Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1993-08-16SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 1 IN CONFERENCE ROOM 201 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 1993, AT 7:00 PM CLOSED SESSION 1. DISCUSSION OF LITIGATION AND LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - File 1.4.1.a No. 93-15(a) - #7 No reportable action was taken. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 1993, AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael City Council Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember, Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember, Michael A. Shippey, Councilmember, Joan Thayer, Councilmember Absent: None Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE COMPLAINTS - File 100 Irving "Whitey" Litchfield stated that most of his problems involve life and death, and the existence of the City of San Rafael. He requested an audit of the Sanitation District because of their fees. He also stated the City Hall is unsafe and should be torn down since it is a brick building and not properly reinforced. He added that the City Hall is out of the Parking District, and there is no parking for the City Hall or Library, while his building was closed down for insufficient parking. He stated Home Depot should have 2,700 parking spaces, and should not have a permit to build. He stated he wants an audit of the Parking District to find out where all of their money has been going. He also complained about the award of a contract for the Bus Shelters to a firm which was not the low bidder and is represented by the Independent -Journal. He expressed concern about the type of advertising which will be in the bus shelters. CONSENT CALENDAR RECOMMENDED ACTION Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: 3. Resolution of Intention to Vacate Existing Drainage RESOLUTION NO. 8995 - Easement - Oakwood Subdivision, Unit 5 (PW) - RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO File 2-4-16 x 5-1-244 VACATE EXISTING STORM DRAIN EASEMENT - OAKWOOD UNIT 5 SUBDIVISION, SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA 5. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1648 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1623 (PARAMEDIC SERVICE SPECIAL TAX) AND SETTING THE PARAMEDIC TAX RATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES (Fin) - File 9-3-31 x 8-5 6. Approve Street Closures Re: San Rafael Library Opening Events: (Lib) - File 11-19 x 9-3-61 a. Authorization to Close "E" Street Between Mission and Fifth Avenue From 12:00 Noon to 4:00 PM, Sunday, September 12, 1993, for Library Reopening Celebration. b. Authorization to Close "J" Street Between Forbes Avenue and the Alley at Mid -Block on Saturday, September 11, 1993 from 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM, "Dollar House Tour". Approved Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 1648. Approved staff recommendation. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 2 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer and Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 2. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO VACATE EXCESS PORTIONS OF TERRACE AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY - OAKWOOD UNIT 5 SUBDIVISION (PW) - File 2-2 x 5-1-244 Councilmember Breiner stated she is a little concerned about how this would work. She realizes we are trying to avoid removing some trees and burrowing into the hill. Public Works Director Bernardi replied that is correct. Mrs. Breiner inquired if the reinforced earth buttress would be to reinforce the existing area. Mr. Bernardi explained that conventional slide repair would be to take the whole slide out and rebuild it back up in layers. The alternative to that is to use the buttress, which is basically to put a mass of earth at the base of the old slide, thereby buttressing it up. He stated that is a very accepted way of doing soils engineering work. Mrs. Breiner stated she is concerned that if this earth buttress does not hold up over time, the City will have given away land and we would not have the ability to use that other piece of property. She feels the City may find themselves having to spend a lot of money in the future if this is not fool -proof. She wondered if there is some way that it could be done so that the City does not actually abandon that portion for ten years or so, to be sure that this engineering really holds up. Mr. Bernardi stated it went through the last winter, which is indicative of the kind of weather we should be getting, and it performed very well and did what it was supposed to do. He added that another key part of this is that the drainage was modified so that, rather than going down at the rear of the properties it is now in a pipeline out in the street. Consequently, a lot of the conditions under which the buttress might fail have been removed, so there should not be problems. He stated this is a very conservative way to repair slides in lieu of cutting the hill open and recompacting it all. He noted this method was used on San Rafael Hill when they built the soccer field many years ago, and it has held very well. Mayor Boro inquired if the property owner is going to want to use the portion of property if it is transferred to him. Mr. Bernardi replied it is a hillside, and the only benefit it would serve would be to divide enough land area for a lot if he was short some square footage for a lot, in order to meet the Hillside Standards Ordinance. Mr. Bernardi pointed out that he was recommending setting a Public Hearing for September 20th, to receive testimony regarding the abandonment of this right-of-way. Mayor Boro stated it would probably be more appropriate tonight to set the Public Hearing and have it come back before the Council on September 20th. Mr. Bernardi explained that if the Council will not consider the transfer there would be no Public Hearing. Mayor Boro clarified that by taking the action recommended by staff the Council is not making a commitment to make the transfer, and Mr. Bernardi replied that is correct. Councilmember Cohen noted that the staff report states that there was additional land which was necessary for the relocated turn -around improvements. He asked are the improvements already in place, and Mr. Bernardi replied they are. Mr. Cohen stated, then we need this additional land from the property owner in order to accomplish that. Mr. Bernardi replied that is correct. Mr. Cohen recommended giving the property owner the opportunity to respond to the concerns and have some input on this, because it was probably the property owner's understanding that there would be a land swap. Mr. Bernardi pointed out that ultimately it will require City Council approval and the property owner understands that. Mayor Boro pointed out that the staff report talks about a land exchange and it sounded like a commitment had been made, but Mr. Bernardi is saying we have not, and we do not have the applicant here, and he would not want to hold a hearing without him here. Mr. Bernardi stated he is aware of the September 20th date for a hearing and he will be here for discussion. Councilmember Shippey noted this Resolution is an intent to vacate, and what he is hearing is that perhaps we do not intend to do that but still want to have a hearing about the issue. Mayor Boro explained that the issue is to set the hearing. Mr. Bernardi stated that is correct, and the Resolution is required to put anyone who has any interest on notice. Mr. Cohen pointed out that paragraph 2 of the Resolution states, that the Council hereby declares its intention to vacate excess portions. City Attorney Ragghianti pointed out that paragraph 3 of the Resolution indicates that the hearing is for the purpose of permitting anyone to come forward and to give his or SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 3 her objections to the proposed vacation, so there is not anything which commits the Council to vacating it by adopting the Resolution. It is purely form, that is all. Mr. Bernardi asked if it would make the Council more comfortable if the wording in paragraph 2 is changed to say that the City Council hereby declares its intention to consider ... Mr. Shippey stated he feels that is more in line with what the Council intends to do. The Council agreed. Councilmember Shippey moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to adopt the Resolution with modified wording as discussed. Mrs. Breiner noted that the title of the Resolution should be changed to reflect the change in paragraph 2. RESOLUTION NO. 8996 - RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO CONSIDER VACATION OF EXCESS PORTIONS OF TERRACE AVENUE EXTENSION RIGHT OF WAY - OAKWOOD UNIT 5 SUBDIVISION, SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 4. REPORT ON BID OPENING AND AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE TWELVE PASSENGER VAN (Gen. Svcs.) - File 4-2-275 Councilmember Thayer stated her comment is with regard to the Inmate Program, which she thinks is excellent, in that the City gets quite a few workers to help clean up the City. She noted we have them every six weeks for one week, and Mayor Boro added that schedule is for one year. She questioned is it better to have that schedule, or instead have some sort of ongoing maintenance for one and one-half days every week, and have an ongoing program for which they are basically assigned. Mr. Bernardi stated it is better to have them for a larger block of time. If they are here for a week they can be assigned a task which would take a week to accomplish, but a day and a half would not give them much time. It works much more efficiently if we have them for a week. He pointed out that in working with Fairfax and San Anselmo he has found they may not need the inmates the six times a year and we will be able to take their slots and will probably have the inmates every three or four weeks. Ms. Thayer asked if the cost would be allocated accordingly, and Mr. Bernardi replied it would. City Manager Nicolai stated that we will take on more, but from a cost benefit analysis it is a very good deal for the City. She noted we will also share the cost of the prison supervisors which we have to pay for now. She explained that this way we will be purchasing only half of the JPA (Joint Powers Agreement) and paying a pro -rated part. Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Shippey seconded, to adopt the Resolution as recommended by staff. RESOLUTION NO. 8997 - AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A 1994 TWELVE PASSENGER VAN FROM BOB NOBLES CHEVROLET, INC. (Lowest responsible bidder, $19,174.19) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 7. LEGISLATION AFFECTING SAN RAFAEL (CM) - File 9-1 Councilmember Shippey referred to AB 996 (California Indoor Clean Air Act of 1976), and stated he does not understand what is going on, since he feels it would preempt the County Ordinance which is already in place. He asked what was the intent of this. Councilmember Cohen stated he had read in the paper that it involves funding to the State, since the tobacco tax is part of the Bill, and that money goes to the State. He stated it is felt that the State will pass this bill, preempting the counties, and the local jurisdictions will have their ordinances preempted. Councilmember Shippey moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to approve the staff recommendation: OPPOSE SB 1234 (Bergeson) Government Financing: and OPPOSE AB 996 (Tucker) Tobacco. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 4 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None SPECIAL PRESENTATION 8.SPECIAL PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION TO CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER, 1993 AS "SCHOOL'S OPEN DRIVE CAREFULLY MONTH" (CM) - File lin The proclamation is to be mailed to CSAA District Manager Frank Bemis. 9. CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION TO SUMMER YOUTH (Rec) - File 102 Recreation Director Sharon McNamee introduced the youths who had worked in the Summer Youth Program throughout the City, and Mayor Boro presented each with a certificate. They were: Nebiat Haile, Almaz Haile, Lee Smalley, Brandon Kozmerl, and Linh Phung. Mayor Boro thanked the youth for their contribution to the City of San Rafael. The following were not able to attend the City Council meeting: Corey Adams, Michael Lindeman, Thinh Khuc, Andrea Hall, Shannon Kelly, Matt Lee, Khanh Nguyen, Claire Saari, Toban Noohan, Xuan-Trang Phung, Thuy Nguyen, Kai Evans, Jasmine Williams, Madria Ward, Nhan Tran, Du Nguyen, Vien Tiet, Alette Roberts, Van Nguyen and Hakam Jaber. 10 PUBLIC HEARING - TO CONSIDER DELETING CHAPTER 9.16 AND 9.18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ENACT NEW REGULATIONS FOR REFUSE COLLECTION AND RECYCLED MATERIALS COLLECTION (Fin) - File 4-3-32 Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened. Finance Director Ransom Coleman reported that after about a year working with the other franchising agencies and Marin Sanitary Service, he is proposing a revision of Chapters 9.16 and 9.18 of the Municipal Code. It is a total rewrite of the Municipal Code, and staff believes it is an improvement over the existing language. This Ordinance is basically the same as the ones which will be adopted by the other four agencies. There are a few changes which are unique to the City of San Rafael, which were suggested by the City Attorney, Fire Department and Code Enforcement Officer. He stated that, generally speaking, the Ordinance before the Council tonight was discussed by all of the franchising agencies, as well as Marin Sanitary Service. Mr. Coleman explained it is difficult to generalize all of the changes because this is a rewrite, but there were several concerns raised during the process and he believes they are covered. One was Accumulation (Article II, Section 3) which spells out what we expect people to do in the way of having adequate garbage service. He stated there have been some problems in the past and he feels this totally new language will address them. In other cases there is revised language which updates the current practice and talks about types of garbage cans and that sort of issue, and updates the original Ordinance from 1966. Mr. Coleman stated he would consider this a generic Health and Safety Ordinance. It does not talk specifically about Marin Sanitary, but there is the separate franchising agreement with Marin Sanitary. He stated this outlines the framework of what we expect in the way of refuse collection and recycling. Mr. Coleman noted that Patty Garbarino, who has been working with the franchising agency is in the audience, if the Council has questions regarding the service. Mayor Boro inquired with respect to the wording in the Ordinance which deals with situations where we have merchants who apparently are using the public collection bins for their own benefit, rather than subscribing. He noted there is a requirement that each business shall have minimum pickup service. He asked Mr. Coleman what this Ordinance allows the City to do in that regard. Mr. Coleman stated that, with regard to public receptacles, there is language in the Ordinance which prohibits anyone from dumping in those receptacles, and it talks about no more than half a cubic foot, and basically provides only casual use of those receptacles, and not a use in lieu of regular garbage service. He added that the Ordinance does provide for regular pickup and requires mandatory service. If there is not mandatory service or if there is not adequate service, the properties can be liened and the proper service can be requested by the City and the garbage company will comply with our request to provide whatever service we feel is necessary. He added that if there is some dispute over the cost we can impose a heavy lien to be placed on the property to eventually ensure that the amounts will be paid for the garbage service we feel is adequate. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 5 Mayor Boro then inquired about apartment houses, and stated there was considerable discussion in the East San Rafael Neighborhood Task Force about some of the apartment houses not having adequate service. He stated he is not clear whether or not this Ordinance will provide for at least one container per unit. He stated he is aware that they do not have individual containers, but pickup bins, and he asked if there is some way that as a minimum at each apartment complex there will be an equivalent of one container per unit. He explained he is interested in what basic service we would expect an apartment house owner to provide. Mr. Coleman stated that the Ordinance speaks about one container per living unit, and he is not sure whether it specially relates to apartments. He noted the Ordinance also speaks about accumulation, which involves the need for a minimum amount of service which will take care of all of the safety and health needs. The Ordinance also talks about the frequency of pickup which, again, relates to the need for health and safety. Patty Garbarino of Marin Sanitary, a San Rafael resident, stated that in Section III, page 7 under Accumulation, it states that containers shall be filled in a manner that prevents the contents from overflowing and allows the cover to fit securely. She stated that in addition, the Ordinance also says that for any residential parcels which have a sink, it is the obligation of the owner to have regular garbage service. Mayor Boro clarified, that when an apartment house owner comes on line or an existing place asks for service, does Marin Sanitary go there and basically count the number of units and determine what size containers they need based on the number of units? Ms. Garbarino stated this is done by Marin Sanitary. However, if they have a problem as they have had in the Canal area, they will be working closely with the Code Enforcement Officer. She stated that problem is the reason they originally decided to rewrite the 1966 Ordinance. The service will be upgraded so there will not be a litter problem. Councilmember Shippey stated that Home Depot will obviously be finding they have to pay garbage bills. He asked if Ms. Garbarino has an indication of the rates going down in the near future. She stated there was a discussion at a recent meeting with the Las Gallinas Sanitary District, but we would not be able to predict. She added she would hope so. She stated they did a recent audit on Fourth Street, and there were 34 businesses which did not have service at all. She explained that with their computer system they are able to track that and, with the Code Enforcement Officer, they will be making sure that everything is equal. Councilmember Thayer stated that in reading this document she was concerned about people who throw their hazardous household waste into the trash. She noted this issue is not addressed anywhere in this Ordinance, which deals with recyclables and with solid waste in general. She asked if we have anything presently in our Code which deals with that issue. She noted that people picking up garbage can be severely injured by some of the materials which are in the garbage. She stated she would like to see something in the Ordinance, if there is not something already in the Code, with regard to people who throw away household hazardous waste when there is a place where they can go at the present time. Ms. Garbarino stated that is a very good point, and she does not believe it has been addressed. She stated that might be a good topic for the next newsletter, and input in the bills, to definitely not do that. She stated they can do a better education about preventing that. She added there is a sign at the indoor dump. She stated that they would like to be able to start a pilot project for the collection of household hazardous waste which would include getting the material out of the can before it gets into the truck, and educating the homeowner right there on the spot. Councilmember Thayer stated she wonders whether the City could help that along a bit, by having an Ordinance which would preclude people from throwing the waste containers and the like, into the trash cans, because it is hazardous and creates not only a fire hazard but a chemical burn or the like. She stated that perhaps by inserting something in this particular Ordinance, it would be a wise thing to do. City Manager Nicolai recommended staff looking at this issue and coming back to the Council, because she feels the Council would like staff to define what is hazardous material and say it is illegal to do that, and provide penalties through our Ordinance, if they are not already in existence by State law or by some other Code section. She stated we could add another section at a later date, which would then basically deal not only with the public education part but create a potential penalty phase, which is what she thinks the Council is suggesting. She recommended that staff take a look at it, and come up with a definition of hazardous material to develop in all of the Codes and rules. She stated we do not want to have it too restrictive in this Ordinance, but by some language standard which will allow us to say it has been determined to be a household hazard and you cannot dispose of it in SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 6 your garbage and, if you do and we find out, we can impose a penalty. Ms. Garbarino recommended that very small businesses be included as well, since they generate small amounts of hazardous waste and are allowed to dispose of theirs at the household waste dump sites. Ms. Garbarino referred to an incident last week, where there was hydrochloric acid which a woman had used to clean her pool deck in Larkspur, and she put it into a 50 -gallon drum of another garbage service. It happened the drum was made of aluminum and when the acid mixes with the aluminum it cleared out the neighborhood for two blocks in any direction. The hauler was fine after a while, but both he and his helper had to go to the hospital, as well as two neighbors, for a period of time. She noted that last summer they had a garbage truck blow up at Redwood High School because the chemistry teacher decided the dumpster was a nice place to store the chemicals from her lab for the summer. She put a sign on the side, Do Not Empty This Dumpster. She explained their driver does not read. She agreed with Ms. Nicolai that if there is more notoriety, people wanting to dump such materials may have second thoughts. She explained that if such material is in a brown bag, and is being sorted in the indoor dump, it goes past someone's hands, which is a hazard. Councilmember Breiner referred to Section 4 on page 15, Authorized Refuse and Recycling Agent, and wondered if there is anything the City should do regarding a 'hold harmless'. City Attorney Ragghianti stated he cannot respond, noting Deputy City Attorney Walker has been working on this item, and he has not had any involvement. Ms. Nicolai explained this is not an agreement with a specific hauler but is simply setting a standard. She added she would think the franchise agreement with whoever then provides the service on our behalf would be the one who would have the hold harmless agreement in it, but not the Ordinance itself. Councilmember Shippey stated he noticed that section requires insurance and workers' compensation. Mayor Boro stated he has a question, also tied in with conversations at the East San Rafael Neighborhood Task Force. He stated there have been comments about the community down there, especially in the larger complexes, paying for the recycling program, and the program is not yet operational because of various problems. He asked for an update on that issue. Ms. Garbarino explained they had initially covered the area with containers in the multi- family units, and soon the containers were either burned or stolen, and since they are watertight they assumed that during the drought they were taken for storage of water. She stated the contents also would disappear, and when AB 2020 went into effect in September of 1987, it became such a cost factor for the rest of the program that they would write several letters to the property owner and then take the container away. When they showed interest again in wanting recycling services which could be somewhat supervised they were again supplied with containers. With the help of Sharon Andrus of the City Manager's Office, they put together a listing of all houses with over four units each in the Canal area, and checked addresses with the County Assessor's Office, and wrote personal letters to each property owner, urging them to recycle. Out of all the letters to buildings with multi -family units, they received only two responses. She noted the containers were $89 each, and they disappeared. Mayor Boro asked whether Ms. Garbarino was still working with the property owners who want the services, and are they policing it to make sure it works. She stated that is correct. Also, it works best to have the containers chained to a fence, and it would take someone with chain cutters a long time to cut them loose. She stated the contents still disappear, but the containers are still in place. Joe Garbarino, owner of Marin Sanitary Service, announced that there are two new owners in Marin Sanitary effective today (Joe Garbarino Sr. and Joe Garbarino Jr.), and they are looking forward to giving the City the same kind of service they have for the last 48 years. Mr. Garbarino stated his only item tonight refers to the Performance Bonds referred to on page 16. He noted that when it comes to insurance, they are covered up to $20 million on any liability of any kind. He stated that putting up a Performance Bond will cost him about $6 to $7 a day, $200 a month, to guarantee the fact that he will come to work tomorrow. He stated they have been coming to work for 48 years, and he has been coming to work in Marin for 38 years. He was hoping that based on that back record you would eliminate this, because it would cost between $2100 and $2400. He stated that in the scope of things that is not a tremendous amount of money, but Marin Sanitary has a good track record, and have never missed anybody. He stated that is not a big item, but it has not been the greatest year for any business persons and to put this kind of money out for insurance that they will be operating seems unnecessary. He hoped the Council would consider waiving that requirement. In closing he stated that he hopes they will soon have a permanent hazardous waste SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 7 collection site at the Main Recycling Center, open six days a week. He stated they have been working with Ms. Nicolai and with Fire Chief Marcucci, and everyone has been very cooperative. They want to make it possible for people to bring their hazardous waste any day, instead of waiting in a long line once a year to turn it in. He hopes it will be open within the next six months. Mr. Coleman commented on Mr. Garbarino's remarks about Performance Bonds, stating that was the last item they put into the Ordinance. The dollar amount was somewhat arbitrary. He stated City of Larkspur is $25,000. They contacted the City of Santa Rosa and they indicated $50,000 which was a very old figure which had not been changed in quite a while. He stated he has no doubt that Mr. Garbarino will probably be here for many years, doing the same thing, but the only thing this would cover is some unpredictable event such as a strike or some other work stoppage, or some other incident we cannot anticipate where, for whatever reason, Marin Sanitary may not be able to perform for a short or long period of time, and all this would do would enable the City to absorb any cost that may be incurred to continue some garbage service. He stated it may never happen, and he does not know what the odds are of anything happening in this area, but it was put in for that particular reason. Councilmember Breiner stated she wonders if there is another way we could achieve the same end, and not be as costly on an ongoing basis. She suggested perhaps a separate savings account with the City, or some contractual wording which would give the ability to the City to fund what needs to be done if something happens, even though we do not expect it to. Something which would achieve the same ends, but not cost as much. Mr. Coleman stated that one alternative would be to put on deposit the sum of $100,000 which the City of San Rafael could have some control over. Ms. Breiner stated that is the sort of thing she meant. Councilmember Cohen stated that if what we are saying is that we want to protect the City if any contractor is unable to provide the services, why do we not put a clause in here which says in the event that we have to go out and do it, that we have the ability to recover the cost from Marin Sanitary. He noted that the Resolution says that the authorization is for collecting fees for providing a service. If for some reason they are unable to provide the service, why do we not put some mechanism in here that allows the City to recover its cost incurred in actually doing it? Mr. Ragghianti stated that when you look at the Performance Bond language, it specifies what the sum is, in the first sentence. Then it says that the bond shall be immediately paid to the City upon determination, as provided in Article IV, Section 6. He noted that when you go to the next page, which starts Article IV and then go to Section 6 (page 19) it talks about termination. He stated he finds this confusing, to have a Performance Bond put up, to be paid to the City, when the basis for the payment is termination of the contract. In other words, it does not make sense to him, and he thinks some thought should be given to rewording it. He stated perhaps he is missing the meaning and Mr. Coleman can explain it. Ms. Breiner stated it may be that the City, because of the State's requirements for recycling, would be liable for fines if there was a problem. Mr. Ragghianti stated he does not think so. He thinks the Performance Bond is in the nature of some sort of financial penalty in the event that Marin Sanitary fails to carry out its duties as it has agreed to do so. He stated the remedy for that is to cancel the contract, not to take $100,000. Mayor Boro stated Mr. Ragghianti is saying that what Mr. Coleman described does not necessarily flow with the language in the contract. Mr. Ragghianti agreed, saying he does not think it is a Performance Bond. It does not guarantee anything. He stated if you find in Article IV, Section 6, that they have not fully performed their contract, then you would get $100,000. Mr. Coleman inquired if it would flow any better if they eliminated the phase "as provided in Article IV, Section 6". Mr. Ragghianti replied he does not know, and would hesitate to say, since he was not involved in the drafting of this paper. He just thinks it is another thing which should be looked at, and discussed with Mr. Walker. Councilmember Cohen stated he can understand the concern about in general protecting the City, but he also thinks that Mr. Garbarino makes a good point. He is not sure that under the current circumstances we need to require a Performance Bond. He added that if we need to leave this language in for the future, because this document is not a specific contract we might want to make it optional. We could say we have the authority to require a Performance Bond, but based on our current franchisee and their performance he does not feel there is any reason to require a performance bond to provide, as a good faith gesture, that they will continue to do what they have been doing for the past 40 years. He stated that if the issue is cost recovery if the City has to take on the burden of garbage collection for whatever reason, then there is some other more appropriate way to provide for recovery of those costs, as opposed to a performance bond. He stated if someone is paying fees for garbage SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 8 collection and the franchisee stops doing the garbage collection, we should have the right to attach those fees and collect the money, until we find someone else to carry out the contract. He stated a performance bond does not seem to be an appropriate vehicle. Mayor Boro asked if the Council agrees in principle, that it makes sense that, regardless of who our garbage collector is, to protect the City in the event that the service stops for whatever reason, that we have a way to be reimbursed if we have to go out on an interim basis and do something? The Council agreed. Mayor Boro then asked staff if there is a way to do this which is not as costly, but we could still make sure that the City is protected? He stated that if the answer is that there is no other way, staff should come back and tell the Council that. He asked staff to look at what the options are, but also to make sure that the language in the corresponding paragraphs makes sense and says what the Council intends. Councilmember Thayer stated she would also like her comments regarding household hazardous waste to be considered, and whether this is an appropriate vehicle to address that issue or whether there is another mechanism by which it could be done. Ms. Nicolai asked if the Council has a problem with staff bringing this back later? She stated she does not think they can accomplish Ms. Thayer's item between now and the next meeting. She stated she would rather make all of the changes rather than come back with an amendment later on. The Council agreed. Ms. Nicolai noted that this action is being taken by all five jurisdictions and it would be necessary to make sure they are all consistent in adding that issue. Councilmember Shippey asked that, when the performance bond issue comes back, he would like consideration of liquidated damages or contract agreement upon termination, rather than a performance bond. Ms. Nicolai stated she feels that we need something in the document. She added that all of the things the Council is talking about will take time. One of the problems we will have is an ultimate remedy to terminating the agreement, and if you look at the time frames on terminating agreements once they start not performing, there could be a lot of garbage amassed. She stated her idea would be, unforeseen, not intentional, and someone besides Mr. Garbarino can't perform, we might need to have immediate access to revenue and not just be looking at theoretically being able to recover some other way. She stated she would be looking at some interim gap, so you would have the opportunity to go through a process to terminate the agreement and get someone else on board. She stated that would be a significant period of time and we would need to have some ability to provide those services. Mayor Boro stated he feels everyone agrees, and rather than continue to debate, let us see what the staff can come back with in the nature of a solution. Councilmember Shippey stated that there should be consideration of an option to the performance bond. Ms. Nicolai stated that something has to be there. Mr. Shippey stated he heard someone suggest that, depending on the franchisee, we could have an option. Mayor Boro stated we are trying to look at protecting the City, in the event that the franchisee, whoever they are, fails for whatever reason, that the City can continue to provide the service. Mr. Shippey stated he would like to know if an option could be do -able. Ms. Nicolai stated it might be, but she would not want to take it upon herself to be the one who said she did not want it this time, and have that be the time it failed. She stated it is a real risk situation, and she would think that just like our taxi franchises and others, there have to be certain requirements that they meet, for the protection of the City, and it should not be judgmental. Ms. Garbarino stated she believes, in Las Gallinas' case, when they contract with the individual franchisees, they negotiate it at the contract time in January, and wondered if this could be done. She wondered if this could be taken out completely, or leave it in and negotiate something else and amend it later. Mayor Boro stated we are dealing with a model Ordinance here and, whoever the franchisees are, we need to have the principle established. He stated everyone has agreed on the principle, and let's see what we can come up with, and see how it plays out. Ms. Garbarino stated she would be happy to help work it out. She wanted to publicly thank Mr. Coleman for allowing her input and Sharon Andrus was very helpful. There being no further input, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing except for discussion of the Performance Bond issue, and asked for a motion to continue the item to September 7, 1993. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Breiner seconded, to continue the hearing for discussion of the Performance Bond issue only, to September 7, 1993. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 9 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Cohen, Shippey, Thayer & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 11. STATUS REPORT ON REOPENING OF THE LIBRARY (Lib) - File 9-3-61 The Council discussed the scheduled reopening of the Library on Tuesday, September 7, 1993. Library Director Vaughn Stratford informed the Council that all of the work will be completed by that date. Mr. Stratford discussed the celebration for the Library reopening from September 8th through the 18th. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: RE: PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENT - File 9-2-4 a. Mayor Boro reported that the Council, earlier in the evening, had interviewed six candidates for the Park and Recreation Commission, and appointed Fred Warnecke, although they were very pleased with all six candidates. RE: SIGN AT ENTRANCE TO SAN RAFAEL - File 125 b. Councilmember Breiner noted that the lights on the San Rafael sign as you come into town are being overgrown by plants and she would like staff to look into it. RE: PROPERTY MAINTENANCE - File 13-9 x 13-10.1 C. Councilmember Breiner remarked that the site of the former Nymph's Garden Restaurant and also the King Henry VIII site, need to be cleaned up, especially since we are trying to attract new businesses to the downtown area. RE: BUILDING PERMIT VERIFICATION - File 9-3-32 d. Councilmember Breiner noted that at Fourth Street and Lincoln Avenue where there is a little market, she was looking at the signs which were put up and noticed there was no building permit for the construction work which was done inside. She asked that staff look into it. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:03 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1993 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 8/16/93 Page 9