HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/2002 BAKERSFIELD
Alan nager Sue Benham, Chair
Staff: Trudy Slater David Couch
Jacquie Sullivan
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITrEE
Regular Meeting
Monday, June 17, 2002
1:00 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
1. ROLL CALL
Called to order at 1:06 p.m.
Members present: Councilmember Sue Benham, Chair
Councilmember David Couch
Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan, arriving 1:10 p.m.
2. CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (a) OF GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.9, CITY OF BAKERSFIELD VS. FLASHCO; KERN COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 245944 - SPC
Committee Chair Sue Benham indicated there was no reportable action from the closed
session.
3. ADOPT MAY 13, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Adopted as submitted.
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
None.
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
June 17,2002
Page 2
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. CONTINUING REVIEW, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
MASSAGE ORDINANCE MODIFICATIONS TO ALLOW MOBILE MASSAGE
Police Chief Eric Matlock indicated the City of Modesto had been contacted regarding its
massage ordinance. He indicated the Modesto ordinance was the result of the local massage
industry wanting to implement strict regulations and guidelines to legitimize the out-call
profession due to the past view by the community as out-call massage having a double
meaning for prostitution. The local massage industry worked directly with the City Attorney's
office in implementing the strict guidelines. Modesto's ordinance only allows out-call
massage at private homes with a doctor's or a chiropractor's prescription.
Police Lt. Mel Scott indicated instances in Bakersfield where illicit activities had been
conducted. He also mentioned the problems with illegal operators who falsify their identities
in order to conduct operations.
Chief Matlock explained Modesto's out-call is by prescription in the home and in open areas
such as convention centers and not in closed locations such as private hotel rooms.
Problems with enforcement would exist unless clearly definable restrictions were placed
within any proposed ordinance. Chief Matlock indicated investigations relating to illegal
activities conducted under the guise of massage are difficult and labor intensive and generally
result in misdemeanor charges.
City Attorney Bart Thiltgen added Modesto's ordinance has additional requirements of the
licensee such as malpractice insurance and CPR training. He suggested that if the
Committee wished to move forward with a proposed ordinance change, City staff meet with
industry representatives. He also indicated he met with Mr. Berry as requested by the
Committee. He indicated staff conveyed to Mr. Berry its recommendation that if a change is
made in the ordinance that out-call massage be done only in public places. If a hotel had a
license with a room set aside for out-call massage, it would not be a problem.
Community representatives voiced a desire to have picture ID's, terminology which would
reflect "off-site" rather than "out-call," more hours of training, to work with the Police
Department on the issue, and to get something "on the books."
Committee Member Jacquie Sullivan felt it was important to have the issue fully reviewed
before passing an ordinance.
Committee Chair Sue Benham asked the City Attorney to meet with industry representatives
to work toward creating a draft ordinance to be reviewed by the Committee at the next
meeting. She asked members of the community to mark an M by their names on the sign in
sheet if they wished to be part of the discussions with the City Attorney. Committee Member
David Couch concurred with Committee Chair Benham's request.
Chief Matlock asked that if the massage ordinance is changed, at some point a review of the
City's escort service ordinance be reviewed. It was indicated this is an issue that should be
reviewed separately.
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
June 17,2002
Page 3
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. REVIEW, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING ADULT-
RELATED BUSINESSES
City Attorney Bart Thiltgen explained adult-related businesses were protected under the First
Amendment of the Constitution, and the City can't prohibit them legally. They must be
allowed to communicate with their potential customers, but they can be limited to certain
areas and restricted as to number and spacing between businesses. He explained clustering
can cause secondary effects, and secondary effects caused by adult-related businesses
allow spacing restrictions. Many studies have been conducted. The City uses a zoning
restriction. If siting conditions are changed, it will require a comprehensive study/review. The
City must have a reasonable number of legitimate sites.
Committee Member Couch asked for a copy of the current map. In response to his asking
if places where children congregate (such as roller rinks) could be identified, City Manager
Tandy responded a physical assessment would need to be done to determine as many sites
as possible.
In response to a question, City Attorney Thiltgen indicated staff could probably do the
comprehensive study that would be needed--which might need to be as extensive as an
environmental impact report. The issue of "clustering" would be part of a very extensive
study.
Committee Member Couch asked for the City Attorney to provide a preliminary evaluation
with regard to businesses that cater to young adults and children and a map to be available
for the next meeting for further discussion. City Manager Tandy indicated City staff would be
able to provide a map.
B. REVIEW, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING COUNCIL
COMPENSATION
Committee Chair Benham referred to Assistant City Manager John Stinson's memo relative
to council compensation of other cities, which Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater handed out.
Committee members generally felt council salaries were not commensurate with the time and
effort that was spent on council member duties.
City Clerk Pam McCarthy provided the Committee with a history of past ballot efforts to
increase council salaries. She also provided estimates for costs of holding elections and
explained costs change with the numbers of other agencies participating in the particular
election, for which each agency assumes a portion of the cost. With fewer agencies
participating, costs are shared among fewer participants and, thus, are more expensive per
agency. She indicated the highest cost for a City election within the last ten years was
approximately $45,000.
It was felt it is too late this year to get council compensation on the November ballot. The
next general election is November 2004. It is possible a March primary will be held in
2003/2004.
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
June 17, 2002.
Page 4
City Attorney Thiltgen explained that any increase in council compensation would require an
election, per the City Charter, and required a majority of the voting electorate to pass.
Committee Member Sullivan indicated an increase in council compensation was not out of
line and felt it was an educational issue for the community. She indicated many people felt
the council held full-time compensated positions. It is a privilege to serve the City. The
perception, however, is out of balance with actual compensation. She is in favor of increasing
the council's compensation. She suggested at some point that a "Community Voice" article
would be helpful.
Committee Member Couch indicated that if it cost $40,000 for an election to raise council
salaries, it would be a 'tough sell." He, too, agreed that council members deserved more
than $100 a month but felt it would not pass.
Committee Chair Benham indicated this was an issue on which the public needed to be
educated. Comparisons to 1956 when the council's salary was raised to $100 needed to be
identified, including the city's population, complexity of issues, and the city budget. She felt
it would be of interest to the public to know, and it was important to focus on the role of the
city council. Thought needs to be given to the election which would be the least expensive.
The City Manager suggested a survey of the cities which Bakersfield regularly uses as
comparable cities. The Committee asked for more specifics on the three cities which were
cited in Mr. Stinson's memorandum. Similarities mentioned included type of government
(charter vs. general law), population and budget size. The City Clerk indicated she believed
the League of California Cities had recently completed a council salaries survey.
C, REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE BANNING
OF FIREWORKS IN THE CITY
Director of Environmental Services Ralph Huey explained most fire problems which occurred
from fireworks came from the use of illegal ones. It would be easier to crack down on the
illegal use of fireworks if all fireworks were banned in the City.
Arthur Doland indicated he formerly had been in insurance and felt the City did not do enough
to keep Bakersfield safe. He indicated he had talked with Fire Chief Ron Fraze after the City
Council meeting where he had raised the issue of banning fireworks. He also indicated
fireworks bought during the Fourth of July sales period could be used all year long. City staff
concurred but identified that illegal fireworks were against the law at all times. The use of
legal fireworks are legal any time.
City Manager Tandy and Police Chief Matlock both indicated a ban of fireworks in the City
would be unmanageable relative to enforcement if it were not also banned in the County. City
Attorney Thiltgen also indicated county to county jurisdictional issues could also occur.
Committee Member Couch felt insurance costs were generally based on the materials with
which the house was constructed, i.e., a shake roof vs. a tile roof, with which staff concurred.
He indicated he felt that if fireworks were used correctly, there wasn't an issue.
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
June 17, 2002
Page 5
Environmental Services Director Huey indicated the State Fire Marshall determines the types
of fireworks which are legal or not.
Committee Member Sullivan felt safe and sound fireworks sounded good to her. Fireworks
are a tradition which she is not ready to ban. She feels it is the owner's responsibility to care
for their animals. The sales of safe fireworks are also a major fund-raiser for charitable
organizations from which much good comes to the community. Enforcement of a ban would
be an issue as well.
Responding to a question from'the City Manager, City Treasurer Bill Descary indicated there
were 65 permits for fireworks in the City, most of which were held by charitable organizations.
This number will grow as the City population grows.
Committee Chair Benham suggested that the more appropriate place for banning of fireworks
to be addressed would be the county. She asked for a report back from staff as requested
of Mr. Thiltgen regarding a survey of some of the other California cities which have banned
fireworks entirely. The issue will be revisited at the Committee meeting of July 22.
7. COMMrl'rEE COMMENTS
None.
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m.
Staff Attendees: City Manager Alan Christensen, Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater, City
Clerk Pam McCarthy; City Attorney Bart Thiltgen, Deputy City Attorney
Virginia Gennaro; Police Chief Eric Matlock, Police Lt. Melvin Scoff; Principal
Planner Jim Eggert; City Treasurer Bill Descary; Director of Environmental
Services Ralph Huey
Other Attendees: Knute Berry, Judith Koch, Renee D. Nelson, Margaret Hust, Donna
Henderson, Mary Strowa, Arthur Doland, Marsha Magnuson, Bob Hurst,
James Burger
(L020617.MIN)