Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-01-13-92-Adjourned Meeting MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL .9 4 I h OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 13, 1992 The City Council of the City of Downey held an adjourned regular meeting at 7 :35 p.m., January 13, 1992, in the Council Chamber of the Downey City Hall, Mayor Barbara J. Hayden presiding. PRESENT: Council Members: �.� Barbara J. Hayden Mayor Diane P. Boggs Mayor Pro -Tem Robert G. Cormack Robert S. Brazelton Richard D. Carter ALSO PRESENT: Gerald M. Caton, City Manager Peter Thorson, City Attorney Judith McDonnell, City Clerk Lee Powell, Assistant City Manager James Jarrett, Director of Community Services Clayton Mayes, Police Chief Art Rangel, Director of Community Development Richard Redmayne, Acting Director of Public Works Lowell W i l l i a m s , Director of Finance Ron Yoshiki, Assist. Comm. Dev. Director /City Planner Robert Brace, Acting City Engineer Gail Crook, Battalion Chief Charles Baptista, Police Lieutenant June Yotsuya, Assistant to the City Manager Franklin De Groot, Principal Planner William Doebler, Associate Planner Cindi Api dgi an , Executive Secretary PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Hayden presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Linda Irwin for Jo i co' s financial contribution to Su Casa Family Crisis Center. Mayor Hayden presented a Plaque to Frank Hall, Southern California Gas Company, in honor of his retirement. Mayor Hayden presented a plaque of appreciation to former Assistant City Manager Ken Farfsi ng. HEARINGS Mayor Hayden opened the public hearing on LIGHTING DISTRICT ANNEXATION 91/30 - ALLEY WEST OF PARAMOUNT BOULEVARD BETWEEN GALLATIN ROAD AND SUVA STREET. Ms. McDonnell affirmed the Affidavit of Posting of Notice and Proof of Publication. It was moved by Council Member Boggs, seconded b y Council Member Carter, and so ordered to receive and file. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -1- 94[ There was no correspondence received on this matter. There being no one present to speak in favor or opposition to the proposed annexation, it was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Boggs, and so ordered to close the public hearing. RESOLUTION NO. 5523 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY ORDERING ANNEXATION OF A CERTAIN AREA INTO LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT A.D. 121 AND TO MAINTAIN AND FURNISH ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THOSE STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES ON THE STREETS AND PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THOSE AREAS (ANNEXATION 91/30 - ALLEY WEST OF PARAMOUNT BOULEVARD BETWEEN GALLATIN ROAD AND SUVA STREET) The Resolution was read by title only. It was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Boggs, and unanimously carried to waive further reading and adopt. Mayor Hayden opened the public hearing on GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91 -107 AND DOWNEY MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 91 -101 PERTAINING TO SENIOR HOUSING STANDARDS. Ms. McDonnell affirmed the proof of publication. It was moved by Council Member Boggs, seconded by Council Member Carter, and so ordered to receive and file. Mr. Rangel summarized the staff report, explaining the intent of this Ordinance is to provide safe and affordable housing for senior citizens in the community. He discussed concerns regarding density, setbacks, criteria for labeling "senior" developments, conversion to non - senior units, and potential parking and police problems. He narrated a slide presentation depicting senior housing developments in Downey and neighboring cities. He noted various aspects of the proposed Ordinance that address staff, Planning Commission and City Council concerns. Correspondence had been received from Regent Terrace residents that were circulated by Newport Pacific Development Corporation, and Al Marshall, President of Newport Pacific Development, supporting the current regulations for senior housing. Other letters received expressed concern regarding an over - abundance of senior housing in the Hospital- Medical Arts Zone. Another letter criticized the manner in which the form letters were circulated. Mr. Rangel stated the General Plan Amendment establishes new text and standards in the housing element that address Council's concerns, and the Code Amendment would codify those new policies by amending the Downey Municipal Code. No further correspondence was received on this matter. There being no one to speak in favor of the proposed General Plan Amendment /Code Amendment, Mayor Hayden asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak in opposition. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -2- 944-, Mr. Dennis Mod rich, 11445 Dolan Ave., spoke regarding density and minimum age requirements. By increasing the minimum age from 55 to 62, the market will be reduced. He mentioned a survey had been conducted among the citizens living at Regent Terrace, citing the lack of parking, noise and density problems. By reducing the density requirements, the City is adding to the economic difficulty developers are experiencing. He displayed a drawing of a proposed senior citizen development to be built across the street from Regent Terrace. However, if construction regulations are changed, this project w i l l not be approved as it contains 75 units per acre. He requested Council not approve the Ordinance at this time. Mr. Ernie Briggs, 8937 Bairnsdale St., discussed the change in age requirement. There are many retirees between the ages of 55 and 62 that will have to go elsewhere to find affordable housing. He questioned the absence of Whittier as a comparison City in the study, as he felt Whittier is quite similar to Downey. He distributed copies to Council of the Whittier Senior Housing Code and recommended Downey continue the current development standards Y � for senior citizen facilities. Ms. Pat Gomez, 13437 Murphy Hill Dr., Whittier, stated that by adopting this Ordinance, developers would be working g under tight restrictions which would discourage further construction. She questioned the lack of an elevator for a multi -story facility. Mr. Ed Di Loreto, 7333 Rio Flora Pl., spoke regarding the need for an owner to have the right to develop his property as he wishes. More restrictive building standards would eventually raise the monthly payments for seniors citizens on their homes. Ms. Doris Patterson, 10524 Lesterford Ave., commented that the proposed Ordinance restrictions would hinder further senior citizen development in Downey. Mr. Al Marshall, President of Newport Pacific Development, 4400 MacArthur Blvd., , Newport Beach, spoke regarding how the proposed Ordinance will affect future senior citizen housing in Downey. His concerns regard height restrictions, lot coverage, density, age restriction, and setbacks. He suggested the existing policy be considered as reasonable guidelines ' Y g es �n reviewing the need for an Ordinance establishing regulations for senior citizen housing. Mr. Ron Kolar, 7914 E. 7th St., expressed concern that the proposed 60 units per acre is too high a density and encouraged adoption of the Planning Department's original proposal of 50 units per acre, thus maintaining the character of the community. Mr. Guy Sterner, 10303 Downey Ave., supported the necessity for elevators in a two -story or higher building, as people age through the years and may not be able to walk to and from their second -story unit. He noted the law does not restrict having a younger person living with a senior citizen in this type of development which might cause a parking problem at the facility. Mr. Lennie Whittington, 8542 Manatee St., supported the need for an elevater in any multi -story facility. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -3- 9 , Ms. Myrtle Risley, 7938 Phlox St., spoke regarding senior developments in the Hospital Zone. Mr. Frank Perez, 9104 Gainford St., questioned the connection between apartment housing and condominiums and was informed the comparison was strictly to emphasize the levels of density for different types of housing developments. It was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and so ordered to close the public hearing. Council Member Brazelton questioned staff's density recommendation after reading the proposal of the Planning Commission and was informed that 50 units per acre continues to be staff's recommendation. He then discussed the occupancy ratio of the existing establishments and methods of policing the age limitation i n the Ordinance. Mr. Thorson explained the age limitations as defined in the Civil Code relative to senior citizen housing. Council Member Brazelton emphasized future aesthetics of these projects, favoring the 50 unit per acre density as it would allow for better quality. He expressed concern with the proposed parking ratio because of the difficulty in restricting the number of people living in each unit. Council Member Carter discussed a possible approach of differentiating between rental and condominium housing units. With this separation, an Ordinance could address the specifics of each type of housing, including condominium conversions. He noted the abundance of single family dwellings in the community, and expressed concern that Downey may have an over - abundance of senior housing developments in the future. He favored elevators in any multi- , story housing, noting they should be large enough in size to accommodate medical equipment if needed. He mentioned storage space is rather small at 80 square feet, and density would be appropriate at 60 units per acre. He foresaw no problems with the age limitation but indicated definite setbacks should be established. Council Member Boggs expressed concern with labeling developments T "senior", thereby giving the developer certain privileges in the standards he must follow. However, comfortable and affordable housing should be available for our senior citizens. She questioned how "affordable" is defined. Mr. Rangel explained how affordability is based on the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area Median and discussed HUD levels of rent for different types of housing. Council Member Boggs expressed concern that seniors do have many possessions they have kept over the years that must be stored. She noted it is an assumption and not a fact that senior citizens. She requested staff review the concerns expressed and return with a revised Ordinance. Council Member Cormack commented the owner should be allowed to build as he wishes on his land; however, low density is needed to protect the neighborhood. He expressed concern with the small, confined quarters that are not safe or healthy. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -4- :14 r Mayor Hayden concurred with the minimum age of 55 as being reasonable. She favored elevators in multi-level buildings and more storage space for senior citizens' possessions. She suggested reviewing each project on a case - by -case basis using the Conditional Use Permit process, emphasizing that setbacks and landscaping create the aesthetic tone for any project. Council Member Brazelton suggested staff consider the comments made and restructure the Ordinance, establishing guidelines that the Planning Commission could follow. It was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Boggs, and unanimously carried to return this item to staff for further review of concerns expressed and modify the proposed Ordinance accordingly. The meeting recessed at 9:15 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m. Mayor Hayden opened the public hearing on ZONE CHANGE NO. 91 -109 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7865 -7877 FLORENCE AVENUE AND 10021 TWEEDY LANE. Ms. McDonnell affirmed the proof of publication which was so ordered to receive and file. Council Member Carter advised he will abstain from considering this matter due to a possible financial conflict of interest, and vacated his seat at this time. Mr. Rangel summarized the staff report, discussing the history of this case before the Planning Commission. He narrated a brief slide presentation depicting site and zoning maps, and the subject and surrounding areas. The City's General Plan defines this area as General Commercial, which is the zoning designation requested by the applicant. He discussed concerns raised by residents at the Planning Commission hearing and recommended approval of the project with conditions as set forth in the Parcel Map. Council Member Boggs questioned the rezoning affect on parking requirements for this area and was informed that adequate on -site parking exists for each facility. No correspondence was received on this matter. Mayor Hayden asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of the proposed Zone Change. Mr. Richard Salyer, 10022 Newvi l l a St., representing the Stamps Foundation, explained his understanding of the Planning Commission's recommendation that some type of barrier be installed on the west side of the property. Their final determination was an 18 -24" flower bed that would prevent people from exiting onto Dinsdale Avenue. He explained there is no intended use for the site at this time; the dairy owner would l i k e to buy his own lot and then renovate his facility. Mr. Salyer indicated his willingness to meet with the residents to discuss their concerns and noted he had not been contacted as of this time. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -5- t Council Member Brazelton questioned why a C -2, General Commercial Zoning was requested instead of a C -1, Neighborhood Commercial designation and was informed the Engineering firm of Olson and DeTilla recommended the C -2, General Commercial zoning because it is consistent with the remainder of the area. There being no one else to speak in favor of the Zone Change, Mayor Hayden asked if there was anyone present to speak in opposition. Ms. Carol Kearns, 9942 Smallwood Ave., stated she lives i n a quiet, single family residential neighborhood which would be adversely affected b the ro osed Zone • y by p p one Change. She narrated a brief slide presentation of the area and commented that this re- zoning is not consistent with the written portion of the General Plan. Furthermore, it is not mandatory to match the General Plan Map if other zoning is consistent with the area. Mr. Charles Pastorel l o, 7804 Di nsdal a St., expressed his opposition to the Zone Change as it would adversely affect the neighborhood. It was moved by Council Member Brazelton, seconded by Council Member Boggs, and so ordered to close the public hearing. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AT 7865 -77 FLORENCE AVENUE AND 10021 TWEEDY LANE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C -2) AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO REFLECT SUCH CHANGE OF ZONE (ZONE CHANGE NO. 91 -109) The Ordinance was read by title only. It was moved by Council Member Boggs and seconded by Council Member Brazelton to waive further reading and introduce. Council Member Brazelton discussed the boundary buffers on the b' y subject property, including landscaping and walls. He noted that the numerous uses under the General Commercial designation might not be compatible with the residential neighborhood. Council Member Boggs noted the importance of protecting the integrity of the single family residential neighborhood, indicating .a change in zone would not be fair to the residential property owners who expected the zoning to remain the same in their area. Council Member Cormack commented on the remaining Parking-Buffer Zone around the residential area and Neighborhood vs. General Commercial uses. Mayor Hayden expressed concern with the intensity of uses in the General Commercial Zone as they affect single family dwellings. It was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and unanimously carried by the Council Members present to waive further reading. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -6- 94 t4si It was moved by Council Member Cormack to introduce the Ordinance. Motion failed due to lack of second. Council Member Carter resumed his seat at this time. ORAL COMMUN I CAT I ONS Mr. Harold Hector, 13043 Stanbridge Ave., stated his support for retaining the Downey Police Department and not contracting with the local Sheriff's Department. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR: Council Member Boggs requested Agenda Item VI -C -1, CASH CONTRACT NO. 586 - WATER YARD RESERVOIR DOME RING REPAIR and Agenda Item VI -E -8, SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PRIORITIZATION STUDY be removed from the Consent Calendar. Ms. Carol Felch, 9204 Otto St., requested Agenda Item VI -B -1, CORRESPONDENCE FROM RICHARD AND CAROL FELCH CITING LACK OF PROPER NOTICE TO AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS OF PUBLIC HEARING ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23238 (9918 HALEDON STREET) be removed from the Consent Calendar. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and unanimously carried to waive further reading of the Resolutions and approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar as recommended: MINUTES: ADJOURNED AND REGULAR MEETINGS, DECEMBER 10, 1991; ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING, DECEMBER 17, 1991: Approve. WARRANTS ISSUED: #41626 - 42355, $1,416,507.21: Approve. INVESTMENT POLICY FOR 1992: Approve. 1992 -93 BUDGET CALENDAR /SCHEDULE for preparing the 1992 -93 budget eum% calendar: Approve. FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED 1991: Receive and file. SELECTION OF CHIEF NEGOTIATOR: APPROVE CONTRACT WITH LIEBERT, CASSIDY AND FRIERSON to provide legal services in personnel/labor relation matters and to provide supervisory training as part of a consortium of cities under a separate agreement at an hourly range rate of $125 -195 per hour: Approve. UTILITY AGREEMENT WITH STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS FOR RELOCATION OF WATER FACILITIES FOR 1 -105 FREEWAY at a sum of $2,000: Approve. UNSCHEDULED EQUIPMENT PURCHASE - ROLL UP GARAGE DOOR IN PHYSICAL SERVICES YARD at a cost of $4,000 to be reimbursed by Proposition A funds: Approve. AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION GRANT - Accept and authorize expenditure of a $3,700 grant from the American Library Association for the Downey City Library: Approve. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -7- 1 . 1 _ RESOLU 4 0 TI NO. 5524 (ADOPT) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE, 1992, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS OF SAID CITY AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY RESOLUTION NO. 5525 (ADOPT) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AL ELECTION WITH TO CONSOLIDATE THE CITY OF DOWNEY GENERAL MUNICIPAL r -�► THE STATEWIDE DIRECT PRIMARY ELECTION TO BE HELD ON JUNE 2, 1992 PURSUANT TO SECTION 2330 ET SEQ. OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE RESOLUTION NO. 5526 (ADOPT) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES' STATEMENTS FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO MATERIALS SUBMITTED TO THE ELECTORATE AND THE COSTS THEREOF FOR THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON TUESDAY JUNE 2, 1992 RESOLUTION NO. 5527 (ADOPT) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY APPROVING THE FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP OF PARCEL MAP NO. 21552 (12305 ORIZABA AVENUE S/0 ORANGE STREET) AND APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SUBDIVIDER AND ACCEPTANCE OF A TIME CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF SURETY BONDS RESOLUTION NO. 5528 (ADOPT) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY CALIFORNIA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT, A TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS MISCELLANEOUS TRANSFER DRAIN NO. 1371 IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF ORDINANCES NOT SET FORTH ABOVE: None. RESOLUTIONS NOT SET FORTH ABOVE: None. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: None. OTHER BUSINESS: Consent Calendar - Items Removed by Council Approval: CORRESPONDENCE FROM RICHARD AND CAROL FELCH CITING LACK OF PROPER E NOTICE TO AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS OF PUBLIC HEARING ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP N 23238 (9918 H 0' HALEDON STREET) City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -8- 34 9 Ms. Felch, 9204 Otto St., requested a waiver on the Appeal period for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23238 based on her opinion that everyone involved was not correctly notified of the meeting, and the notice itself was confusing to those people that did receive it. She distributed material to Council with additional names that were omitted from her previous letter indicating they Y did not receive proper notification, and a map of the subject area. She mentioned the legal notice stated the address as 9918 Haledon Street which c affects Otto Street; but since the notice only read "Haledon Street ", many neighbors did not know this land division would affect them. Mr. Richard Felch, 9204 Otto St., referenced certain people in the audience that did not receive notification o f notification of the project. It was noted that 14 people were resent in the audience, stating the P � 9 Y did not receive a notice. Ms. Lillian Keller, 10045 Chaney Ave, described her residential neighborhood, noting the adverse affects this land division would have in the area. Mr. Peter Perez, 10041 Chaney expressed Ave., ressed concern with the additional traffic that would result from this subdivision. Mr. Thorson discussed provisions under Section 9160.06 of the Downey Municipal Code regarding legal noti ci n g . The law requires res publication of the noticing. q hearing notice at least ten days prior to the notice 9 hearing. Also, a of ce is y P 9 mailed to all property owners as shown on the last available County Assessor's Roles within 500 feet of the exterior boundary lines of the subject property. He advised as long as notices were sent to the required people, a notice was published in the newspaper according to law, and the Appeal period has expired, the City does not have the option to extend that Appeal period because the property owner has relied upon that notice and is proceeding to finalize his map. The actual notice indicates the property address, and that a 63,000 square foot lot will be divided into three single family parcels, which shows a substantially large-sized lot will be affected by the proposed hearing. Mr. Rangel confirmed that a 500 foot radius was measured correctly. He mentioned the amount of notices sent back from the post office is an indication of how many notices were received. None of the mailed notices were returned to the City. Council Member Boggs expressed concern that so many people may not have been notified; however, she must rely on the City Attorney's recommendation. Mr. Thorson commented on potential problems that might result if the hearing were re- opened. The law requires the City to take action to send notices to the required parties, which was correctly done. Additionally, the notice was published as required. Council Member Cormack questioned whether the hearing could be re- opened if material surfaced that was not considered at the Planning Commission level and was informed that information which is not presented at the Planning Commission hearing cannot be considered at a subsequent meeting. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -9- r--. • A ; Mr. Melvin Kennedy, 9204 Dinsdale St., noted he received notice of the meeting; however, he did not know the exact intent as he is a fairly new Downey resident. It was clarified that notices were correctly sent and published in the newspaper; also each notice indicated further information could be obtained by contacting the Planning Division at Downey City Hall. Mayor Hayden questioned whether the applicant could be contacted regarding modifying his project to include a different access, and staff informed her this would be done. r- Discussion ensued regarding a viable alternative to access this property. It was moved by Council Member Cormack, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and unanimously carried to receive and file this correspondence. Prior to the foregoing vote, Council Member Boggs clarified that legally, Council has no other alternative to pursue. The meeting recessed at 10:54 p.m. and reconvened at 10:47 p.m. Council Member Cormack was excused from the remainder of the meeting due to illness in his family. CASH CONTRACT NO. 586 - WATER YARD RESERVOIR DOME RING REPAIR Council Member Boggs questioned the high inspection fees in the report. Mr. Redmayne indicated that specialized expertise is needed to inspect a job of this magnitude, and is expensive to obtain. It was moved by Council Member Boggs, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and unanimously carried by the Council Members present to award a contract in the amount of $197,350 to DYK, Inc. of El Cajon for repair of reservoir dome ring at the Water Yard, and authorize the Water /Sanitation Division to retain Barrett Consulting Group of Tustin for construction inspection of the repairs at a cost of $12,600. SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PRIORITIZATION STUDY RECOMMENDATION Council Member Boggs supported the study's recommendation to retain all crossing guards and requested the matter be returned to Council prior to September, 1992. She expressed concern with the impact of the I -105 Freeway and requested this item be addressed prior to school starting in the Fall. Mr. Caton noted staff's recommendation is to add three crossing guards for the remainder of the school year. It was moved by Council Member Boggs, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and unanimously carried by the Council Members present, to maintain 14 crossing guard positions; that they be re- aligned to include all locations that meet miniaum requirements set forth in the Caltrans Traffic Manual for crossing guards; that an additional three crossing guards be hired for the remainder of the fiscal year at a cost of $7,500; and that this item be returned to Council prior to the beginning of school in Fall, 1992. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -10- OTHER BUSINESS - City Council Members: CORRESPONDENCE FROM JUDY HATHAWAY - FRANCIS, LACTC REPRESENTATIVE, REQUESTING DOWNEY'S INPUT REGARDING GREEN LINE RAIL PROGRAM Ms. Yotsuya indicated Ms. Hathaway- Francis would like input from the Council on any concerns they might have regarding the Green Line Program. Council Member Boggs noted several important points are -made in the letter and commended Ms. Hathaway- Francis for communicating with the cities on this vital matter. She suggested supporting the letter asking for reconsideration of Greenline construction cars, and requested correspondence r be sent to support the position of Ms. Hathaway - Francis. Staff was directed to draft this letter of support. RESOLUTION NO. 5529 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY RECOMMENDING GUIDELINES REGARDING THE POTENTIAL PROVISION OF NEW SERVICES BY THE SEAACA AUTHORITY Ms. Boggs requested support of this Resolution which would prevent the dilution of voting power on the Board by offering contract services to any city that requests them, but not giving them a position on the Board. It was consensus of Council and staff to modify Section 1 of the Resolution to delete specific repetitive language. The Resolution was read by title only. It was moved by Council Member Boggs, seconded by Council Member Brazelton, and unanimously carried by the Council Members present to naive further reading and adopt as amended. RATIFICATION OF AMENDED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL OF SOUTHEAST LOS ANGELES COUNTY, INC. - JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT Ms. Boggs discussed the composition of the Private Industry Council, noting a seventh City of Artesia is requesting to become a member. Mr. Thorson advised there are two portions of the Private Industry Council (PIC): One is the Policy Board composed of the representatives of the member cities; second, there is the PIC which is an independent, non-profit corporation formed to carry out the purposes of the Act. In Section 3B, the responsibilities of the Policy Board are outlined. He discussed insurance provisions to protect the Policy Board and Private Industry Council. Council Member Boggs requested a verbatim copy of Mr. Thorson's comments. (See page 13). Mr. Art Aguilar, 8800 National Ave., South Gate, Downey's representative to the Private Industry Council, concurred with.the above comments. It was moved by Council Member Boggs, seconded by Council Member Carter, and unanimously carried by the Council Members present to approve the Joint Powers Agreement No. 110 to include the City of Artesia. City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -11- it *(4. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. ...A1 "7 ' I udith. E. McDonrel l , City Clerk Barbara / ay• en /" ayor City Council Minutes (Adj.) 1/13/92 -12- ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF JANUARY 13, 1992 CITY OF DOWNEY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT Per the request of Council Member Boggs, the following verbatim comments of the City Attorney are included as part of the record in these Minutes: Peter Thorson: "Madam Mayor and Members of the Council. There are two aspects of the Private Industry Council at work in this agreement; one is the Policy Board which is composed of members of the representatives of the member cities and then there is the PIC - Private Industry Council which is an independent non - profit corporation that was formed to carry • out the purposes of the Federal Jobs Act. In Section 3B of the Agreement, the responsibilities of the Policy Board in relation to the Corporation are outlined. Essentially, the responsibilities are fairly broad, basically to appoint members and then the important one is in subparagraph 2 which is to negotiate and approve an agreement with the PIC which specifies the respective duties of the PIC and Policy Board. That is the document in which the relative responsibilities of the Policy Board and the non-profit • corporations will be spelled out and those will include indemnification provisions, insurance provisions, that will protect the Policy Board from something that the PIC might do. Additionally, in paragraph 4C entitled Funds, the Policy Board is authorized to maintain insurance as may be available and reasonably priced to protect the Policy Board from liabilities and expenses. It also provides that none of the debts or liabilities of the PIC is a debt or liability obligation of any of the cities or Policy Board. There is a further provision that says that this agreement does not limit any liability which may attach under Government Code Section 895 which simply means that if there is any liability to the Policy Board, it is shared by all cities, equal without anyone assuming more or less liability. Apart from those general comments, I'm not sure what type of liability, what kind of problems the Policy Board can really get into but I think there's a mechanism available to protect the Board through insurance, through indemnification as you develop the agreement with the PIC." Verbatim Transcript - Adj. City Council Mtg. 1/13/92 -13-