City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
1 CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF
AUGUST 1, 2006
The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Manhattan Beach, California, was held on the 1 st day of August, 2006, at the hour of 6:33 p.m ., in the City Council Chambers of City Hall, at 1400 Highland Avenue, in said City.
PLEDGE TO FLAG
Public Works Director Neil Miller led the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward.
Absent: None.
Clerk: Aliabadi (Acting).
CEREMONIAL CALENDAR
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar (Item Nos. 1 through 10), consisting of items under General Consent and Boards and Commissions , was approved by motion of Councilmember Fahey, seconded by Councilmember Aldinger and passed by the following unanimous roll call vote:
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
GENERAL CONSENT
06/0801.1 Approve Minutes of the City Council Adjourned Regular and Regular Meeting of July 18, 2006
The Council approved the subject minutes.
06/0801.2 Consideration of a Resolution A dopting the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the City of Manha ttan Beach and the Manhattan Beach Miscellaneous Employees Represented by California Teamsters Local 911
The Council adopted Resolution No. 6053.
RESOLUTION NO. 6053
A RESOLUTION OF THE CI TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH AND
THE MANHATTAN BEACH MISCELLANEOUS
EMPLOYEES REPRESENTED BY CALIFORNIA
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 AND AMENDING RESOLUTION
5898 OF SAID COUNCIL (PERSONNEL RULES) BY
AMENDING RULE XI (ATTENDANCE AND LEAVES) AND
ADDING CERTAIN CLASSI FICATIONS TO THE
MANAGEMENT/CONFIDENTIAL SALARY AND
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
2 06/0801.3 Consideration of Financial Reports:
a) Ratification of Demands: July 27, 2006
b) Investment Portfolio for the Month Ending June 30, 2006 c) Financial Reports for Month Ending June 30, 2006
The Council approved with no exception Warrant Register No. 29B & 3B in the amount of $3,307,376.82 in payment of ratification of demands a nd claims as prepared by the Director of Finance, together with the original demands a nd claims as prepared by said Warrant Register; received and filed the Investment Portfolio for the m onth ending June 30, 2006; received and filed the Financial Reports for the month ending June 30, 2006.
06/0801.4 Consideration of a Resolution for A cceptance of a Grant from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Cont rol (ABC) for Increased Education and Enforcement Activities Regarding Alcoholic Beverage Control Laws in the Amount of $29,188 and Appropriate Said Amount from the Unreserved General Fund Balance Which Will be Reimbursed by the Grant
The Council adopted Resolution No. 6049 and appropriated $29,188 from the unreserved General Fund balance which will be reimbursed by the Grant.
RESOLUTION NO. 6049
A RESOLUTION OF THE CI TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS
INTENT TO ACCEPT A STATE GRANT UNDER THE
GRANT ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES PROJECT ADMINISTERED BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVEREAGE CONTROL
FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006/2007 AND AUTHORIZE THE
EXPENDITURE OF THESE GRANT FUNDS FOR
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL TRAINING,
EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT
06/0801.5 Consideration of Appropriation of $28,400 for the City’s Share of Street and Drainage Repairs Conducted by Am erican Martyrs Church at 15 th Street and Laurel Avenue
The Council approved and appropriated $28,400 from the Gas Tax Fund as the City’s share of street repairs being conducted by American Martyrs Church at the intersection of 15 th Street and Laurel Avenue.
06/0801.6 Appropriate Funds ($26,144.52) and Appro ve Payment for Completed Emergency Water Line Repair on Rosecrans Avenue to Doty Brothers Equipment Company
The Council approved the expenditure and appropriated $26,144.52 from the Water Fund to cover the cost of emergency water line repair that was assisted by Doty Bros. Equipment Company on May 20, 2006
06/0801.7 Disbursement of Progress Paymen t No. 15 in the Net Amount of $187,546.94 to S.P. Pazargad Engineering Construction, Inc. for the Strand Improvement Project
The Council approved the issuance of the subject progress payment.
06/0801.8 Disbursement of Progress Paymen t No. 28 in the Net Amount of $551,771 to Swinerton Builders
The Council approved issuance of progress payment # 28 for $551,771 to Swinerton Builders.
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
3 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Cultural Arts Commission
06/0801.9 Consideration of Draft Minutes, Cultural Arts Commission Meeting of July 11, 2006
The Council received and filed the subject draft minutes.
Planning Commission
06/0801.10 Consideration of Action Minutes, Pl anning Commission Meeting of July 26, 2006
The Council received and filed the subject action minutes.
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
06/0801.14 Patrick McBride Re Senior Activities
Patrick McBride, 5th Street & Peck Avenue, announced that upcoming senior activities at the Joslyn Center include the South Bay Strumme rs who will perform on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 from 2:00 – 3:30 p.m.; the screening of the movie A Love Divided on August 16 th; and a forum regarding Undergrounding and alternatives to poles on August 12, 2006 from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. in the Hermosa Beach Chambers.
06/0801.15 Viet Ngo Re Civil Rights
Viet Ngo, No Address Provided, handed out a copy of a Federal Civil Rights statute; stated that he is assisting residents of Undergrounding Distri cts 2 and 6 who have been subjected to civil rights violations; and encouraged them to call the FBI. He also read from the minutes of the City of San Diego regarding Utility Undergrounding.
06/0801.16 Irl Cramer Re Location for Gathering
Irl Cramer, No Address Provided, announced that after the “fi ghting hillbillies” will meet outside of the Council Chambers directly after the meeting.
06/0801.17 Mayor Ward Re Misinformation
Mayor Ward announced that the Heal the Bay organization is sending out a fundraising letter indicating that the City of Manhattan Beach is using contaminated sand from a recent sewage spill, which is a blatant falsehood and that th e Los Angeles County Sanitation Department is asking for a retraction of that statement.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
06/0801.11 Consideration of a Determination that the City is in Compliance With the Program Requirements of the 2006 Conge stion Management Program (CMP) for Los Angeles County as Prepared by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)
Assistant Planner Angelica Ochoa summarized the Congestion Management Program (CMP) communicating that the main goal of the CMP is to mitigate traffic impacts associated with new development. She explained that debits are assigned when new structures are built and credits are awarded when structures are demolished. She pointed out that the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) is the agency responsible for preparing the CMP and that they have suspended, until further notice, the necessity to mitigate de velopment impacts (credits); however, they still require that each city monitor and annually re port new development activity. She concluded by reporting that last year there were 151 new re sidential constructions versus 142 demolitions; 26 multiple units were constructed versus 23 demolished; and 4527 square feet of office space was constructed with nothing being demolished.
Mayor Ward opened the Public Hearing at 6:43 p.m.
Hearing no requests to speak, Mayor Ward closed the Public Hearing at 6:44 p.m.
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
4 MOTION: Councilmember Aldinger moved to adopt Resolution No. 6052 demonstrating the City’s compliance with the program requi rements of the 2006 Congestion Management Program. The motion was seconded by Counc ilmember Fahey and passed by the following unanimous roll call vote.
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
RESOLUTION NO. 6052
A RESOLUTION OF THE CI TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MANHATTAN BEACH, CAL IFORNIA, FINDING THE
CITY TO BE IN CONF ORMANCE WITH THE
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) AND
ADOPTING THE CMP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT,
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CAL IFORNIA GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 65089
GENERAL BUSINESS
06/0801.12 Consideration of an Ordi nance Regarding Floodplain Management Regulations for Areas of Special Flood Hazards within Manhattan Beach
Senior Management Analyst Lindy Coe-Juell presented information about the Floodplain Management Ordinance and gave a brief bac kground to put in context the need for the Ordinance. She stated that in 1968 the United States Congress established a Federal program entitled The National Flood Insurance Program and th at the purpose of this program is to reduce future flood damage through state and community floodplain management. She reported that currently there are over 20,000 communities, including Manhattan Beach, that participate in this program; that approximately 130 Manhattan Beach property owners have taken advantage of this insurance program; and that in exchange, the Federal Government makes federally backed insurance available to property owners within these participating communities. Senior Management Analyst Coe-Juell explained that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for this program and their duties include 3 things: to identify and map flood hazard areas nationwide; to insure that the communities that want to participate have the proper level of regulations according to the ri sks; and to provide federally backed flood insurance. She reported that FEMA recently conducted a new mapping study for Los Angeles County and that although the designation includes all of Manhattan Beach, the area identified with flood risk is contained to the beach, onl y, and not to any real properties beyond. In conclusion, Senior Management Analyst Coe-Jue ll conveyed that this newly defined designation from FEMA requires an ordinance for Floodplai n Management Regulations; that all Manhattan Beach residents are eligible for the FEMA admi nistered, federally backed flood insurance; and that detailed information on the subject is available online at www.floodsmart.com .
MOTION: Councilmember Aldinger moved to waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2087 adding Section 9.76.080 to Chapter 9.76 of Title 9 of the Manhattan Beach Municipal Code to establish floodplain management regulations for areas of special flood hazards within Manhattan Beach. The motion was sec onded by Councilmember Fahey and passed by the following unanimous roll call vote:
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
City Attorney Robert Wadden read aloud Ordinance No. 2087.
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
5 06/0801.13 Consideration of Utility Underground Assessment District Issues:
a) Approval of a 22% Reduction in Assessments for District 05-2 and Adoption of a Resolution Determining the Revised Unpaid Assessments for District 05-2 of $4,545,000
b) Presentation of Survey Results for Proposed Utility Underground Districts 7-14 c) Discussion Regarding Proposed Districts 7-10
d) Discussion Regarding Proposed Districts 11-14
e) Discussion Regarding Procedures for Forming New Districts f) Discussion Regarding District 4a
a) Reduction in Assessments for District 05-2
Finance Director Bruce Moe explained that, af ter receiving the open market bids for Utility Underground Assessment District 2, it was determined that the project can be completed for approximately 22% less than the original estimat e, which will result in reduced assessments of between $7,400 and $12,900. He advised that, per the Bond Counsel, proposed Resolution No. 6050 reflects the lower assessment amounts necessa ry in order to pro ceed with the Utility Undergrounding in District 2.
The following individual spoke on this item:
• Myron Pullen, 1400 Block of 19
th Street
Senior Civil Engineer Stephanie Katsouleas clar ified that the previous assessment amounts were estimates provided by the utility companies for vo ting purposes, and that the lower cost is a reflection of open market bids obtained after District 2 was approved.
Mayor Pro Tem Tell added that Southern Californi a Edison (SCE) originally bid the project as a hard cost item, meaning they did not intend to go out for open market bids prior to finalizing an invoice to the City. However, during several meetings with SCE, that he and Councilmember Fahey attended, it was discovered that a signifi cant contingency was built into SCE’s bid for District 2 and they are required to go out for open market bids, resulting in a cost reduction.
Mayor Pro Tem Tell noted that he and Councilmem ber Fahey will continue to meet with both SCE and Verizon in hopes of achieving cost reducti ons for District 6 and further cost reductions for District 2.
MOTION
: Councilmember Fahey moved to adopt Resolution No. 6050 determining the revised unpaid assessments due to a 22% reducti on construction costs for District 05-2. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Tell a nd passed by the following unanimous roll call vote.
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
RESOLUTION NO. 6050
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIF ORNIA, DETERMINING
UNPAID ASSESSMENTS FO R UNDERGROUND UTILITY
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 05-2
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
6 b) Presentation of Survey Results for Proposed Utility Underground Districts 7-14 c) Discussion Regarding Proposed Districts 7-10
d) Discussion Regarding Proposed Districts 11-14
With the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Seni or Civil Engineer Katsouleas shared background information on the formation of the Utility U nderground Assessment Districts (UUADs). She highlighted the following: the status of the proposed UUADs 7-14; the pricing for Districts 2, 4 and 6; the results of the surveys for future Di stricts 7-14 and estimated assessment costs related thereto; the issues to consider when deciding whether to proceed with Districts 7-10, for which the City has already initiated and spent funds; the issues to consider when deciding whether to proceed with Districts 11-14; the time frame for accepting utility underground petitions; whether or not to allow district boundaries to be modified ; the sizing of districts; whether an opt-out policy is needed or whether mitigating measures could be established; and the parameters for reinitiating failed districts.
Senior Civil Engineer Katsouleas related that staff recommends that the Council: confirm the petition threshold needed for districts to form; de termine if a new threshold would retroactively apply to Districts 7-14 (if they do not move forward based on discussion this evening); set a time frame for a petition drive; establish a policy fo r boundary modifications during a petition drive; establish a policy for district sizing; decide ag ainst forming an opt-out policy; set criteria for reinitiating failed districts; and decide if such cr iteria should be the same as or different from newly formed districts.
The Council discussed that their original U tility Undergrounding policy included a requirement that 60% of the total households in a propos ed district must sign petitions in favor Undergrounding and that it is important to be consistent when considering the statistics gathered.
City Attorney Robert Wadden verified that the Utility Undergrounding policies previously established by the Council are documented according to minute action by the Council.
The following individuals spoke on this item:
• Bev Morse, 900 Block of 1st Street
• Esther Besbris, No Address Provided
• Brian Sweeney, District 8
• Emma Collier, District 13
• Robert Bush, District 9
• Greg Sharp, District 12
• Julia Tedesco, District 13
• Margo Woodard, District 13
• Unidentified Speaker, No Address Provided
• Karol Wahlberg, No Address Provided
• Myron Pullen, 1400 Block of 19th Street
• Viet Ngo, No Address Provided
• Frank Matranga, District 2
• Bob Rupkey, District 7
• Myron Klafter, District 12
• Bill Bloomfield, No Address Provided
• Patrick McBride, 5th Street & Peck Avenue
• Irl Cramer, 100 Block of North Dianthus
• Dick May, No Address Provided
• Joe Moore, No Address Provided
• Steve Morse, No Address Provided
• John Roehl, Duncan Avenue
• Robert Freedman, 1000 Block of 1st Street
• Loretta Wells, Marine Avenue
• Lee Berouty, No address Provided
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
7 The Council clarified that Utility Undergrounding is not proposed east of Sepulveda Boulevard.
RECESS AND RECONVENE
At 8:37 p.m. the Council recessed and reconvened at 8:50 p.m. with all Councilmembers present.
Council discussion included the following: the f unds already expended on Districts 7-10 and the anticipated amount yet to be spent relative to thos e districts; the title insurance associated with the Utility Undergrounding Loan Program; and the idea of returning interest along with the refunds that will be given for pre-paid assessments as a result of the lower open market bids for District 2, as discussed earlier in the meeting.
The Council agreed that moving Utility Unde rgrounding Assessment Districts 7, 9, 10 and 11 forward should not be continued at this time b ecause over 70% of the property owners in those districts do not support Utility Undergrounding.
MOTION: Councilmember Aldinger moved to deny moving forward with Utility Underground Assessment Districts 7, 9, 10 and 11. The mo tion was seconded by Councilmember Fahey and passed by unanimous roll call vote as shown below:
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell, Mayor Ward.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
Offering information on the City’s ballot dist ribution procedures, Senior Civil Engineer Katsouleas affirmed that only one ballot per household was counted using unique parcel numbers.
Council discussion continued regarding the follo wing: that the Council could consider not pursuing Districts 7 through 14 b ecause none of them meet the 60% threshold; that proponents in Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 apparently did not understand that 60% was n ecessary for the Utility Undergrounding to move forward; that, in looking at Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14, it appears there is support for Utility Undergrounding when the price is reasonable (approximately $20,000 or less); that, because property owners in Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 believe they were insufficiently notified of the percentage necessa ry to move forward, a new survey could be distributed for an extended period of time; and that the Utility Undergrounding Subcommittee could meet to develop recommendations for future Utility Undergrounding processes.
Should the Council agree to extend the time period for gathering signatures in Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14, Senior Civil Engineer Katsouleas related staff’s recommendation that two letters be sent to property owners – one informing those who di d respond the status of the survey effort, and another requesting participation from those who did not previously respond.
Council discussed the 60% threshold concurring th at for the survey; the threshold should be 60% of the total households.
She noted that the Edison design plans for District 8 are completed; that pricing for District 8 should be available for consideration in the very near future should it move forward; and that if it does, the ballots for District 8 could be distri buted in November or December of this year.
She explained the reasons for varying costs in different Utility Undergrounding Districts, the cost of Undergrounding utilities in the future; and the goal of requiring the utility companies to obtain open market bids before balloting procedures rather than just providing cost estimates.
A majority of the Council agreed to continue the survey process in Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 with a 90-day response period and the following motion was offered:
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
8 MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved to approve that new surveys for Utility Underground Assessment Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 be distributed with the stipulation that there shall be a 90-day response period. The mo tion was seconded by Councilmember Fahey and passed by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey and Tell.
Noes: Mayor Ward.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
Mayor Ward explained his dissenting vote due to his belief that Utility Underground Assessment Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 should be dissolved.
e) Discussion Regarding Procedures for Forming New Districts
The Council extensively discussed procedures for forming new Utility Underground Assessment Districts, including the pros and cons of increasing the percentage of the actual Prop 218 votes required for a district to be approved by City Council and the immediate distribution of surveys after petitions (with the required percentages) are received.
MOTION
: Mayor Ward moved to approve that the percentage of the actual ballot vote required for a Utility Underground Assessment District to move forward shall be increased to a minimum of 60%. The motion was seconded by Councilm ember Fahey and passed by the following roll call vote.
Ayes: Montgomery, Fahey and Mayor Ward.
Noes: Aldinger and Tell.
Abstain: None.
Absent: None.
The Council clarified that the actual
Prop 218 ballot vote required was increased to 60%.
RECESS AND RECONVENE
At 10:03 p.m. the Council recessed and reconvened at 10:14 p.m. with all Councilmembers present.
After the break, there was additional Council discu ssion as to whether the increased percentage to 60% of the actual ballot vote approved by the C ouncil this evening, prior to the recess, should apply only to future Utility Undergrounding Assessment Districts, or to proposed Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 as well.
MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved to approve that the newly approved percentage of 60% of the actual vote shall not retroactively apply to Utility Underground Assessment Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14. The mo tion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Tell and passed by the following roll call vote.
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery and Tell.
Noes: Fahey and Mayor Ward.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
The Council clarified that the percentage of th e actual ballot vote required for proposed Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 to move forward will be determined at the time those Districts come before the Council.
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
9 Senior Civil Engineer Katsouleas shared inform ation on the duration of previous petition drives and related staff’s recommendation that modifica tions during petition drives be reviewed on a district-by-district basis by a small subcomm ittee and then brought forward for the Council’s consideration if desired. She called attention to the cumbersome effect of an opt-out policy, particularly in the Hill Section, and noted the difficulty of determining which areas should be allowed to opt out. She suggested that boundaries and modification procedures be established at the beginning of a petition drive and prior to th e City expending funds on the formation of a district in lieu of an opt out policy
MOTION: Councilmember Aldinger moved to approve setting a six-month time frame for initiating and completing a petition drive; to allow the morphing of boundary modifications during a petition drive and prior to such time as the City expends funds; to not sent a limit on the size of a Utility Underground Assessm ent District; to not allow the creation of an opt-out policy once a district is initiated, to confirm the implemen tation of procedures that negate the need for an opt-out policy at the onset of district form ation; and to require a one year period before petitions can be re-initiated. The motion wa s seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Tell seconded and passed by the following unanimous roll call vote:
Ayes: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward.
Noes: None.
Abstain: None.
Absent: None.
f) Discussion Regarding District 4a
Background information regarding proposed District 4a was presented by Senior Civil Engineer Katsouleas. She noted modifications made to the petition for proposed District 4a; related staff’s understanding that the 60% threshold to approve the petition for District 4a has been reached; and recommended that the Council discuss whether the previously-established policies, or those approved this evening, should apply to proposed District 4a. Senior Civil Engineer Katsouleas then reviewed the boundaries for propos ed District 4a, expre ssing staff’s viewpoint that they do make sense.
The following individuals spoke on this item:
• Unidentified Speaker, No Address Provided
• Unidentified Speaker, No Address Provided
• Unidentified Speaker, No Address Provided
• Bev Morse, 900 Block of 1st Street
• Esther Besbris, No Address Provided
In response to an audience member’s comment that Mayor Pro Tem Tell should recuse himself from this discussion due to owning property in Di strict 4a, City Attorney Wadden advised that, since the discussion will be general in nature, a nd not determine whether District 4a should be formed etc., it is not necessary for Mayor Pro Tem Tell to recuse himself.
• Robert Friedman, 1000 Block of 1st Street
Mayor Pro Tem Tell left the meeting at 11:18 p.m.
• Karen Westover, 200 Block of South Dianthus
• Steve Morse, No Address Provided
• Viet Ngo, No Address Provided
• Patrick McBride, 5th Street & Peck Avenue
• Lee Berouty, No Address Provided
• Joe Moore, District 4
• Dick Wilden, 100 Block of South Poinsettia
• Robert Bush, District 9
• Jacque May, No Address Provided
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
10 The Council debated whether District 4a should be considered a new district and, if so, whether property owners supporting the District were previously misled by the Council. A majority of the Council agreed that District 4a should be treated as a new Utility Underground Assessment District and that the boundaries for District 4a should be as contiguous as possible.
City Attorney Wadden advised that a tie vote w ould equate to no action, which would mean that District 4a would fall under the ne w district policies approved this evening. He further advised that the Council’s vote in December 2005 in favor of allowing the formation of District 4a did not deal with the issue of the vote threshold in Proposition 218.
MOTION
: Councilmember Fahey moved to approve distributing surveys if a petition in favor of District 4a is verified by staff and staff determines that the boundaries are reasonable, and that it be considered as a new district. The mo tion was seconded by Mayor Ward and the following roll call vote was recorded.
Ayes: Fahey and Mayor Ward.
Noes: Aldinger and Montgomery.
Abstain Tell.
Absent: None.
Prior to the vote, City Attorney Wadden explaine d that if the vote ends in a 2-2 tie, ultimately District 4a would fall under the new District classification.
Deputy City Manager Sherilyn Lombos recapped the decisions made by the Council this evening with regard to Item No. 13: that Districts 7, 9, 10 and 11 shall be dissolved; that new surveys shall be distributed for Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14, with the stipulation that there shall be a 90-day period to get 60% of the total households to suppor t Undergrounding; that the future ballot vote requirement shall be increased to 60%, which does not apply to proposed Districts 8, 12, 13 and 14 (which will maintain the 50% minimum threshold); that there shall be a six-month time frame for initiating and completing petitions; that modificati ons to district boundaries shall be allowed during the petition process and before the City has expended funds; that there shall be no limit on district sizes; that there shall be no opt-out policy; that a minimum of one year shall pass before a petition can be re-initiated; that District 4a sha ll be treated as a new district and thus surveys confirming support for District 4a shall be distributed as soon as possible after the validity of the petition and boundaries for District 4a are verified by staff.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
06/0801.18 Bill Bloomfield Re Undergrounding
Bill Bloomfield, No Address Provided, emphasized that the Council’s decision to require that future Undergrounding districts meet a 60% (of the number of households – not of the number of returns) approval for petitions and surveys is nearly impossible and will “kill” all future Undergrounding.
06/0801.19 Bev Morse Re Undergrounding
Bev Morse, No Address Provided, emphasized that the opponents in District 4 did not get to vote on Mr. Bloomfield’s petition; that her husband was denied the right to circulate a petition; and that the matter should have been brought to a vote of the entire City.
06/0801.20 Steve Morse Re Democratic Process
Steve Morse, No Address Provided, stressed that the democratic process was not used when the Council gerrymandered District 4a and questioned who the Council is doing this for.
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
11 In response to comments by Mr. Morse and others, Councilmember Fahey emphasized that she and the Council represent all citizens of Manhattan Beach, not just those in the audience and that they don’t make decisions based on what their legacy may be. She spoke of how the Council has gone out of their way to be available to meet with residents to discuss Undergrounding and that surveys were sent out in order to determine what residents really want. She expressed her disappointment over the hostility and divisiveness that have come out of this issue and the inappropriateness of those people who have threatened to recall the Council before the issue was even discussed.
06/0801.22 Patrick McBride Re New Wires
Patrick McBride, 5th Street & Peck Avenue, spoke about the new wires that Verizon has been installing and how big and ugly they are. He spoke about complaints he has made to the City’s Public Works Department regarding Verizon’ s poor quality work and that perhaps someone needs to follow them around and keep track of what they are doing. He also suggested that the City look into wireless communication technologies.
06/0801.23 Myron Pullen Re Thanks to the Council
Myron Pullen, 1400 Block of 19 th Street, thanked the Council for the job they do; however, stated that putting up with things such as th e “Recall the Council” signs that were displayed tonight is part of the job and “if you can’t stand the heat; you should get out of the kitchen”.
06/0801.24 Dave Wachtfogel Re
Dave Wachtfogel, No Address Provided, commented that “if other cities had a Council like Manhattan Beach’s, they would think they died and went to heaven”. He remarked that he does not always agree with decisions made by the Council, but they are always fair.
06/0801.25 Jacque May Re Undergrounding
Jacque May, No Address Provided, stressed that the Council allowed District 4a to opt in, yet they won’t allow any other District to opt out.
06/0801.26 Scott Gobble Re Southern California Edison Rate Increase
Scott Gobble, Southern California Edison (SCE), encouraged the community to continue to conserve energy wherever possible especially between the hours of noon and 7:00 p.m. He forewarned the community that that there will be a price increase for those residents who pay from Tier 4 (residences whose electric bills ar e over $300 a month) and that this would be the perfect time to buy energy efficient appliances. He encouraged residents to contact SCE at (800) 655-4555 or at their web site at www.sce.com.
CITY MANAGER REPORT(S)
None.
OTHER COUNCIL BUSINESS, COMMITTEE AND TRAVEL REPORTS
06/0801.27 Councilmember Aldinger Re Conference
Councilmember Aldinger announced that he recently attended the League of California Cities conference in Monterey and participated in sessions on commissions and upcoming propositions.
06/0801.28 Councilmember Montgomery Re Democracy
Councilmember Montgomery thanked Councilmember Fahey for her earlier comments; commented that it is unrealistic for anyone to th ink that the entire Council will be “on the same page” for each issue; and that there is no finer example of democracy in action than tonight’s Council meeting.
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
12 06/0801.29 Mayor Ward Re Conference and the Need for Healing
Mayor Ward announced that he also attended the c onference in Monterey and participated in an IT session which gave him insight into how the City could further utilize its web site to assist residents and keep them informed.
Mayor Ward also commented on the need for th e City to move on after Undergrounding, begin to heal itself and get back to the things that are cherished by the community.
ADJOURNMENT
At 12:50 a.m. the meeting was dul y adjourned with the City Council adjourning to the 5:30 p.m.
Adjourned Regular Meeting to be followed by the 6:30 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, August 15, 2006, in the City Council Chambers of City Hall, 1400 Highland Avenue, in said City.
WENDY WEEKS
Recording Secretary
M I T C H W A R D
M a y o r
ATTEST:
TERRI ALIABADI
City Clerk (Acting)
City Council Meeting Minutes of August 1, 2006
13 CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 1, 2006
The Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Counc il of the City of Manhattan Beach, California, was held on the 1 st day of August, 2006, at the hour of 6:02 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of City Hall, at 1400 Highland Avenue, in said City.
ROLL CALL
Present: Aldinger, Montgomery, Fahey, Tell and Mayor Ward Absent None.
Clerk: Wadden (Acting).
CLOSED SESSION
The Council recessed into Closed Session at 6:02 p.m. and moved to open session at 6:26 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was duly adjourned at 6:26 p.m.
ROBERT V. WADDEN, JR.
Recording Secretary
MITCH WARD
Mayor
ATTEST:
TERRI ALIABADI
Acting City Clerk