Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/29/2004 B A K E R S F I E L D Sue .Benham, Chair David Couch Jacquie Sullivan Staff: Trudy Slater SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Monday, March 29, 2004 1:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room Second Floor - City Hall, Suite 201 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH .LEGAL COUNSEL -- EXISTING LITIGATION CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (A) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9: FOUR (4) POTENTIAL CASES 3. ADOPT FEBRUARY 23, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING MOTOR HOMES PARKED ON PUBLIC STREETS 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 7. ADJOURNMENT ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT I MEETING DATE: March 29, 2004 I AGENDA SECTION: Closed Session I ITEM: TO: · Legislative and Litigation Committee APPROVED FROM: Virginia Gennaro, City Attorney DEPARTMENT HEAD /J~/~ DATE: March 24, 2004 CITY A'I-rORNEY /&;::~y CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation ~ Closed session pursuant to subdivision (a) of GOvernment Code sec~t( 54956.9. 1.E. Brooks, et al. v. City of Bakersfield KCSC Case No. S-1500-CV 249762 AEW 2.Medina .v. City of Bakersfield, et al. KCSC Case No. S-1500-CV-252293 SPP, 3.D'Amourse v. City of Bakersfield, et al. 5~ D.C.A. Case No. F043160 4. Bradford Martin v. BPD, et al. USDC Case No. CV, F-01-6119 TAG RECOMMENDATION: BACKGROUND: VG:Is March 24, 2004, 1:22PM DRAFT B' fi,K E R S F I E L D Alan anager Sue Benham, Chair Staff: 'Trudy Slater David Couch Jacquie Sullivan AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT LEGISLATIVE AND*LITIGATION COMMrl'rEE Regular Meeting Monday, February 23, 2004 1:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room 1. ROLL CALL Called to order at 1:05 p.m. Members present: Councilmember Sue Benham, Chair Councilmember David Couch Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan 2. ADOPT JANUARY 12, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY.REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND COMMI'R'EE 'RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO FIREWORKS COMPANY REQUEST FOR CHANGE IN THE CITY'S FIREWORKS LOTTERY PROCEDURES/ORDINANCE Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater explained the staff proposals submitted to Committee for review: one which seeks to limit a specific non-profit organization to one permit application only (Exhibit A) and one which charges each subunit making application for a permit a non- refundable permit application fee (Exhibit B). Agenda Summary Report DRAFT Legislative and Litigation Gommittee February ~3, 2004 Page 2 City Treasurer Cheryl Perkins indicated she favored limiting a non-profit organization to one application regardless of how many subunits it might have. She also indicated that staff spent a considerable amount of time in processing' the applications and non-refundable permit application fees should be .charged to cover staff costs of doing so. Discussions centered on whether a few or many organizations were submitting more than one application, whether a limited number of applications would solve issues, the numbers of applications which were included in the lottery drawing as well as those grandfathered in (those not having to participate in the lottery drawing), and the fairness of a non-refundable-permit . application fee. Fire Chief Ron Fraze indicated a concern over illegal sales of fireworks by a den mother as a fundraising effort for .her scout troop. Mr. Roger Jobe, Phantom Fireworks, indicated fireworks required safety measures and should be picked up at fireworks stands. Staff was directed to attempt to address Chief Fraze's issue. After discussion, Committee Member Jacquie Sullivan made a motion to have a non-refundable application fee. This was unanimously passed. Committee Chair Sue, Benham made a motion to allow only one application per non-profit organization. This also passed unanimously. Committee Member David Couch suggested, and the Committee concurred, that as a new ordinance would not be effective before the application period for permit submissions begins this year, staff will inform this year's applicants of the ordinance changes that are being proposed so they can plan ahead for next year. B. REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND COMMITTEE 'RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO STREET CORNER VENDOR ACTIVITY IMPACTING OTHER BUSINESSES Committee Chair Benham explained she, too, had received complaints regarding transient businesses/itinerant merchants in addition to the Council referral to Committee. Ms. Slatei; indicated that generally problems did not occur with those who had followed the City's regulations in obtaining the proper permits but with those who had not. Mr. Scott Farley indicated there was a substantial loss of revenues when itinerant merchants sell merchandise during the holidays, including Valentine's. Day and the upcoming Mother's Day. Committee Chair Benham indicated she would like to see Code Enforcement and the Bakersfield Police Department enforce the ordinance. Committee Member Sullivan made a motion to adopt a policy of citation rather than warning, and Committee Chair Benham asked-if a motion was needed to step up enforcement. City Manager Tandy indicated that staff present would see this happens. Mr. Farley was given Treasury's number to call for issues with itinerant merchants and an additional complaint line number (326-3674) in Development Services. Committee Member Sullivan asked whether the license amount needed to be reviewed, and Ms. Perkins indicated this would be included in the City's annual review. Agencla Summary Report DRAFT Legislative and Litigation Committee February 23, 2004 Page 3 C. REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO AN ORDINANCE ALLOWING SEIZURE OF VEHICLES BELONGING TO INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN ILLEGAL DUMPING ACTIVITIES Police Captain Tim Taylor explained that the Los Angeles dumping ordinance became effective in November 2003 and since that time Los Angeles had impounded only one vehicle, a dump~ truck. The Los Angeles ordinance targets major illegal dumping activities. Development Services Director Jack Hardisty explained that there are existing remedies in the City permit process for construction waste dumpers who are caught in the act of illegal dumping; the real issue is in catching them. Captains Taylor and Lynn indicated there are eXisting avenues in both the Vehicle and Penal Codes for impounding vehicles of those caught in violation of the Vehicle and Penal Codes. Seizure and forfeiture of assets requires numerous procedural.steps, including notifications, hearings, appeals, and other administrative and legal procedures. The Committee felt a review of the costs involved in impounding a vehicle was appropriate. Staff will review as part of the City's cost recovery program. No further Committee action was taken. Committee Member Couch asked that a report back to Council Member Salvaggio be made to-let him know the result of the Committee's review. D. REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO THE '2004 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM Administrative Analyst Slater presented two proposals for changes to the 2004 Legislative Platform. The Legislative Platform, annually reviewed by the Legislative and Litigation Committee, provides a broad framework for quick City legislative response to issues which arise. One proposal added "transportation funds" as a separately identified category to which the City supports limiting State access. The second approach consolidated several previous categories into fewer broader categories. City Manager Alan Tandy, in response to discussions on the propoSed changes, indicated that historical issues are included within the current Legislative Platform which will no longer be identified if the consolidated Platform is. recommended. Committee Member Couch suggested adding wording to the first proposal which includes support for a constitutional amendment to protect local revenues. After discussion, the Committee unanimously voted to recommend the first proposal, with Committee Member Couch's addition, to: be presented to Council for approval. 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS Committee Member Sullivan suggested that the issue of grandfathered fireworks permits should be addressed at some point and a time frame (i.e., three to five years) be developed for elimination of the grandfather clause. Agenda Summary Fleport DRAFT Legislative ~nd Litigation Committee February ~>3, ~>004 P~ge 4 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 2:13 p.m. Staff Attendees: City Manager Alan Tandy, Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater; City Attorney Ginny Gennaro, Assistant City Attorney Robert Sherfy; City Treasurer Cheryl Perkins;.Police Captain Bryan Lynn, Police Captain Tim Taylor; Development Services Director Jack Hardisty; Fire Chief Ron Fraze, Director of Prevention Services Ralph Huey. Other Attendees: Roger Jobe, James Burger, Tammy Brown, Scott Farley B A K E R S F I E L D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM March 25, 2004 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: TRUDY SLATER, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST Ill SUBJECT: 'OVERSIZED/RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARKING Over the last couple months, City staff has reviewed Bakersfield's and other cities' ordinances relating to oversized and recreational vehicle parking. It has generally been found that many of the concerns felt in Bakersfield have been felt in other cities to some degree or another. Additionally, given city size, location, availability of parking facilities, and other community issues and level of activeness of their constituencies, cities have chosen different venues to try to solve the individual issues each has with oversize or recreational vehicle parking problems. About the only consistency over city systems is that they are "complaint driven." It is important to remember that any ordinance that is promulgated will have an impact not only on the department issuing the citations (or following through on the complaint) but also on the department/departments who receive the complaints originally. Policies for exceptions, if promulgated, also have an impact on the department/s which must issue the exceptions (i.e., parking permits). And, of course, there are costs involved in all aspects of the process, costs which should be considered for recovery or not. A review of the impacts upon City residents and staff of new restrictions on oversized/recreational vehicle parking for Bakersfield would be prudent prior to instituting any change and should include secondary parking issues which may arise as a result of them. (One city noted that once the parking prohibitions removed these vehicles from the streets, secondary complaints ensued because people were parking their vehicles illegally on their properties--i.e., too close to street, parked in yard or driveway, not behind a fence or screened area, inhabited.) The Police Department will be present to the Committee at its meeting a proposal modifying the City's ordinance regarding moving these vehicles which it believes will help eliminate much of the signage requirements needed in many instances. Information is attached on cities contacted and additional information will be available at the Committee meeting for member review. P:\L&L\M0403251 -Oversized-RecreationalVehicles B AK E R S FI EL D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM -March 22, 2004 TO: CITY ATTORNEY GINNY GENNARO FROM: TRUDY SLATER, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST III ~ ~;~-"/-~~---------~ SUBJECT: INFORMATION ON OVERSIZE AND/OR RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN 'OTHER CITIES As a follow up to an earlier meeting with you, I have made contact with other cities regarding their ordinances and issues they might have relating to oversize and/or recreational vehicle parking in residential areas. Information was obtained from the cities of Agoura Hills, Thousand Oaks, Camarillo, Pasadena, Modesto and Fresno. The following summarizes that information. City of Camarillo Camarillo has prohibitions on oversize and recreational vehicles parking on streets in residential areas. Attached is a Camarillo information brochure on its parking regulations and sample sign. Violations are issued on a complaint basis by the Camarillo Police Department by non-sworn individuals. Temporary parking permits are allowed but on a limited basis. There was greater resistance to the ordinance when passed in 1997 than there is currently. A secondary issue arose regarding parking restrictions on private property when residents could no longer park on the streets. Signs are generally posted on major streets and highways letting individuals know the parking restrictions in residential areas. (Note: Camarillo covers about 20 square miles and has approximately 57,000 people.) City of Agoura Hills The Agoura Hills ordinance is enforced by the Sheriff's Department. Recreational vehicles are to be off the street and behind screening or in an RV park or storage rental. On private property, they require a 5 foot setback and screened by a solid wall; residents cannot park in their driveways. They must have a side yard in which to park the RVs. More than 50% of the complaints received come in about parking issues on the property itself. Code Enforcement handles the private property issues. (Note: Agoura Hills covers about 7 square miles and has approximately 21,000 people.) City of Thousand Oaks Thousand Oaks prohibits overnight parking on posted public streets. In order to get an area posted for no parking, 75'% of the property owners must agree. They have one area which falls within this guideline. There are two other areas around high schools which are designated for permit parking. The city has established an ad hoc committee to study the issue of banning RV's but there are limited areas where they could go. Land was donated earlier to the City, and they are reviewing the possibility of developing an RV storage facility. They have very active RV constituents. (Note: Thousand Oaks covers about 56 square City Attorney Ginny Gennaro March 22, 2004 Page '2 miles and has approximately 117,000 people.) City of Pasadena A review of Pasadena's ordinances on-line indicate it, too, requires a 5 foot setback as well as other restrictions, including prohibitions on parking recreational vehicles on the grass, dirt, or other landscaped areas around a house. Pasadena has preferential parking districts which can and are established and dissolved by city council resolution. (Note: Pasadena covers about 23 square miles and has approximately 134,000 people.) City of Fresno In Fresno, in residential districts, except the R-A district, recreational vehicles and trailers shall be parked and stored in enclosed areas or in the rear yards or side yards, enclosed by a wall or solid fence not less than five feet in height (Section 12-306). No recreational vehicle, while parking or stored in any residential district, shall be used for sleeping or habitation. Fees for residential parking permits are designated in the master fee schedule and can differ from area to area. Upon a verified petition by residents of at least 100 dwelling units in the residential area proposed for designation or residents living in 50% of the living units in the area proposed for designation, whichever is lesser, the CAO or designee shall undertake or cause to be undertaken a survey or study necessary to determine whether a residential area satisfies the designation criteria for a residential permit parking area. The Council can by resolution designate residential permit parking areas in which resident vehicles displaying a valid parking permit may stand or be parked without limitation by parking restrictions established by this article (Section 10-2102 and 10-2103). (Note: Fresno covers about 105 square miles and has approximately 428,000 people.) City of Modesto Modesto prohibits parking of oversized vehicles or trailers on streets in residential areas Monday through Fridays, with exceptions (Section 3-2.2006 and 3-2-2007) and restricts placement of a recreational vehicle upon any lot, with exceptions, including in a residential zone (Section 10-2-2307). The City Council can determine that unique parking problems exist in specific areas. Upon the filing with the City Clerk of a verified petition containing the valid signatures of at least 67% of the residents and owners of real property. in a specific residential area, Council shall conduct a public hearing to consider whether that residential area should be designated as a residential parking permit zone, due to the nature, location, frequency or duration of activities or events causing such problems, that outweigh the needs of the general public for .access to the area and its facilities. The Council may by resolution establish a residential parking permit zone for said residential area in accordance with the provisions of this article. Such resolution shall state the findings of necessity for the zone designation, the boundaries of the residential parking permit zone, the applicable time limitations, the day or days of restriction, and such other conditions as Council deems necessary and in the public interest. Persons occupying residences with frontage on streets within a residential parking permit zone shall be exempt from the general restrictions of parking. Such exemptions shall be evidenced by a valid parking sticker affixed to the left front window of the parked vehicle. Council shall not consider permit zone establishment for a particular residential area more frequently than once each year (Section 3- 2-1900). (Note: Modesto covers about 36 square miles and has approximately 189,000 people.) I have attached back up materials for your review. P:~&L~vI0403221 -Oversize-RecreationalVehicleParking Attachments ,-