HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-03-03; Chapter 1.24 Committee Ad Hoc; MinutesMINUTES
Meeting of: CHAPTER 1.24 COMMMITTEE
Time of Meeting: 8:30 A.M.
Date of Meeting: March 3, 1983
Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers
The following Committee Members were present:
Mary Casler, Chairman
Michael Straub
A.J. Skotnicki
Patrick O'Day
Margie Cool
Alan Feld
Absent: Ann Kulchin, Council Member
The Committee determined to consider the minutes and the draft
guidelines separately.
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The City Manager referenced page 2, next to the last paragraph,
and indicated that the word "affirmative" should be changed to
the word "negative".
The February 24, 1983, minutes were approved as corrected.
AYE S : Casler, Straub, Skotnicki, O'Day, Cool, and Feld.
NOE S : None
ABSENT: Kulchin
Mr. Skotnicki noted he was not voting in favor of the action
taken at the meeting, but was voting in the affirmative in that
the minutes reflect the action at that meeting.
111. Review Draft Guide1 ines
Mr. O'Day referenced Guideline Z.D., which was prepared as a
result of the last meeting, and suggested that the words
(exceeding l-million) be deleted. He stated that the discussion
and intent of the committee was that all gifts not designated for
a specific purpose go into the general fund and would be subject
to the ordinance. He indicated that three separate gifts of
$500,000 each could be combined, used for a project, and be
exempt from the ordinance under the existing wording.
.-
CHAPTER 1.24 COMMITTEE MINUTE S
March 3. 1983
Page 2
The City Attorney suggested that to reflect the intent of the
committee, the wording could be changed in Guideline 2.D. to
state that Gifts for non-specific purposes would be City Funds,
and thereby subject to the ordinance.
The Committee approved the addition of items 2.C. and 2.D. to
the draft guidelines with the change in item 2.D. to reflect
that Gifts for non-specific purposes would be considered City
Funds. and subject to the ordinance.
AYE S : Casler, Straub, O'Day, Cool, Feld, and Skotnicki
NOE S : None
ABSENT: Kulchin
Mr. Skotnicki expressed his desire to add, for the record,
support for the fact that the Public Facilities Fee is a tax,
and thus public funds and subject to the ordinance.
He referenced a copy of the ordinance which was submitted to the
voters which requested approval to charge an additional tax on
construction in the City. He stated the ordinance had received a
majority vote of the people, but had not received the required
two-thirds vote for implementation. He continued stating that
since the matter was rejected by the voters as a tax, the City
then passed it by policy as a fee. He reiterated his previously
stated opinion that the Public Facilities Fee monies are public
funds and are subject to the ordinance.
The City Attorney explained that the ordinance which was
rejected by the voters was a tax and would have applied to a11
construction in the City. He stated that Policy 17 was a fee
and applied only to development requiring discretionary action
by the City. He further stated that the City has now adopted an
ordinance implementing the License Tax on new construction,
. similar to the ordinance submitted to the voters. However,
Policy 17 (Public Facilities Fee) is still in effect.
Therefore, if someone builds in the City and no discretionary
action is required, the ordinance is applicable and they pay the
tax on new construction. Those monies go into the General Fund
and are subject to Ordinance 1255. However, if they build, and
discretionary action is required, they are subject to Policy 17,
and those funds are designated to build public facilities
necessary to serve new development, and are not subject to
Ordinance 1255.
CHAPTER 1.24 COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 3
March 3, 1983
Mr. O'Day commented that the Subdivision Map Act notes that
development is a privilege and subject to payment of any fees
and conditions deemed necessary.
Sewer Fund
The City Attorney gave a brief explanation of the sewer fund and
how monies are collected.
In response to questions, the City Manager noted that the sewer
connection fees go into a capital construction fund and are
designated for expansion. The monthly service charge is used
for maintenance and operation of the facility.
Committee discussion, with the exception of Mr. Skotnicki,
reflected the opinion that the sewer construction fund be
exempted from the ordinance, but that the funds collected from
the monthly service charges should be subject to the ordinance.
Mr. Skotnicki reiterated his previous statement that all capital
projects costing in excess of one million dollars should go to a
vote of the people.
Mr. Straub expressed the opinion that clarification was needed
on whether the ordinance was designed to protect the pocketbook
of the people, or to allow people to vote on projects. He noted
if it were to allow a vote on projects, it could be seen as a
growth/no-growth" measure. He expressed the opinion that it
was designed to protect the pocketbooks of the people.
11
Mr. Skotnicki stated it was to allow people to participate in
the process to determine priorities for City projects, and not
as a ''growth/no-growth" issue. He stated it was designed to get
public input in how the monies are spent for facilities. He
also stated that how monies are spent from one fund impact other
funds, and though not everyone may pay a particular tax,
everyone would receive the benefit.
Mrs. Cool expre.ssed the opinion that though the originators knew
their intent when the ordinance was prepared, the issue of
determining priorities for City projects was not addressed in
the ordinance.
Chairman Casler reiterated that the Committee has the
responsibility of interpreting the ordinance as it is written,
and not to try to determine thoughts of those who voted for
same.
.. , , . -r , Ir
CHAPTER 1.24 COMMITTEE MINUTE S Page 4
March 3, 1983
The Committee determined that the sewer construction fund is
exempt, and not subject to the ordinance.
AYE S : Casler, Sttaub, O'Day, Cool, and Feld.
NOE S : Skotnicki
ABSENT: Kulchin
As a point of interest, Chairman Casler indicated that the SDG&E
bill 'for the sewer plant is projected to increase from $100,000
this year to $1,200,000 next year.
Mr. Skotnicki stated it was a good example of how a new
facility required by new development could cause increased
maintenance fees, which would affect all people.
Water Fund
The City Manager explained the water fund, its collection and
purpose. He also indicated that some of the money is earmarked
for bond payments, but there is currently no distinction between
capital money and maintenance and operation money in the fund.
He stated it operates as a separate business enterprise.
Mr. Straub stated that everybody who needs water pays the fee;
therefore, it is assessed to all people.
Mr. Skotnicki stated that the water fee more closely resembles a
user fee than anything else that has been discussed.
Mr. O'Day expressed the opinion that there should be some
distinction in the fund between the portion that is necessary
for new development and the rest of the fund.
Chairman Casler expressed the opinion that the funds should be
separated between those used for future capital facilities which
are contributed by new homeowners and the use fees.
It was moved, qeconded, and the motion later withdrawn that the
portion of the funds collected through monthly billing be
subject to the ordinance and the connection fees and those for
construction be exempt.
Mr. O'Day stated that the City currently does not have a
connection fee, merely a charge for the meter and then the
monthly fees which are based on water usage.
CHAPTER I. 24 COMNITTEE MINUTES Page 5
March,3, 1983
Discussion reflected the need to separate the money collected to
build new facilities required as a result of new d.evelopment
from the remaining water monies.
The Committee determined that to the extent to which water funds
are collected from new development and expended for capital
facilities to serve that new development, those funds should be
exempt, and not subject to the ordinance. To the extent that
fees are collected from existing residences and used for
maintenance or replacement of the existing system, those funds
would be subject to the requirements of the ordinance.
AYES: Casler, Straub, O'Day, Cool, and Feld
NOES: Skotnicki
ABSENT: Kulchin
Due to the hour, the Committee determined to continued
discussion of the agenda at their next meeting.
The Committee adjourned to Tuesday, March 8, 1983, at 8:30 a.m.,
in the Council Chambers.
Respect f u 11 y submit t ed ,
& LEE RAU ENKRANZ
J City Clerk