CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
CITY COUNCIL / BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES JOINT REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91355
AGENDA
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY – No New Business
How to Address the City Council
You may address the Council during Public Participation on any matter within the Council’s jurisdiction that is not listed on the agenda. Each person wishing to speak should prepare a presentation of not more than three (3) minutes. Public Participation speaker’s cards must be submitted to the City Clerk BEFORE this portion of the meeting begins. Public Participation takes place before the consideration of the agenda items and following the consideration of agenda items. However, each person will be allowed to speak only one time during Public Participation per meeting.
Anyone wishing to address an item on the agenda should fill out a speaker’s card and submit it to the City Clerk BEFORE the Mayor announces the item. Each person addressing the Council is given three (3) minutes to speak indicated by a colored light system on the Council dais; a green light appears when the speaker begins; a yellow light appears when 30 seconds remain and a red light appears when time has expired. Comments should be complete at this time. Each presentation may not exceed three (3) minutes.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office, (661) 255-4391. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II)
INVOCATION – WESTE CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL
FLAG SALUTE
EXECUTIVE MEETING
This time has been set aside for Councilmembers to review the agenda and obtain any further information that may be needed. Council will also discuss each individual item during the course of the meeting with the exception of the Consent Calendar, which may be approved in its entirety by one motion, unless there is a request to pull an item for discussion. No action will be taken on public agenda items during the Executive Meeting.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA – Mayor to inquire whether there are any changes to the Agenda or if any member of the Council or the public would like to pull for discussion, any item on the Consent Calendar.
AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
Proclaim April 11, 2015, as Arbor Day
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
This time has been set aside for the public to address the City Council on items NOT listed on the agenda. The City Council will not act upon these items at this meeting other than to review and/or provide direction to staff. All speakers must submit a speaker’s card to the City Clerk PRIOR to the beginning of this portion of the meeting. Thirty minutes are allotted for public input at this time. The FIRST TEN people to submit a speaker card prior to the beginning of Public Participation will be heard. Speaker cards will be accepted beginning at 5:45 p.m. Any speaker cards received once the first speaker has begun will be heard at the end of the meeting regardless if the ten person limit has been met. Speakers may not exceed three (3) minutes and may only be heard once per meeting under Public Participation.
STAFF COMMENTS
COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion by the City Council. The items are not individually discussed by the City Council unless a request is made by a member of the public or the Council, in which case, the item(s) will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately.
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES – The minutes of the Joint City Council and Board of Library Trustees meeting are submitted for
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council and Board of Library Trustees: Approve the minutes of the March 10, 2015, special and regular meetings.
- SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN (SSMP) – STATEWIDE GENERAL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS – City Council re-approve and re-certify the Sewer System Management Plan document to remain in compliance with the terms of the California Water Resources Control Board permit.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
- Approve the proposed updated Sewer System Management
- Authorize the City Manager or designee to make future operational changes, as needed, that do not have a financial impact to comply with Waste Discharge Requirements.
- RAILROAD AVENUE BIKE TRAIL DESIGN CONCEPT, PROJECT T2011 – AWARD CONTRACT – Railroad Avenue Bike Trail Design Concept will study the proposed Class 1 bike trail along the east side of Railroad Avenue from Lyons Avenue to Oak Ridge Drive.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
- Award contract for the Railroad Avenue Bike Trail Design Concept, Project T2011, to MNS Engineers, Inc., in the amount of $144,798.
- Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the contract, subject to City Attorney approval.
- ACQUISITION OF 173.54 +/- ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY, VACANT LAND, ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 2826-020-056 AND 062 – Acquisition of this property will enhance the City’s on-going efforts to preserve open space lands and improve trail connectivity throughout the Newhall
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
- Approve the purchase of 173.54 +/- acres of real property, vacant land, Assessor’s Parcel No. 2826-020-056 and 062, for open space preservation, at a total cost of
$1,910,000, which includes the property purchase price of $1,850,000, and $20,000 for escrow, title, surveying fees and due diligence costs, $30,000 for trail improvements including fencing and signs, and $10,000 annually for property taxes.
- Appropriate $1,870,000 from the Open Space Preservation District Fund Balance (Fund 358) to Open Space Preservation District Expenditure Account 12592- 5201.004.
- Appropriate $30,000 from Open Space Preservation District Fund Balance (Fund
358) to Open Space Preservation District Expenditure Account 12592-5161.002 for the purpose of property improvements, including signage, gates, and trail clean-up.
- Appropriate $10,000 as an on-going annual expenditure from Open Space Preservation District Fund Balance (Fund 358) to Open Space Preservation District Expenditure Account 12592-5185.003 for the payment of annual property
- Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
- NORTH OAKS PARK AND VALENCIA GLEN PARK POOL RENOVATIONS, PROJECT M0106 – APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT – The North Oaks and Valencia Glen Park Pools were built in 1969 and 1970, and the facilities need several significant renovations to keep both pools operating safely and efficiently.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
- Approve the plans and specifications for North Oaks and Valencia Glen Park Pool Renovations, Project M0106.
- Award the construction contract to A.M.G., Inc., in the amount of $184,694, plus additive alternates one and two in the amount of $7,950, and authorize a contingency in the amount of $27,704, for a total contract amount not to exceed $220,348.
- Authorize the transfer of project savings in the amount of $17,959 in General Capital Projects Fund (Fund 601) from SCSC Aquatic Center Pool Deck Repair project, expenditure account M3023601-5161.001, to North Oaks Park Pool and Valencia Glen Park Pool Renovations, expenditure account M0106601-5161.001.
- Authorize the transfer of project savings in the amount of $10,225 in Facilities Replacement Fund (Fund 723) from Central Park Sportsfields, Phase III project, expenditure account P4012723-5161.001 to North Oaks Park Pool and Valencia Glen Park Pool Renovations, expenditure account M0106723-5161.001.
- Authorize the transfer of project savings in the amount of $27,164 in General Capital Projects Fund (Fund 601) from Central Park Sportsfields, Phase III project, expenditure account P4012601-5161.001 to North Oaks Park Pool and Valencia Glen Park Pool Renovations, expenditure account M0106601-5161.001.
- Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
- AWARD CONTRACT FOR BID NO. LMD-14-15-13 FOR IRRIGATION CONTROLLER REPLACEMENT – Award a contract to ValleyCrest Landscape Maintenance for an amount not to exceed $339,449 for the purchase and installation of eighty (80) smart irrigation controllers to support operations in Landscape Maintenance District Zones transferred to the City of Santa Clarita from Los Angeles County in
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
- Award contract to ValleyCrest Maintenance Landscape to procure and install 80 WeatherTrack Irrigation controllers for $308,590, and authorize a 10 percent contingency in the amount of $30,859, for a total amount of not to exceed $339,449.
- Authorize the City Manager or designee to modify the award in the event that issues of impossibility of performance arise, subject to the City Attorney
- CHECK REGISTER NO. 6 FOR THE PERIOD 02/20/15 THROUGH 03/05/15 AND 03/12/15. ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFERS FOR THE PERIOD 02/27/15 THROUGH 03/12/15. – Check Register No. 6 for the Period 02/20/15 through 03/05/15 and 03/12/15.
Electronic Funds Transfers for the Period 02/27/15 through 03/12/15.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council approve and ratify for payment the demands presented in Check Register No. 6.
NEW BUSINESS
- RED-LIGHT PHOTO ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM – The City Council extended the contract with Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc., on a month-to-month basis for up to one year and directed staff to further evaluate the Red-Light Photo Enforcement Program and report back within 12 months. The existing contract term expires March 31,
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council receive report and discuss alternatives for the City of Santa Clarita’s Red- Light Photo Enforcement Program.
- LOS ANGELES REGIONAL INTEROPERABLE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS – The Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS) has informed the City of the planned installation of seven LA-RICS wireless telecommunications facilities on County-owned properties within the
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
- Request Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS) to conduct public outreach to nearby residents and property owners of all proposed LA- RICS telecommunications tower sites within the City of Santa Clarita, and to respond to, address and remediate concerns raised
- Request LA-RICS to consider an alternative site location for the proposed tower at Fire Station 108 based on testimony received by nearby property owners opposed to this proposed
- Request the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to take action to prohibit the co-location of commercial (non-governmental) communication equipment at LA- RICS towers.
- Adopt a resolution withdrawing the City of Santa Clarita from membership in the LA-RICS Joint Powers
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
This time has been set aside for any speakers that have turned in speaker cards and were not heard in the first thirty minutes allotted to address the City Council on items that are NOT on the agenda. No further speaker cards will be accepted once Public Participation begins. Speakers may not address items that have been considered this evening. Speaker cards may not be submitted relating to any items listed on the agenda.
STAFF COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
In memory of Carol Kieczykowski
FUTURE MEETINGS
The next Joint Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held Tuesday, April 14, 2015, at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1st floor of City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, CA.
CERTIFICATION
I, Kevin Tonoian, City Clerk, do hereby certify that I am the duly appointed and qualified City Clerk for the City of Santa Clarita and that on March 19, 2015, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall and the Santa Clarita Sheriff’s Station.
Kevin Tonoian City Clerk
Santa Clarita, California
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
17 Comments
What a novel idea, posting a public agency’s complete agenda with tab item details to the public days before the meeting. Whole packet on the City website as well: http://santaclaritacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=1037&Inline=True
Any way to get that to happen in Acton/Agua Dulce with the school district?
Red light cameras are dangerous and don’t reduce accidents they are a way to extract money from the wallets of citizens
Santa Clarita needs to join the list of these 72 California cities which have dropped red light cameras, or prohibited them.
Anaheim, Bell Gardens, Belmont, Berkeley, Burlingame, City of Orange, Compton, Corona, Costa Mesa, Cupertino, Davis, East LA, El Cajon, El Monte, Emeryville, Escondido, Fairfield, Fresno, Fullerton, Gardena, Glendale, Grand Terrace, Hayward, Highland, Indian Wells, Inglewood, Irvine, LA County, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Woods, Lancaster, Loma Linda, Long Beach, City of Los Angeles, Maywood, Montclair, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Newport Beach, Oakland, Oceanside, Paramount, Pasadena, Poway, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Redwood City, Riverside, Rocklin, Roseville, Rowland Heights, San Bernardino, San Carlos, San Diego, San Juan Capistrano, San Rafael, *Santa Ana July 2015*, Santa Fe Springs, Santa Maria, Santa Rosa, South Gate, South San Francisco, South Whittier, Stockton, Union City, Upland, *Victorville June 2015*, Walnut, Westminster, Whittier, Yuba City, Yucaipa.
*cities where cameras operate until the end of their current contract on the dates noted* 39 plan to continue at this point. Note: The city of Modesto has a suspended program with an unknown future. They are still counted in the 39 number above, but only 38 programs are issuing tickets currently, in a state that once had over 100 programs.
Residents need to call ALL the elected local officials to politely but firmly say you want the camera program ended and the cameras removed.
James C. Walker
Life Member, National Motorists Association
Not if you stop at the red light.
OK, the point is that it DOES NOT reduce the number of people stopping and in fact some speed up or jam on brakes causing even more accidents.
Bottom line, they DO NOT reduce accidents and in fact at certain lights cause even more!
Exactly Tony.
Exactly Tony.
Red light cameras return profits above their high costs ONLY when one or both of these scams are used. 1) Yellow intervals are set or maintained shorter than needed for safety for the ACTUAL 85th percentile approach speeds of vehicles. 2) Cameras ticket safe slow rolling right on red turns that are involved in only 0.06% of crashes with injuries or fatalities per federal research by NHTSA.
Red light cameras are, and always have been, a for-profit business partnership between cities, states and the for-profit camera companies.
And independent audits done by groups NOT in the revenue stream from the cameras often show an increase in total crash rates at camera intersections. It does not happen at every camera, but often enough to be a commonly known result. Red light cameras need to become illegal to use in every state.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
I seen people accelerate to avoid the picture
I seen people accelerate to avoid the picture
For Carlos Sanchez Aguirre. That tends to happen where people know the yellows are slightly too short, so people have the choice of panic braking which risks being hit from behind or accelerating slightly to avoid the 0.2 or 0.7 second gotcha ticket at about $500 a pop.
Hopefully Santa Clarita will become the 73rd California community to end the use of cameras or ban them. Perhaps some residents will go to speak to politely but firmly request the end.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
It is the drivers who run red lights that are dangerous.
Agree and the cameras do not stop that but cause other accidents.
I’ve seen that thing flash after taking the green and getting stuck in the middle due to traffic.
Billie is correct in both posts above.
Almost all camera tickets are for violations of less than one second. Almost all t-bone crashes happen when drivers enter at least two and more usually five to nine seconds into the red. The two groups are NOT related to each other. Camera companies relate them in the sales pitches in order to get VERY profitable contracts that ticket almost exclusively safe drivers, but the relationship is patently false.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
Neither option addresses the issue of those drivers who are more concerned about getting to where they need to go in such a hurry that they have no regard for the safety of others. They only care about themselves and making it through the intersection so they are not delayed another 2-3 minutes until the light circulation goes through again. Go to a crowded intersection anywhere in the 72 cities mentioned above (and other cities not mentioned) where you get a green arrow to make your left hand turn that you have been patiently and legally waiting for only to have several cars run right through their red light causing you to miss your green arrow. Removing the red light cameras certainly fixed that problem (Sarcasm). I have seen where the person with the green arrow takes off and gets t-boned (as mentioned above)by the person(s) who runs the red light. Removing the cameras will not solve the issue, it will let those selfish people who don’t care about the law and others get the “free pass” to run a red light knowing they will no longer get ticketed.
Just remember, so cal guy, that most tickets are for split second violations where the yellows were deliberately set or maintained too short.
With correctly set yellow intervals for both straight ahead and turn lanes, the problems will decrease AND the cameras will lose enough money that very few cities will use them.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association