SALINAS CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
APRIL 17, 2007 MEETING MINUTES
Mayor Donohue convened the joint City Council and
Redevelopment Agency meeting at 5:05 p.m.
Present:
Mayor/Chairperson Dennis Donohue
Council/Agency member Janet Barnes
Council/Agency member Tony
Barrera
Council/Agency member
Gloria De La Rosa
Council/Agency member Jyl Lutes
Council/Agency member Sergio Sanchez
Council/Agency member Steve Villegas
Also Present:
City Attorney/Agency Counsel Vanessa Vallarta
City Clerk/Secretary Ann Camel
JOINT CITY
COUNCIL/SALINAS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
CITY OF CHAMPIONS
The City Council recognized Caitlin Bullman and Leslie Shing
on receipt of the Eileen O’Doherty Spirit Scholarship for outstanding
leadership, commitment, and community service.
The City Council recognized Frank Navarrette and Gabe
Segovia for their outstanding coaching services to the Salinas National Little
League Baseball Team.
The City Council recognized Michele King, Top Scoring 5th
Grade Student in California.
The City Council recognized Salinas’ United Spirit
Association 2007 Junior/Youth Team National Winners:
Mighty Mites Song/Pom:
Alvarez Titans, 3rd Place
Pee Wee Song/Pom:
Salinas Broncos, 1st Place
Midget Song/Pom:
Alvarez Titans, 1st Place; Salinas Colts, 3rd
Place
PROCLAMATION
The City Council proclaimed the week of April 15th
through April 21,2007 as National Library Week.
PRESENTATION
Bob Chauncey, National Center for Bicycling and Walking/Steps
to a Healthier Salinas, made a presentation.
ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORT
1. Status
of Monterey County Gang Task Force
Dino Bardoni,
Police Commander, stated that the Task Force has applied for federal funding
totaling $3.5 million for fiscal year 2007 and $4 million for 2008. They are uncertain whether funding will be
allocated. The allocation of time spent
in Monterey County jurisdictions includes sixty-six percent in Salinas, twelve
percent on the Monterey Peninsula, twelve percent in South County, and twelve
percent in unincorporated areas. The
Task Force made 538 arrests in 2006 and 218 to date in 2007, including 118 in
Salinas. This year they have
concentrated on community outreach and have taken a new approach.
Sheriff Kanalakis stated that the federal government has not
provided a timeline for funding. They
are still awaiting year three funding.
Kathryn Ramirez, Salinas Union High School District Board
member, asked for evidence based training and intervention programs.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Kathryn Ramirez, Salinas Union High School District Board member, former
Volunteer Center Executive Director, spoke in support of the Caminos program.
Gwen Foote criticized the lack of internet access at the libraries.
CONSENT RESOLUTION
City Attorney Vanessa Vallarta corrected the April 6, 2007 minutes to
reflect that Senior Deputy City Attorney Chris Callihan attended the meeting
instead of City Attorney Vanessa Vallarta.
Upon motion by Council/Agency member De La Rosa and second by
Council/Agency member Barnes, Council voted unanimously to adopt the Consent
Resolution.
SALINAS CITY COUNCIL
1.
Approved minutes of
April 6 minutes as corrected and April 10, 2007 meetings.
2. Accepted financial claims report.
3. Accepted
the monthly financial report for March 2007.
4. Adopted RESOLUTION 19185 approving a
two-year extension with JT2 Integrated Resources for Workers’ Compensation
Third Party Administrator services.
5. Adopted RESOLUTION 19186 approving a
two-year extension with Nova Pro Risk Solutions for Liability Third Party
Administrator services.
6. Adopted RESOLUTION 19187 approving the
installation of one Yellow Loading/Unloading Zone along 347 Front Street’s East
San Luis Street Frontage and relocating two existing 20-minute (green) zones
along the site’s Front Street frontage.
SALINAS
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. Approved minutes of April 10, 2007 meeting.
2. Accepted financial claims report.
The
Redevelopment Agency adjourned at 6:45 p.m..
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
1. Increase Development Impact Fees by Three
Percent Effective July 1, 2007.
Lynn Mau,
Public Works Assistant, stated that the fee increase is in accordance with the
increase in the Engineering News Record index.
Lori Atkinson
and John Fair, Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, stated
that they do not oppose the fee increase.
COUNCIL ACTION
Upon
motion by Councilmember Barnes and second by Councilmember Lutes, Council voted
unanimously to adopt RESOLUTION 19188 increasing fees three percent effective
July 1, 2007 in accordance with provisions of Section 9-42 of the Salinas City
Code.
2. Fee
and Service Charge Revenue Increase Effective July 1, 2007.
Tom Kever,
Finance Director, stated that the fees would be increased by 3.2% in accordance
with the Consumer Price Index. The Permit Center has implemented a permit tracking system for
development and land use activity. To
fund this, staff recommends that a four percent technology fee be added to all
fees collected for development and land use activity. On April 5th, these fees were discussed with the
Chamber’s Business Development Task Force, who did not object.
Lori Atkinson and John Fair, Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce, stated
that the Chamber does not object to the increase and supports the technology
fee.
COUNCIL ACTION
Upon
motion by Councilmember Barnes and second by Councilmember Lutes, the Council
voted unanimously to adopt RESOLUTION 19189 approving the recommended schedule
of fees and service charges, including the 3.2% adjustment to existing fees and
service charges effective July 1, 2007.
3. Extension
of Urgency Interim Ordinance on Medical Marijuana Dispensaries.
Dan Perez,
Police Commander, stated that federal and State law conflict as to the use,
possession, and cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes. Medical marijuana can only be
recommended and cannot be prescribed by a physician under federal law. California’s Proposition 215 provides for
seriously ill patients to obtain marijuana for medical purposes when it has
been determined to be appropriate by a physician upon recommendation, versus
prescription. The definition of
patients and caregivers who would not face prosecution are not clearly
defined. California law is not clear as
to how the marijuana may be obtained or
distributed.
Commander
Perez referred to five valid questions that have been posed and should be
answered before staff believes it is prudent to allow facilities in
Salinas: 1) is it possible for a store
front dispensary to be legally operated under the 1996 Compassionate Use Act;
2) Could an individual or Councilmember be found to be acting illegally and be
subject to federal criminal charges for allowing dispensaries; 3) If a
dispensary is violating state law for sales and trafficking, could an elected
official be guilty of state criminal charges; 4) does the approval of an
ordinance open the jurisdiction to civil or criminal liability; and 5) does the
issuance of a business license involve any civil or criminal liability for a
City or County and its elected officials?
Commander
Perez stated that law enforcement concerns include increased crime and the lack
of definition and regulation regarding dosage, quantities, instructions as to
how marijuana is to be ingested, and how, when and where it could be
distributed. There are little or no
controls regarding potencies or how much patients can buy. Dispensaries have proliferated in some
communities because of little or no regulatory controls. Some communities have
noted a marked increase in vehicle and foot traffic, congregation, and gangs
around dispensaries. Staff does not
know what the true need for medical marijuana is in the community. Not allowing dispensaries in Salinas does
not deny patients medical marijuana.
Councilmember
Sanchez asked about Santa Cruz’ experience.
Commander Perez stated that they have not had major incidents at their
facility. However, they have a different culture and tolerance than Salinas.
Sheriff
Kanalakis spoke in opposition to authorization of dispensaries. He is committed to investigating and
shutting down any criminal activity regardless of where it may be located.
Frank Pierce,
cancer survivor, spoke in support of dispensaries.
Heddy Chang
opposes dispensaries because of the experience of two San Diego students
receiving prescriptions. The California
Medical Board oversees the dispensing of prescriptions. Very few people in a case study were being
treated for life-threatening illnesses or glaucoma.
Assistant
District Attorney Berkley Brannon stated that dispensaries are illegal under
California law, because only primary caregivers can minister prescribed
marijuana.
Arlene
Tavani, Salinas resident, spoke in support of completely banning the
establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries.
Dean Flippo,
Monterey County District Attorney, spoke in support of completely banning the
establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries. Only seven of the fifty-eight counties and twenty-four cities
allow dispensaries. It is his job to
ensure that the laws are carried out.
The dispensary is not a primary care giver and is not provided for in
State law.
Councilmember
De La Rosa stated that the community brought up the need for dispensaries. She notes that there are no community
members in the audience who have voiced support. She will not support the dispensary because of the vagueness of
the law. There are insufficient
resources to regulate dispensaries, and she believes that the resources should
be allocated to addressing crime.
Councilmember
Barnes stated that safety, security, and reputation are imperative in the
community. She supports banning
dispensaries because of the lack of clarity, and based on the statistics and
case examples cited.
Councilmember
Lutes stated that there are questions that need to be answered by the Attorney
General, and inconsistencies between federal and State law. She believes that the laws enacted by the
voters allow access to marijuana. It
was necessary for her first husband to have access to marijuana and morphine in
order for him to be able to die at home at the age of 31. She supports extending the ordinance until
the Attorney General can respond and strict regulations can be developed. She would like to hear about any cities that
have not had problems.
Councilmember
Sanchez stated that the report was not well balanced, which the Council needs
in order to make decisions. He would
like to hear from the Santa Cruz Police Department and hear about their
experience, although they are a different community. He bases his decisions by weighing the impacts to the greatest
number of people. He would like to hear
more from the medical community before considering a ban and therefore he is
leaning toward extending the interim ordinance.
Councilmember
Barrera stated that Council has heard from both law enforcement and from some
family members of cancer survivors. It
would be difficult to ban dispensaries after they have been allowed.
Councilmember
Lutes noted that the City could rescind the Conditional Use Permit if the
dispensary was not operating well.
Councilmember
Villegas stated that medical marijuana is available in Santa Cruz for patients
who need it.
Councilmember
Sanchez asked whether there are any municipalities that have been sued for
banning dispensaries. Ms. Vallarta
stated that she does not know of any jurisdictions that have been sued or
prosecuted. However, District Attorneys
are discussing it increasingly.
Mayor Donohue
stated that he is persuaded by the District Attorney’s Office’s comments.
This is an
issue of how access is secured.
Councilmembers are all compassionate, and he is not concerned about
liability. Salinas has a different
character than Santa Cruz, and he respects Santa Cruz’s differences. He does not believe Salinas is in support of
dispensaries.
MOTION
Councilmember
Barnes moved to adopt RESOLUTION 19193 extending interim Ordinance No. 2466 and
directing staff to return with an ordinance permanently prohibiting the
issuance of permits, entitlements, licenses or any other approvals.
Councilmember
Sanchez requested an amendment to the motion directing the Police Chief to
return with information on the Police Department’s policy on dealing with
residents and primary caregivers who are cultivating marijuana with a
physician’s prescription. He would like to include that they would not be
arrested, similar to statements the Council has made on some immigration laws.
Councilmember
Lutes stated that she is going to oppose the motion, not because she wants
gangs or drugs to proliferate but because she feels that the City could draft
an ordinance that severely restricts the establishment of dispensaries.
COUNCIL
ACTION
Councilmember
Barnes amended her motion to adopt RESOLUTION 19193 extending interim Ordinance
No. 2466 for an additional ten months and fifteen days, and to direct staff to
return with an ordinance permanently prohibiting the issuance of permits,
entitlements, licenses or any other approvals for medical marijuana
dispensaries, along with a report and clarification regarding the current
Police Department’s policy regarding application of the law to patients and
primary caregivers. The amended motion
was seconded by Councilmember Barrera and passed. AYES: Councilmembers
Barnes, Barrera, De La Rosa, Sanchez, Villegas, and Mayor Donohue. NOES:
Councilmember Lutes.
The City
Council recessed to closed session at 8:35 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m.
The City
Council met in closed session pursuant to:
a. Government Code Section 54956.9(a), pending
litigation, Goodman v. City of Salinas, et al., United States District
Court Case No. C06-07161. CONTINUED
TO MAY 1, 2008.
b.
Government Code Section 54956.9(c), conference with
legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation (one potential case).
c.
Government Code Section 54957.6 with its designated
labor representatives Dave Mora, City Manager; Vanessa Vallarta, City Attorney;
Jorge Rifa, Deputy City Manager; Finance Director Tom Kever; and Teri Silva,
Human Resources Manager regarding labor relations with Association of
Management Personnel, Firefighters Association, Fire Supervisors Association,
Confidential Employees, Confidential Management Employees, and Department
Directors. CANCELLED
d.
Government Code Section 54957.6 with its designated
labor representatives Dave Mora, City Manager; Vanessa Vallarta, City Attorney;
Jorge Rifa, Deputy City Manager; Finance Director Tom Kever; and Teri Silva,
Human Resources Manager regarding labor relations with Service Employees
International Union (SEIU), SEIU Supervisors, and Salinas Municipal Employees
Association/SEIU. CANCELLED
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. Planned
Unit Development 2007-001 and Conditional Use Permit 06-30; a request to amend
Planned Unit Development Permit 74-10 to allow the consideration of land uses
which are subject to the Conditional Use Permit process and modify parking
requirements at two existing buildings located at 1164 and 1184 Monroe Street,
and a request to operate a Religious Assembly use within an existing building
located at 1164 Monroe Street.
Andrew
Myrick, Associate Planner, presented his report. There is an average parking stall vacancy of forty-three percent,
which justifies the parking reduction.
A larger facility would be needed if the congregation grows beyond
forty-nine members.
Mayor Donohue
opened the public hearing.
Tim King,
Pastor of New Life Church, stated that they have forty-five members. They have held two morning services and
could hold more services to accommodate members. This is a temporary location for them.
COUNCIL
Upon
motion by Councilmember De La Rosa and second by Councilmember Lutes, Council
voted unanimously to adopt RESOLUTION 19190 finding the proposed project
exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, and approving Planned
Unit Development Permit 2007-001 and Conditional Use Permit 06-30.
5. General Plan Amendment
06-03 and Rezone 06-03; a request to change the General Plan designation of a
3.42-acre parcel (Parcel “L”) from “Office” to “Retail” and to change the
Zoning designation of the same 3.42-acres from “Commercial Office (CO)” to “Commercial
Retail (CR),” on a property located at 1535 Constitution Boulevard (northeast
intersection of Independence Boulevard and Constitution Boulevard).
Thomas Wiles, Senior Planner,
presented his report.
In response to Councilmember Barnes,
Deputy City Manager Russell stated that Creekbridge has expressed willingness
to fill the berm gaps with trees.
Currently, there are no limitations regarding truck delivery times.
Councilmember Lutes would like the
trucks to have access from Constitution Boulevard instead of from Independence
Boulevard.
Deputy City Manager Russell stated
that queuing or backing up of traffic is causing shortcuts through the
neighborhood. He cannot forecast
whether this would increase as the result of the proposed project.
Marina Gallegos, Little River Drive,
expressed concern regarding traffic impacts on Little River Drive between 3
p.m. and 6 p.m. from people who are trying to avoid the intersection at
Constitution and Independence. She is
not opposed to the development, although she would prefer office buildings She
would like mitigations such as speed bumps.
Richard
Thorne, 1628 Newport Court, stated that the project would result in unmitigated
traffic impacts, decreased property values, lighting impacts, loitering; loss
of office jobs, and noise. Sufficient
retail space already exists. The
proposal does not support the General Plan land use policies because it impacts
the quality of life and reduces employment opportunities.
Peter
Gamble, Manchester Drive, stated that there are two offices above the parcel,
one of which is 100% occupied and the newer building is 70% occupied. There are commercial parcels available. The intersection is already
busy; there are
noise and pollution impacts. Shopping
carts and trash would be left in the neighborhood. Independence Boulevard is not a thoroughfare for the trucks. Safeway has a drug
store.
Audrey Thorne stated that Salinas
needs office space, and there would be traffic impacts. The neighbors would be exposed to the unattractive
truck delivery area.
Chris Luffman, Creekbridge Homes,
stated that Creekbridge would do everything possible to mitigate any
impacts. They have obligated to a
continuous landscaping buffer that would be filled in with adult, live trees. They are not opposed to a truck delivery
time restriction of 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., and they would write that into their
leases. They may not build another
office building if they do not get the necessary occupancy. They have a plan to reduce lighting
impacts. The trucks would enter from
Constitution Boulevard and exit from Independence Boulevard. They could reconfigure the loading area to
respond to Councilmember Lutes’ concerns.
Councilmember
Sanchez would like conditions to calm the traffic and to allow pedestrians and school children to cross
safely. Deputy City Manager Russell
stated that they could develop pedestrian enhancements. Little River Drive is one of the streets on the
list being considered for traffic calming measures.
In
response to Councilmember Sanchez, Mr. Luffman stated that he would have to
take a request for a contribution for traffic calming measures back to the
corporation to determine project cost viability. Mr. Russell stated that the cost would depend on the calming
measures; $10,000 was donated by the medical center on Los Palos. Mr. Luffman stated that he could commit to
$10,000 if others make a contribution.
Councilmember
Barnes stated that the developer has mitigated the issues. She would like them to take care of the berms,
the shopping carts, light shielding and the condition limiting truck traffic
from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Councilmember
De La Rosa noted that the Laurel Heights neighborhood has never complained
about noise from the Walgreens’ area.
Councilmember Lutes stated that the
project makes sense because this is a retail area. She supports Creekbridge in their design. However, she is concerned regarding the
traffic calming policies, and she does not want to risk putting additional
traffic on Little River. She cannot
support it until the shopping cart policy is approved. If the project is approved, she would
request mitigations to include a lighting plan, realigning the loading area so
it is not backing onto residences, delivery hour restrictions, design conforms,
addressing the shopping carts prior to a City-wide ordinance being adopted, and
to ask Creekbridge to deposit $10,000 for traffic calming measures.
Mayor Donohue stated that he is
supportive of Creekbridge, but he is
supportive of the concerns also.
He wondered about the Traffic and Transportation Commission’s unanimous
approval. He stated that the traffic
calming policy is needed in the near future.
He agrees that oversight is needed if the project is approved.
COUNCIL ACTION
Upon motion by Councilmember
Sanchez and second by Councilmember Lutes, Council voted to adopted RESOLUTION
19191 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving the General
Plan Amendment, introducing the Zoning ORDINANCE for adoption at the next
meeting, and requiring the mitigations as stated by Councilmember Lutes, i.e.
a lighting plan, realigning the loading area so it is not backing on
residences, delivery hour restrictions, design conforms, addressing the
shopping carts prior to a City-wide ordinance being adopted, and a deposit of
$10,000 for traffic calming measures.
AYES: Councilmembers Barnes,
Barrera, De La Rosa, Sanchez, and Villegas.
NOES: Councilmembers Lutes and
Mayor Donohue.
6. Planned
Unit Development 06-04 (associated with Conditional Use Permit 03-06); a
request to construct 53 Senior Housing Dwelling Units located at 11 Hill Circle
in the R-L-5.5-F (Low Density Residential–Flood Plain Overlay) District.
Planning
Manager Courtney Grossman stated the Planning Commission found there were no findings
to support the requested alternative means for advertising availability of
inclusionary units. A one-hundred foot
set back from the creek is required but allows infill projects with findings
justified by a biotic study, which the applicant has submitted. Alternative mitigation measures and design
standards have been incorporated for the encroachment.
Deputy City
Manager Rob Russell stated that the intersections are operating at acceptable
service levels, except St. Edwards and East Laurel Drive operate at level F at
peak hours during existing conditions.
The applicant would be required to make a pro rata fair share
contribution to St. Edwards and Laurel.
Christine
Kemp, on behalf of the applicant, stated that this is infill development. They are attempting to provide a park like
setting. The policy to allow
development within the one hundred- foot set back was authorized in
anticipation of this project. There would
be an on-site manager. There are more
controls over rental units than over ownership units. The modulars are on foundations.
They have provided trails, and there is access to Laurel that they would
like to have gated for security purposes.
They would be willing to include a speed bump to address the concern
about speeding around the corner, and there would be trees to screen. She described mitigations including the
vegetation being put back in. They
believe newspaper publishing for the inclusionary units would be redundant
because they have a large number of agencies that they will notify. They would like the units to be gated. Monterey Salinas Transit (MST)
commented
that it was a good project.
Jim Hanson,
Saint Regis Circle, opposes the development, but this is probably the best plan
for this lot if it is going to be developed.
If it goes forward, he also would like to address the proximity of the
road to the fences. Calling it senior
housing is misleading, because seniors will have their children and
grandchildren living there also.
However, there is no recreation, and there would be parking and traffic
impacts because these would be working seniors. On site management mitigates some of his concern. This site is not suitable for
development
because of its scenic view and open space.
The City Council has voted down projects for this site three or four
times previously for this reason. It is
a radical departure from the current development. There is crime in Acosta Plaza and this is open space between
Laurel Heights and Acosta Plaza. But if
they are going to proceed this is a good design.
Ms. Kemp
stated that the homes are only 900 square feet, and the inclusionary units are
deed restricted to two or three persons.
This senior citizen, low impact community will help reduce crime. They would not like to do internal
fencing.
Ted Thoeny,
applicant, stated that they have strict limitations on occupancy in their
projects and willl be attentive to their project.
Councilmember
De La Rosa stated that the residents on North Maderia expressed concern about
the trespassing and dumping in the area currently. More senior housing is needed, particularly for the lower
fifty-five year age level. She is
concerned about graffiti and would like vines on the walls. She supports gates for the project. She believes bus shelters are needed for
the
seniors. She supports the project.
Councilmember
Barnes suggested hedging instead of fencing.
Councilmember
Lutes stated that she would like to reclaim the creek at the fire access so
that the Laurel Heights residents could access it as a walking trail. Ms. Kemp stated that the residents could
contact the property manager for access, but they would like the security of
not leaving it open.
Councilmember
Sanchez asked for a condition requiring the applicant to work with MST and City
staff to provide two shelters on Laurel Drive and that they would continue to
work with the current residents. Ms.
Kemp stated that they could commit to work with MST and would attempt to
accommodate them. She would like to
know what the financial impact is and that there would be proportionality. Mr. Russell stated that the last shelter
cost approximately $10,000.
Ms. Kemp
stated that Mr. Thoeny would make a $10,000 contribution for the bus
shelter.
In response
to Councilmember Sanchez’s request for two shelters, City Attorney Vanessa
Vallarta stated that there would need to be a nexus for the bus shelter. She believes the record supports that there
are transportation and circulation impacts.
The shelter could be a contribution toward addressing the broader,
related issues. Bus shelters are not
addressed in the environmental document.
Ms. Vallarta stated that the developer can only be required legally to
contribute their fair share of their impacts.
Ms. Kemp
stated that MST has not commented that shelters are needed.
Councilmember
Barrera stated that he does not feel that the City should demand shelters from
the developer. The City has not been
consistent in Code enforcement. He is
concerned that the City should be consistent in the enforcement of the senior
occupancy requirement.
In response
to Councilmember De La Rosa, Ms. Vallarta asked if the biologist supported a
hedge separation from the habitat restoration area instead of the recommended
three-foot fence. Ed Mercurio stated
that he conducted the original biological report. He stated that a hedge and
signs would be sufficient to keep people from going into the riparian
area. A split rail fence would not stop
people from climbing over it and detracts from the natural habitat area.
COUNCIL
ACTION
Councilmember
De La Rosa moved to adopt RESOLUTION 19192 affirming the adoption of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
to include the hedge separation, gate, and vines on the wall; approve Planned
Unit Development Permit 06-04;deny the proposed Alternative Means of Compliance
request to eliminate the newspaper advertising requirement; and to accept the
donation of $10,000 for a bus shelter at Laurel and Saint Edwards. The motion was seconded by Councilmember
Sanchez and passed unanimously.
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/APPOINTMENTS/FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember
Barnes requested a 10 p.m. or reasonable deadline for the conduct of business
at Council meetings.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:38 p.m.
HOME