Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10131980-cc_CCv0001.pdf { MItZ37'S of an adjourned regular meeting of the City Council, City of Redlands, held in the Lyons Gallery of A. K. Smiley Public Library at 7:00 P.M. on October 13, 1980. TTESI?_'T Charles G. DeMirjyn, Mayor �µ^ James W. Gosrnan, Vice Mayor Oddie J. Martinez, Jr., Councilmerrber Barbara Cram Riordan, Councilmember Ken Roth, Councilnember Oris C. Christiansen, City Manager Edward F. Taylor, City Attorney Peggy A. Moseley, City Clerk Ted Randolph, Redlands Daily Facts Sam Nicholas, The Sim None The; Council meting of October 7, 1980, was adjourned to this time and place for the pmspose of holding a study-meting on the problems dealing with school impaction; to permit dialog on Proposition "R," Ordinance No. 1680, and SB 201; and to have an open discussion between the councilmembers and following this receive input from the audience. Before consideration of the matters to be informally discussed, the City Manager presente,c, Jaycees a request from the Jaycees that Council request temporary closing of the Orange Street on Christmas and off ramps of I-10 for the annual Christmas parade. This is necessitated b a change .in Parade i Y the parade route, and permission must. be sought from Caltrans. On motion of Councilman Gorman, seconded by Councilman Riordan, this letter was unanimously approved. Mayor Demirjyn turned the meeting over to Vice Mayor german who thanked Miss Irshay for her hos,)italitly. Ile eiTlained to the audience that under the Ralph M. Brown Act, it .is improper for the counciLrexi ems to sit down together as a group to discuss differences of opinion among themselves. For that reason, Council scheduled this study session to provide additicna. discussion which is necessary at this time to consider the series of events, not foreseen, since tame adoption of Proposition "R" on November 7, 1978. The declaration of school impaction by the Board of education of the Redlands Unified School District as contained in Resolution No. 58, adopted June 26, 1979, precipitated the adoption of Resolution No. 3645 by the City Council on January 15, 1980. Resolution No. 3645 provided a vehicle for mitigation of impaction and was an alternative to being sued or having a build- ing moratorium. Mr. Gornon informed those present that SB 201 was not post-Proposition 13 legislation, but instead was adopted earlier to provide interim relief of school crowding until adequate funding was developed for permanent construction. He reminded the audience that since August of this year, both the staff and councilmen hers have been working on an ordinance to supplement Ordinance No. 1680, and to establish guidelines to clarify the manner in which impaction is determined and dealt with. Responding to concerns expressed about the legality of the City's position, City Attorney Taylor reviewed the findings of Superior Court .judge Charles Bierschbach's recent decision in the lawsuit filed against the City by Criterion Development, -Inc. Tie stated that what NAM the City has been doing in accord with the School Board has been found legal and proper. Mr. Taylor stated that the finding is being appealed, but until such time as i:lac appeal is heard, he would support it. He then summarized the court judgement and conclusions stating that the fee rocRiired in the Schaal District's Resolution No. 31. .is not prohibited under i Proixasition 13, nor does it violate the State Constitution, and that the Certificate. of litigation is valid and. proper. Mr. Taylor added that the City was under a building mora- torium Cantil some manner of mitigation was adopted, and that Resolution No. 3645 provides the mitigation certificate which is the means of obtaining a building pecrit. The following are among the statements of concern expressed by the Council: Mr. Gorman spoke of the separation of power, the fact that the School Board and council are both elected bodies, and that the condition of impaction of the schools is unique and more difficult to evaluate than impaction of water, sewer, or other. services. He added that while SB 201 required Council concurrence in the determination of impaction, Ordinance No. 1,680 is i explicitly silent on the need, or not need, for concurrence. Both Mr. Gorman and Dr. Roth stated that they were reluctant to snake a judcWPnt while lack- ing guidelines and definite criteria upon which to base evaluation. Dr. Roth: Do we feel that we should concur with the School Board? I am not satisfied with Resolutiai No. 3645 and feel we should have some way to decide if we don't concur. t�hi.le I feel that the School Board is elected, just as I am, I am not sure that wo should create- a fee becuase they say so. pis~ Speaking from the audience, Ingrid Mack stated: "The School Board has one airs - to produce �a the best possible schools, and that is proper; the citizens of the City look to the Council as the ultimate decision makers." i Mrs. Riordan: I still believe that the schools should be seeking State Funds. Thrzre are tidelands oil monies and Assemblyman Leonard was very optimistic that these would he avail- Mule; also Redlands' growth is unique, some schools are losing enrollnent. I feel there must be definitions of "optimum" and "maximum" in relation to enroll,, nt. I do not support. the other issues. My long association with the school system, and I believe i in the systen,may color ztiy judgement. I would sit in concurrence because it: involves build- ing permits in this city. I am not saying I would not make a fee, am not a.=renting on that issue, and will continue to consider it. Also, I don't feel this feta is equitable. In the same school district there is a different fee: collected, yet there is no difference between the children. I cannot support something that. is not ecTaxal. We need a procedure to move forward - the staff has prepared one, and Dr. Reath and Air. Gorman have also worked on one. I feel that in some schools we do have problems; in others, not. This puts us in an awkward position, in rokkincr a determination, the responsibility conp.s down to us. T r, M rtinez. I will continue to abstain, and 1 will not vote in this matter. Mr. D&tirjyn: I have been a part of the system for twenty-five years. I am not ready to make a decision on unpaction, hoover, I believe it exists on the north side. lavinrx taught in the high school. I know that the enrollment goes down five to eight ;,x--rcent by Christmas time, and is further down at the end of: the school year. There are fewer teachers now; there: were 105 in 1965,. last year there was 75. I cannot feel the high school is hijiactc--ad. i A s7r xix�= Education is a responsibility of all of us. I feel the fee is unfair. For the previous eight years we have averaged 290 units constructed. I feel we could leave: the one to four units out of the fee. I am not ready to accept infraction in the secondary school; I question part of the School Board's information, but don't feel this is being done for gain. "I am involved and would not do anything to hurt a kid." Dr. Roth: We need to have a different mechanism to decide irpaction -- to put a number on it, Like water and sewer. I would like to have a mechanism by which we can judge. I would like to see the fee schedule changed - not based on square feet, but more like the county; would like to see exceptions for individual. hors s. As a drafter of the ordinance, I did riot want to create a problem for family builder.. i pso, 1 feel the School Board must cans before us and the public to give their reasons for feeling they are impacted. Mr. German. I believe there is a credibility gap and am not convinced there is iz�action. We need an agreed mechanism to eliminate suspicion and recriminations. I am certainly ready to further review my attitude toward concurrence with impaction if we can set defini- tions and guidelines. Mrs. Riordan: I have no trouble with procedure, I have trouble with the emotion to eRvmrpt one to four. The vote was two to two. Cn page two: if at any tires. the School Board does not adhere to what we say - we will make a decision.......I would like to argue impaction definition and exceptions; I accept option to make a decision. 1,bllowing ten minute recess, the members restated sone of their opinions. `f'he .State criteria of so many children per square foot was mentioned. Again the tremendous incuity between County and City was also discussed. Mrs. Riordan stated that it would be prudent to hear from the School Board kx cause of the differences that have occured, and added that she would be willing to give the time, to hear also from the parents. Dr. Ibth moved. "I would like to crave that until we resolve this matter, that all mitigation fees ool.lected for one to four units be placed in escrow to be returned if our proposed ordinance be in our favor, or be given to the schools if the finding is in favor of the schools." Following several other suggested additions to the motion, City Attorney Taylor stated this was an illegal motion. 'Ar. (bi- an recommended a workshop to discuss wiat is rktximum and optimum enrollr nt and to set up definite guidelines for the manner of declaring and dealing with impaction. The following people spoke from the floor: R. A. Moore, Robert Bruce, Joe Janzic, Bill Gibson, Don Wallace, Jim Coffin, William Branch, Ingrid Mack, Perry Dyke, Marge LSyuick, and Maysle Hardy. 'Ibe City Manager was authorized to set a workshop time that was satisfactory for the School. Board. There being no further business, Council adjourned, on motion, at 10:10 P.M. payor of the City of and A7 IT,,ST: x Catt ,fie—'