City Council is not required to grant it, however, if you don’t pursuant to the contract terms, GreenWaste could elect to leave if they so wished.

TRI-COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (TCEDC) COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR 2005-2009

Susan Price, City Manager, reviewed the staff report and gave staff’s recommendation that the City Council review and discuss the existing list of City projects, make general additions and/or changes to the list, and approve the project priority lists for the 2005-2009 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. Part of this process is to prioritize City projects for inclusion into this document and one of the benefits of this document is that when the City applies for Economic Development Administration, Federal economic infrastructure funding that the City receives a benefit from that as the cash match is not as large.

Gayle Locke, citizen, questioned where on the long term planning lists, Steps A, B and C, was low and moderate income housing and housing for disabled. Developing all the business and economic part of the City, but you also need safe, adequate and accessible housing for the people that will be employed in the City.

Councilmember Stevens stated that it was becoming far more difficult for low-income and disabled people, as well as a single parent household to obtain housing with the cost and type of housing that has been going in. He felt that item #4 on the Priority A list, industrial development/job creation and retention needed to be moved up closer to the top if the people who live and exist in Red Bluff are going to need the jobs to pay for the cost of housing available. The next item was #6, which was the implementation of required ADA access and improvements under Priority B needs to be moved up to the Priority A list. He felt ADA issues and housing, low and moderate needs to be put together collectively in some sort of phrase that shows that the City is paying attention to not only accessibility out on the streets, but are making sure that available housing is being built. It was his understanding that under California law there are some things that are being done to make houses more adaptable for ADA if needed.

J.D. Ellison, Building Director/Official, stated that they were rewriting Chapter 11 at this time for accessibility for CAB. It will also have mandatory for residential houses for existing now into ADA and future ADA. For example each house will have to have 5 items for ADA, such as built-in hand bars, ramps that will be accessible into the house, at least in one direction. They are thinking of eliminating with 32” rear doors and making them 36” and they are also doing the removable front cabinets for bathrooms, at least one mandatory, and the kitchen area.

Councilmember Stevens stated although he has always been very supportive of the Boys and Girls Club, Item #11 on Priority List A, right now it’s not on the front burner as it once was and that he would like to see item #11 moved from Priority List A to Priority List B and move item #6 from the Priority List B to Priority List A and rephrase that to address ADA issues for implementation, improvements and housing. Also add somewhere the addition of low-income housing, because even though a Redevelopment Agency will formally address some of this, he believed it was going to take sometime to get that established.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown’s question was on #3 on Priority List A and if the City could put some of this to rest if a Redevelopment Agency will address all of this.

Ms. Price stated that it could and that there was a 20% set aside for housing and with the current housing rehabilitation programs under the Community Development Block Grant and the HOME Program can and do address ADA accessibility issues with respect to housing.

Councilmember Stevens stated that he would like to take item 6 in Priority B and move it up to #11 under Priority A and drop #11 down into Priority B.

Ms. Price stated that Shasta College would be #1, Redevelopment Agency would be #2, Industrial development/job creation/retention would be #3 and #4 would be Lake Red Bluff.

Councilmember Stevens stated that he agreed with that list and then switch item B-6 with A-11.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown asked Ms. Locke if her question regarding if this would address mobile home parks and if this was part of her question this evening.

Gayle Locke stated that it was her understanding that if you list housing on a priority list like this, then it makes certain grant possibilities open to you, or it raises your potential when you write for a grant because you have shown preplanning.

Councilmember Stevens stated that so much of the existing housing in Red Bluff has been designed without any consideration for accessibility for disabilities. The longer a person can stay in their existing home by making modifications the better chance the person has to keep the savings they have.

Ms. Locke stated that she felt if the City listed this on it’s priority list then it would encourage older people to upgrade their homes.

Ms. Price stated that the Housing Element of the General Plan was recently updated and it does include some goals for housing.

M/S/C Stevens, Flynn to exchange #6 on Priority B and #11 on Priority A and move #4 up to #3 on the Priority A listing.

ALCOHOL/FIREWORKS RESTRICTIONS IN THE CITY PARK ON THE 4^TH OF JULY/CLOSURE OF CITY PARK BOAT LAUNCH FROM 10 P.M. JULY 3, 2005 TO 10 AM JULY 5, 2005

Al Shamblin, Police Chief, reviewed the staff report and gave staff’s recommendation that the City Council direct staff with a recommendation regarding:

1. The use of alcohol in the River City Park between the hours of 8 AM to 6 PM on July 4, 2005.

2. A designated area as described in the staff report prohibiting both alcohol and fireworks.

3. Closure of the River Park Boat Launch from July 3, 2005 at 10 PM to July 5, 2005 at 10 AM.

Chief Shamblin stated that in past years the use of alcohol in the River City Park between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. on July 4, 2005, allowing alcohol for this limited time has reduced the number of Law Enforcement problems in the park. A restricted area near the children’s playground restricting both fireworks and alcohol has also been utilized for the last two years. Creating a restricted area for both fireworks and alcohol will allow parents with children an area to enjoy the fireworks display without being subjected to this kind of behavior. The Fire Department has stated that they will monitor this area if approved by the City Council.

Councilmember Stevens stated that there had been numerous discussions over the last few months regarding alcohol and alcohol permits and understanding that more and more people each year attend the display of fireworks at the park. He questioned Chief Shamblin if alcohol in the park on that day was an activity that the City wishes to continue using and if the Chief was comfortable with this procedure.

Chief Shamblin stated that to restrict it to a half day has definitely helped the department, but if the City Council choses to not allow alcohol at the park they would give warnings out and try to enforce that as well. It had not been a huge problem to do it until 6 o’clock and then if people come down and they are drinking, there is usually about 6 officers in the park at that time and they can make contact with those people and that this has worked in the past.

1. The use of alcohol in the River City Park between the hours of 8 AM to 6 PM on July 4, 2005.

2. A designated restricted area near the children’s playground, restricting both fireworks and alcohol.

3. Closure of the River Park Boat Launch from July 3, 2005 at 10 PM to July 5, 2005 at 10 AM.

(2) REQUEST FOR REFUND OF BUSINESS LICENSE TAX AND OCCUPANCY PERMIT FEE FOR MEMBER LIBBY COATES

Margaret Van Warmerdam, Finance Director, reviewed the staff report and gave staff’s recommendation that the City Council consider the request for a business license tax exemption for members of the non-profit Tehama County Arts Council as part of the Arts Council’s “Art in Public Places” project and refund of the business license tax and occupancy permit fee for member Libby Coates.

Councilmembers Stevens commented that art in public places is becoming more popular and is being used to show local talent. He would like to see more of it in the City of Red Bluff, at City Hall, the Community Center and areas where people can show their talent.

Ms. Van Warmerdam stated that she understood when the City Council decided to exempt the non-profits for special events, but would like to point out that in this case the City Council would now be exempting a member of a non-profit. If this precedence is set, the City needs to be prepared that other individuals will come back and say that they are under the umbrella of a non-profit and would like their business license and occupancy refunded.

Susan Price, City Manager, stated that she wanted to make a note of what the occupancy permit fee is, because one of the questions that surrounded this agenda item was a question of what is the $35 that comes with a business license fee. It was explained that it was an occupancy permit fee and JD Ellison, Building Director/Official would explain what that was.

JD Ellison, Building Director/Official, stated that it is required by State Law in Code Section 109. The department verifies that it’s a legal space for that type of business to occupancy to be there and whether it might require one, two, three hour. It is also verified that the electrical, mechanical and accessibility to that unit and make sure that everything is in compliance as a standard building, so that we don’t have sub-standard offices and/or buildings that will cause trouble and/or havoc by fire and/or injury.

Ms. Price stated that there is a process that the City has where the applications for Business Licenses are circulated to the Department Heads for review and comment.

Councilmember Flynn stated that the $35 is a token fee, as it does not cover the actual cost of staff time and questioned how many of these non-profits might fall under this same.

Ms. Van Warmerdam stated that you may have people that belong to the Chamber of Commerce, HRBA, schools and that there were quite a few non-profits within the City Limits, which is her consideration, as if this door is opened what occurs at the next step. This individual has already gone through the process so staff time has already been spent in this situation.

Councilmember Stevens stated that one of the questions that would have to be asked is its relevancy and importance to the community and what they are doing. There are things that may not seem in essence making money for the City, but is it enhancing for the City. It’s great to have fees, charge and make money, but there comes a point in time where we need to do and be responsible to things for the community that enhances the quality of life for the citizens that are here and those who continue to come here. Because we have done some of these special things in the past and made the community what it is, is why it is attractive to people and it’s one of the reasons why he came here. He does see the benefit of what these volunteer people do to make Red Bluff more special.

Wayne Brown, Mayor Pro Tem, asked that Ms. Van Warmerdam enlighten him as to what he was reading, as he thought this was arts displayed out on the sidewalks.

Ms. Van Warmerdam stated that this first started out at the Community Center when non-profits were holding events. They approached the City Manager, as well as herself, and stated that they would like to be exempt from the Business License. The next time was when there were special events held in the downtown area and the organizer said that they did not want the City to go after their vendors, and according to the ordinance that she has been given to enforce, it states that there are no exceptions. But it was decided not to charge that group, now this group says that they are a non-profit and hold events downtown and they feel that their members should not have to pay for a Business License and/or Occupancy Permit and would like a refund, which brings us to tonight’s agenda item.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown stated that it is the Occupancy Tax part that was confusing to him and he had misunderstood.

Ms. Van Warmerdam stated that when this person first came in to City Hall she told the department that she was an artist; staff went through the whole Business License procedure with her. She opened a business, filed out an Occupancy Permit based on where she would be located at and then Occupancy Permit went to the Building Department, while the rest of the Business License with the Occupancy Permit circulated to the remaining departments. It was approved, the Occupancy was approved and the Business License was approved.

Ms. Price stated that their art is displayed in public places and they may have had an event or two.

Councilmember Stevens commented that this is not just a display for show casing artists, but is a functioning operating for sale business. For example if the Council Chambers were lined with pictures they would have price tags on them.

Ms. Van Warmerdam stated that her objection is not when she attends a non-profit event being held within the City Limits of Red Bluff. The reason an Occupancy and Business License was required was that she was established in business just like any other individual that comes into the City of Red Bluff.

The City Council conceded that they had all been reading and interpreting it differently.

Ms. Price stated that she believed the Tehama County Arts Council would like you to read it in the way that you had been. Venita Philbrick asked that this be placed on the agenda and she had been told that the City would appreciate having a letter from the Tehama County Arts Council explaining what it is that they were requesting.

Councilmembers Stevens questioned how they got away with being included as a non-profit and whether the profits from the sale of these pictures going back into the promotion of local artists or are they going into someone’s pocket.

Ms. Van Warmerdam stated that the way she understood it and Ms. Price concurred that dues were paid to the Arts Council and she feels that since the non-profit is exempt from a Business License she should be exempt from a Business License.

Ms. Price stated that was the issue that the City Council had with the Downtown as now you’re getting requests for going under the umbrella of a non-profit.

Rick Crabtree, City Attorney, stated that he misunderstood also. What concerns him legally is that the request for an exemption came from the Arts Council and not the person that wants the exemption and normally it’s a requirement that the person seeking the waiver be the applicant for the waiver and here it’s not the case. It might be appropriate to turn it back for that reason and allow Libby Coats to explain her circumstance to the Council. Is she selling pictures for profit, we don’t know the answer to that.

Ms. Price stated that this was similar to the downtown crafters booths for a particular event (1 or 2 day) Civil War Days if you will. Venita interpreted this as the request is written and her interpretation is that since the City Council made that determination about non-profit umbrellas that this fit within that context.

M/S/C Stevens, Brown to rescind the authorization to waive those fees, ask for greater clarification by the appropriate individual that is seeking the exemption, that it be brought back to the City Council at a future meeting with more specific information.

M/S/C Stevens, Flynn to authorize the City Manager to enter into a three year lease order with Inland Business Systems in the amount of $19,950.12 for one copier machine to serve City Hall.

Nik Reikalas, Parks & Recreation Director, reported that in the past the Parks & Recreation Department had run ½ day camps at a very reasonable rate and is actually subsidized by the City. This proposal is a full cost recovery for the camp in a full day camp option, which in his past experience has been very successful in other Cities. It allows working parents to drop their children off at 7:30 in the morning and pick then up at 5-6 o’clock in the evening. It is essentially a daycare, but less expensive than a daycare option with qualified staff who are fingerprinted and skilled in recreation programming, arts, crafts and also incorporated in the week would be guest speakers, field trips and transportation costs if needed. So there would be no cost incurred by the City except to allot the extra funds which expensed but would be made up in full cost recovery with the fees that parents would pay.

Councilmember Stevens stated that having been part of the Parks and Recreation and administering an after school program and the six week period of the summer fun zone program that the City charged $5.00 per week and if you paid for all 6 weeks you got it for $25.00 for 6 weeks and the program went from 9 a.m. until 1 p.m. Although it wasn’t full day people were squawking because of the $5.00 per week charge. He was concerned that parents may sign up children and if the program does not get the number of children needed to cover the cost of the program, it will be cancelled and then parents will be scrabbling to find daycare for their children at the last minute.

Mr. Reikalas stated that this is not something that can be put together in just a few weeks. This is a proposal to have in place so that when the next winter, spring and summer breaks come around we have the advertising ready.

Councilmember Stevens questioned Mr. Reikalas if his thinking was to have this in place in 2006, not 2005 and if he had done any type of a survey that you have a number of concrete interested parties.

Mr. Reikalas stated that was correct and that the number of interested parties would be part of the advertising process.

Councilmember Stevens stated that he would like to see more data compiled with either flyers that go home with after school program children.

Mr. Reikalas stated that there is a difference with the school age children, Vista children are junior high students and the daycare that parents look for are the 4^th through 6^th graders where they can not be left unattended and need the supervision versus middle school which can take care of themselves.

Mr. Reikalas stated that they had looked at other school facilities in addition to the Community Center.

Mr. Reikalas stated that the prices would range between $65 to $100 per week, depending upon staff and children ratio, if a trip was taken during that week.

Councilmember Stevens questioned the liability issue if field trips were made as cost for insurance for mobilizing students is not cheap.

Susan Price, City Manager, stated that all of that would be addressed as part of this.

Mr. Reikalas stated that the parents would sign the liability waiver for their children just like a softball player adult would sign the liability for playing in a softball league and the parent would assume the liability.

Mr. Crabtree stated that you could and he would recommend that we do so, but it did not guarantee that you would get sued.

Mayor Houghton stated that he felt this was a great project to pursue and see what kind of number you can get.

Ms. Price stated that this is really setting up a structure before spending any kind of money.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown stated that this was in a concept mode at the moment and questioned if this was approved would this come back to the City Council.

Ms. Price stated that was correct. Mr. Reikalas would continue to work on this through the school year and it would be brought back to the City Council where this stands.

Ms. Price stated that it could be brought back to the City Council to budget or it can be placed in the Preliminary Budget, showing a revenue and expenditure.

Mr. Reikalas stated that he is currently working on this with the City Manager and Finance Director to incorporate programs like this for the next fiscal year.

Mayor Houghton stated that the City Council would have another chance to say no to this.

Ms. Price stated that was correct and if the City Council approved the proposal it would be moving toward that next year and we would include the revenue and expenditure in the budget.

Councilmember Flynn stated that he felt that this type of program could have a lot of possibilities for helping the local people and encourages him for looking into this and bringing it to the City Council.

Councilmember Stevens questioned if there were any groups that the City could partner with to accommodate some of the low income residents who have situations like a single parent where the City could seek some additional donations to offer either particle scholarships or scholarships for needy children as he doesn’t want to create a situation where the cost is prohibited to some people who are desperately in need of this versus those who could afford to make choices to other places.

Mr. Reikalas stated that any camp program that he has ever worked in or supervised has offered a scholarship program and is offset either by appropriation of monies from the City other organizations that have funded it, such as Rotary, Discover Center or Kiwanis.

Councilmember Stevens stated that he would like to see that as part of the overall plan that if you’re looking for a certain number of students to participate in this program that a certain percentage would be qualifying of low income. Also one thing that would need to be taken into consideration is that you may get applications from students with certain disabilities and you would address those disabilities.

M/S/C Flynn, Stevens to approve the #1 Club Camp proposal and authorize funding up to the amount of $6,324 per two week session and up to $3,162 per one week session for the Parks and Recreation Department to implement full day camps for the school winter, spring and summer school breaks contingent upon the receipt of fee revenue to fully cover the cost of the sessions.

Gary Antone, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, reviewed the staff report and gave staff’s recommendation that the City Council adopt the Sidewalk Assessment/Repair/Replacement Program project priority list and ongoing implementation strategy. The program would be implemented on 1) ADA, 2) high pedestrian traffic area (routes to schools, major roadways i.e. arterials, major/minor collectors), 3) calls by homeowners and 4) sidewalks are looked at with Building Permits.

Kathy Nelson, concerned citizen, stated that the report did not rectify the situation of the sidewalks being damaged by tree roots and owners who have replaced sidewalks having them damaged again by the tree roots. If the City does not rectify the problem the City will constantly come back to these homeowners and have them redo their sidewalks. She has yet to find where the City Codes supersedes Government Codes on this issue on who owns the tree and who’s responsibility it is. She continued by stating that all the laws that she has seen and looked up, as she as said before, comes back to the owner, which is the City. At this time she is asking the City Council to reconsider billing the homeowners with all the different things that are going, such as Redevelopment Program where you have to go into debt to qualify for the program, cleaning up the old City dump and replacing sidewalks and questioned if the City was willing to gamble a class action lawsuit on top of it and then have to pay for the sidewalks and such. If you don’t rectify the problem causing the sidewalk to lift it will just continue. A lot of these homes are lower income and people can not afford the replacement cost.

Mr. Antone stated that to remind the City Council the participation that the City provides is going in and removing the damaged areas, cutting tree roots, do whatever trimming is necessary, inspect the tree if that’s the problem that’s causing damage. Determine if it’s healthy, needs to be removed, has overgrown it present location if it’s a City tree. If it’s a homeowner tree then the City doesn’t have jurisdiction over that so it is left up to the homeowner to decide how they would like to deal with it.

Councilmember Stevens questioned how to get a definitive answer to Ms. Nelson’s questions as to who pays and questioned if the City of Red Bluff is different from other Cities or is there a consistency.

Rick Crabtree, City Attorney, stated as discussed at the last meeting the City Council provides answers to those questions. Although he had not done a survey of all Cities in California and the City is consistent with what ordinance he did review on the League of California Cities website. Rectifying would involve removing the trees which is a whole different public policy.

Councilmembers Stevens questioned the option that the City would have, such as granting waivers for sidewalk replacement or low interest loans that would create situations that would ease the pain on some of these homeowners.

Susan Price, City Manager, stated that one thing she had thought of was the program income that comes back in from the Housing Rehab Loan repayments and she could check with the same State agencies to see if the City could utilize that funding, which the City currently has.

Ms. Nelson stated that the City of Redding just went through this and it came back that the City of Redding was responsible for the replacement of their sidewalks. She stated that no where in the City Code does it state that the City owned property is not the responsibility of the City, nor does it say that when the City owns something that has caused the damage to property the City is not liable and they are going to make the adjacent property owner pay for it. If it says that she would like to know where it says that, although law states that the owner of the tree or the problem that has caused the problem they are responsible and asked Mr. Crabtree if that was not true.

Mr. Crabtree stated that this was off the agenda item and it was up to the Mayor to decide what he would like to do.

Mayor Houghton stated that he believed that the City Council has gone over this once before and this item is on the sidewalk repair assessment program.

Ms. Nelson stated that it goes back to who owns the tree and if this priority list is passed it goes back onto the owner to pay for the replacement of the sidewalk.

Councilmember Flynn stated that the City has to treat each individual case by it self, because every case will be slightly different and he felt that Ms. Nelson was trying to micro-manage how the City was going to do these repairs and it’s up to the City to go out and take care of it.

Ms. Nelson stated that she was not micro-managing, she was trying to get the City Council to understand what is going to happen when you start getting a hold of these property owners and having them replace sidewalks that they are not responsible for. She is trying to save the City money on a Class Action Suit.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown questioned if ADA would get first shot regardless of traffic.

Mr. Antone stated that the listing the City Council had could be rearranged in any order that the City Council would like.

Ms. Price stated that you can have a plan for looking at each different priority.

Mr. Crabtree stated that the City is required to set it’s priorities it will address areas that have areas high concentration of public facilities first, which has been done.

Mr. Antone stated that was correct and it was noted that the priority list is set up the school’s are the central focus. There is a lot of traffic that goes to and from the schools with one Safe Routes to School project completed and are currently in the process of gearing up to do a second one.

Councilmember Stevens stated that he had given a copy to the City Attorney and supplied one to Mr. Antone regarding ADA. He stated that ADA was an interesting thing in that there was no grandfather clauses and the are certain things that need to be done. The purpose of ADA is to develop a game plan so that some of the work is accomplished to avoid possible lawsuits. If staff has any of those things in place he would like to see it. Set priorities to avoid the ADA issues of accessibility, curb cuts, trip and falls and that sort of things. Need to make sure that each year money is set aside in the budget to accommodate facilitating the changes necessary. He felt that tree damaged sidewalks should rank very close to the top of the list.

Ms. Price asked that Mr. Antone elaborate on staff availability and how we normally handle things when a call is received.

Mr. Antone stated that the Engineering staff goes out and reviews the site and determines if it is out of compliance with what is used under the City’s insurance carrier. Staff documents what was seen, brings it back to office and make an assessment of what needs to be accomplished. Staff then contacts the owner of the property and explains the situation; describe what the City will provide as far as services and what the responsibility of the owner will be. Many times temporary repairs will be made until permanent repairs can be done. In most cases this has been very successful and that less than ½ dozen people have objected the request by the City to go through with this process. Once the process is initiated and the owner states that they have their contractor ready to go, City staff goes out with 2-3 Street personnel on site to remove any of the concrete issues, a dump truck, backhoe, the City’s tree person comes in to do any of the root cutting and/or tree trimming whatever the case may be and then remove all that material. The responsibility of the owner is to have their contractor come in right behind the removal process, form up the work, Engineering staff returns to the site, inspects what’s there prior to the concrete being poured.

Ms. Price stated that part of the process for having a plan is allocating staff’s time and balance that between what their current responsibilities are in terms of timing.

Councilmember Stevens questioned if staff had time to review a email that he passed on from a company that provided a different process for sidewalk repairs.

Mr. Antone stated that he had reviewed it and also spoken to the company that provides the service. This company comes in and takes a large wedge off the sidewalk to bring it down to where it’s even. In many locations around Red Bluff there are sidewalks that are not thick enough to accomplish some of that work, so it would have limited use in our community, but we could avail ourselves of.

Councilmember Stevens questioned the City Council had authority to assist the homeowner by picking up a portion of the cost in addition to the removal.

Mr. Crabtree stated that public funds can be spent for any public purpose, that’s the City Council’s job to decide how to spend public funds, but every dollar spent there is a dollar that can’t be spent somewhere else.

Ms. Price stated that she would contact the Grant personnel in Sacramento and pose the question as to whether or not the program income can be utilized for either low interest loans or for the very low income, perhaps grants. She also stated that the City could contact the property owners and see what interest there is and begin to deal with those.

Mr. Crabtree stated that was the appropriate way to do it, as everyone’s situation will be different.

Mayor Pro Tem Brown questioned if an ADA ramp on a corner supersede a trip and fall situation.

Mr. Antone stated that it would not and that staff had looked at each of the sidewalk situations and tried to put that into perspective.

Councilmember Stevens stated that his issue on curb cuts is intersections where there are four corners where only one or two have the curb cuts and the others need to be accomplished.

Councilmember Flynn stated that the information received from Public Works pretty much sets the priority.

Ms. Price requested clarification if the City Council wanted staff to handle these upon request or by notification.

Councilmembers Stevens questioned Mr. & Mrs. Nelson if they felt the list would address some of the issues that they had shown Councilmembers.

Mr. Nelson stated that Gary had done a lot of hard work and prioritizing and that the list is a good start.

Mrs. Nelson stated that she had already spoken with an Attorney and they were ready to go and can’t understand why ignoring the law. The Street Superintendent is the one liable for any one that falls and gets hurt.

Ms. Price stated that the City handles claims as they arise through it’s JPA Insurance Liability Pool and they are handled routinely.

Councilmember Stevens stated that they would hope that doesn’t happen and the City Attorney is assuring the Council that what is in the City Code authorizing the billing of homeowners of that portion of repair, so that’s what we’re going with until such time a change of policy is acting upon.

Mr. Nelson stated that this was a good start, but it needs to be addressed now and not wait for the homeowners to contact the City.

M/S/C Flynn, Stevens to accept staff recommendation on the list and notify property owners of what the process is.

Councilmember Stevens commented that once this gets under way he would like to see staff develop a policy to bring back to the City Council that would give some relief when it is a tree that either the tree is pulled, the sidewalk is replaced, that an appropriate tree with the appropriate root structure is replanted.

Mr. Antone stated that some of that is in place already. When it is a tree situation, the City will cut the roots. If it’s a situation where the tree is over grown and needs to be removed, the City will remove it. If it’s a situation where the tree is diseased the City will remove it. If the tree is removed there is an approved tree list that was approved by the City Council some time back and it designates the types of trees that do well in planter strip areas between curbs and sidewalks. There is also the new Land Division and Engineering Standards that are being developed at this time which also deal with tree and planter issues and recommends that brick guards be used in those situations as well.

Councilmember Stevens stated that the only thing missing is some sort of financial relief and he would like to see that explored.

Gary Antone, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, reported that two projects that were left out of the 1998 STIP cycle that had been pushed out on a few occasions as funding was not available. There is an opportunity at this point in time to get the last remaining projects, one is a $750,000 street rehabilitation/reconstruction project and the other one is a same amount that was left over that was designated for bikeway funds of $11,000. The paperwork is being prepared to get to the CTC so that they can act on it in July, but the concern at this time is whether or not the funds will be there. Hopefully the budget will remain as it is and they do not raid or take those funds and put them at some other location in the budget. What this means is that 19-20 streets could get done.

Councilmember Stevens questioned if any additional work was going to be done in the area of Luther Road north on South Jackson.

Mr. Antone stated that the repairs that are currently done now are temporary repairs done by the Contractor and that he would be doing a more permanent patch when they are through, however So. Jackson Street is not on this list because it is included on the Safe Routes to School Project that will reach from Reeds Creek south down to Crosby. The Contractor is expecting to be done with the waterline project by September and the repairs should be done by that time.

Gary Antone, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, reported that this plan was put together in regards to transportation from information obtained in the Circulation Element and reports that had been prepared in the last few years that look at all the circulation items that the City needs. This information will also show up in the Development Impact Fee Study that will be coming before the City Council in the next couple of months. In an effort to get this out in front of developments, in front of the Impact Fee Schedule and other various activities going on in the community so that there is full disclosure as to what direction the City is headed and what sort of costs will be faced to address these issues. An amended list had been provided that added one signal that was left off and that was the Reeds Avenue at So. Jackson Street signal. The recommendation is that the City Council adopt the 2005 Transportation Capital Improvement Plan with the addition of the Reeds Avenue at So. Jackson Street signal addition.

At 9:23 P.M., Mayor Houghton adjourned the Meeting to June 21, 2005 at 7:00 P.M., in the Red Bluff City Council Chambers.

PROCLAMATION

AYES: Councilmembers: Brown, Flynn, Houghton and Stevens

s/b Gloria Shepherd

City Clerk