“MINUTES”
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
July 7, 2009
VII. Consent Calendar
These matters include routine financial and administrative actions, which are usually approved by a single majority vote. Individual items may be removed from Consent by a member of the Council or the public for discussion and action.
K. Consideration of a Resolution extending the agreement with the City of Monterey to provide interim Fire Administration and Emergency Incident Management Services until January 31, 2010, in an amount not to exceed $94,500.
Carolyn Hardy pulled Item K; Agenda Item placed at the end of the meeting.
City Administrator Rich Guillen presented the Staff Report.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Carolyn Hardy clarified interim Services agreement from July 1, 2009 – January 31, 2010. She called for the removal of Paragraph 1.2 of the Term of Agreement regarding the exclusive negotiations with the City of Monterey. She expressed a desire for preservation of response time and a cost effective service model as close as possible to a stand alone Fire Department, if stand alone Carmel Fire Department infeasible.
Mary Ellen Thomas, member of the Carmel Residents Association Board of Directors, read a statement prepared by the Carmel Residents Association Board of Directors. CRA called for advantages and disadvantages of four fire service options, including consolation with City of Monterey, JPA with other cities, Cal-Fire and Stand Alone Department. She furthermore requested the issuance of a public report prior to January 31, 2010 appraising all four fire service options.
Jim Thompson, City of Monterey, clarified disagreement between City Attorney Don Freeman and Council Members ROSE and HAZDOVAC; that is, “good faith” effort referred to extension beyond January 1, 2010. Therefore, considerations of other fire services options not subject to “good faith” effort and permitted. However, from Monterey’s perspective, Monterey cannot indefinitely have 6 months interim agreements.
Council Member ROSE stated all options under consideration, “still open.”
Council Member ROSE moved adoption of Item K, with omission of second sentence in Section 1.2, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE, and carried unanimously.
COMMENT:
• The dissonance between the City Council communicating to the public that all fire service options are “still open” and the City Council simultaneously not communicating to the public a plan to determine which fire service option is advisable by January 1, 2010 is alarming.
X. Resolutions
A. Consideration of a Resolution amending the Carmel/Carmel Valley/Ambulance Joint Powers Agreement with Carmel Valley Fire District.
City Administrator Rich Guillen presented the Staff Report, including the fact that the Carmel Valley Fire District felt they were subsidizing the ambulance service; therefore they advocated the dissolution of the Joint Powers Agreement. After meetings, the Carmel/Carmel Valley/Ambulance Joint Powers Agreement is extended for one year and allows time for a succession plan for ambulance service if partnership eventually dissolved.
Note: Three ambulances total, one of which is in Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Council Member ROSE spoke to a Plan to reduce the $400,000 subsidy by “implementing responses at the mouth of the valley.”
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Carolyn Hardy spoke about a whether or not the plan to reduce subsidy may be offset by increased costs for more administrative duties. She asked about the effects on the partnership if Carmel Valley voters vote down an assessment for fire service. She asked about whether or not Pebble Beach would be interested in forming a partnership in a JPA.
Council Member ROSE stated the City has been approached by three entities for potential partnership in JPA. The Carmel Valley Fire District is in the red by over $1 million. And administrative costs should not represent a significant increase in costs; therefore expect savings due to control of “purse strings.”
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member ROSE moved approval of a Resolution amending the Carmel/Carmel Valley/Ambulance Joint Powers, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC, ROSE, SHARP, TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
B. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County Elections Department to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election.
Consultant Brian Roseth presented the Staff Report.
Council Member TALMAGE asked about the 0.5 acre conservation easement Map and the 12-13 pages of Mitigation Measures in the voter pamphlet; only Question on the ballot card.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Barbara Livingston asked for the reading of the text of the ballot measure.
Skip Lloyd asked about the cost of the election.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
City Attorney Don Freeman read the Question to be placed on the ballot.
Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property (APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12, 2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved?
City Administrator Rich Guillen stated that costs typically are about $8,000; however, the expectation is this election will cost more than $8,000.
Council Member ROSE moved approval of a Resolution Ordering an Election, Requesting the County Elections Department to Conduct the Election, and Requesting Consolidation of the Election, seconded by Council Member HAZDOVAC and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC, ROSE, SHARP, TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
XI. Orders of Council
A. Receive a report and provide policy direction on the schematic design of the Forest Theater renovation project.
City Administrator Rich Guillen presented the report including three identified construction phases, as follows:
1. Performance Related Accommodations - stage (including grade level additions for CET) and seating are interrelated;
Performance Related Accommodations = $ 2,104,071
2. Audience Related Accommodations - audience support facilities for ticket sales, toilets, concessions, and site paths of travel are interrelated; and
Audience Related Accommodations = $ 936,395
3. Site Infrastructure Related Accommodations - electrical power, sound and lighting are interrelated
Site Infrastructure Related Accommodations = $ 319,248
Total cost approximately $3.4 million
Note: Total cost, $3,359,714
Anticipated Process: After approval of Schematic Design, then Design Development, then to Council, then finally Construction Phase.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Safwat Malek (Vice-President, Forest Theater Guild) spoke of meeting with the City Administrator as part of Forest Theater Guild and Forest Theater Foundation, his support of the Schematic Design and desire to complete the entire project as proposed in one phase, ideally.
Skip Lloyd read a statement adopted by the Carmel Residents Association Board of Directors objecting to approving a contract for Design Development with RFM Architects at this time mainly because of the lack of public review of the Schematic Design; public review which was previously promised by the City Administrator.
Carolyn Hardy spoke to the $3.4 million cost estimate; however, she observed no costs listed for many items, including an Environmental Impact Report, et cetera. Additionally, she addressed benches, wood fencing and carved “Forest Theater” entry arch and concerns about cost savings to make it affordable.
Stephen Moorer of the Forest Theatre Foundation and PacRep Theatre expressed his thanks to the City Administrator for inviting representatives of the user groups to inspect the Schematic Design and his support for the Schematic Design.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member ROSE spoke about the need for quotes for essential items required for safety and ADA requirements. Even with phasing, $3.4 million “not doable by any reasonable measure.”
Mayor McCLOUD spoke to funding possible from Challenge Grants and Proposition 84 Funds for Performing Arts and Parks; however Proposition 84 Funds not currently funded by the State.
Council Member TALMAGE estimated a total of $4 million for project; the City therefore “cannot fund this project.” He suggested pursuing grant money and third party sources for funding. He expressed concerns about safety, ADA requirements and restrooms and bids for those three items.
Consensus of Council Members was in support of a determination of costs for safety measures, ADA requirements and restrooms and directed the City Administrator to meet with Bill Camille.
COMMENT:
• The consensus to scale the Forest Theatre renovation down from the McCann Project to a project involving safety measures, ADA requirements and restrooms speaks to the mismanagement of the Forest Theatre renovation process; that is, the City should have funded the Forest Theater Facility Master Plan, commissioned by the City and completed by local architect Brian Congleton in 2001. The Master Plan represented a comprehensive patron, user group and neighborhood impact “interrelationship” plan. Specifically, the elements of the Master Plan included Patron support systems, User group support systems, Neighborhood/Community impact concern areas, Maintenance & improvement needs and ADA Compliance. The total cost in 2001 dollars was $1,423,000.
(Source: Archived Videos, Regular City Council Meeting, July 7, 2009)
4 comments:
A few points of clarification . . .
Ken Talmage pulled Item F (not K) from the consent agenda regarding the contract for management of city parking lots.
The CRA was requesting that all viable alternatives for fire protection services be considered before this contract extension ends on January 31, 2010 (not January 1).
The sentence removed from the amendment to the agreement with Monterey stated that "the term of this agreement may be further extended by mutual agreement of the parties conditioned upon joint commitment and good faith effort to develop and execute a successor agreement for full fire department services."
The sentence gave the impression that Carmel was negotiating with Monterey to the exclusion of all other alternatives (including a stand-along department). The purpose of this agreement was to only extend the current administrative services and duty chief services, not to set forth future conditions for negotiations.
In reference to the Forest Theater, Bill Camille's expertise is project management (he oversaw the Sunset Center renovation), but he is not the project manager of the Forest Theater renovation, not yet anyway. He may be called on to consult on how the phasing of the renovation could be accomplished and is qualified to "crunch numbers."
The Forest Theater renovation plans are being scaled back so far that we are almost back to the Congleton plan and very little is recognizable anymore from the original McCann plan. (Wonder how McCann feels and the Foundation who paid him tens of thousands of dollars for his design.)
Looks like the Council would like to pull the plug on spending anymore money for drawings (or for moving forward with this project) but the city cannot search for funding without clearly defined plans, not even for the simplest upgrades for safety, etc.
Thank you for the corrections/clarifications.
A couple things.
Why wasn't the alarm sounded before now abut the dire straits of the Carmel Valley Ambulance? Gerard Rose said not to worry there are other cities or areas eager to join Carmel in the JPA. If so, why didn't Carmel anticipate this situation and add them before now?
The city should be prepared to fund the entire renovation of Forest Theater. The mayor always advocates for grants, but in this economy the awarding of grants to the city should not be used as an excuse not to move forward with the renovation, be it a drastically scaled down version or a more ambitious version.
About the interim fire contract with Monterey, the people of Monterey do not deserve or need Carmel not being able to expeditiously decide about whether or not the city is in or out. Decide now. The city and people of Carmel have more than enough information to decide now. The city has let some people obstruct the timely execution of this long-term agreement - this is bad faith on the part of the city towards Monterey. The city should decide promptly and certaining before January 2010.
Post a Comment