Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 01-30 CC MINBook 71/Page 25 1/30/89 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 30, 1989 The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of National City was called to order at 2:00 p.m. by Mayor Waters. ROLL CALL Council members present Inzunza, Pruitt, Van Deventer, Waters. Absent Della Administrative officials present Eiser, Kimble, McCabe, Myers, Peoples, Peterson, Post. Mayor Waters called a recess at 2:01 p.m. to pend for the arrival of Councilman Della and Congressman Bates. Council reconvened at 2:16 p.m. ROLL CALL Council members present Della, Inzunza, Pruitt, Van Deventer, Waters. Absent: None. AREA DEVELOPMENT/BAYFRONT PROPERTY 1. SUBJECT: City Council workshop regarding proposed Naval use of bayfront property. Mayor Waters introduced Congressman Bates to the members of the City Staff, the media, two people with businesses in the area of discussion, Naval representatives, Captain Berkebile, Captain Schlesnger and Captain Kelly, and Admiral Don Nay, the head of the Port District Mayor Waters stated that the meeting was called to discuss the use of the City's bayfront property at the request of Congressman Bates. A copy of a letter dated 26 January 1989 from Congressman Bates addressed to the Secretary of the Navy was distributed to all those who were present. Congressman Bates said he bacame aware of the land exchange matter by communication from various Councilmembers. Councilman Pruitts' letter was the first knowledge that he had of the land exchange. He said he felt the Navy and the Port should advise him when things such as this are occurring, particularly when it's in the 44th and a Federal matter. Admiral Nay said he felt our Congressman ought to tell them when they vote on a bill which effects their property. Bates agreed and inquired as to what bill Nay was referring to. Nay responded that it was the bill that authorized the Navy and the Port to exchange land, H.R. 4481. Bates said had he known that was in there they certainly would have. Nay said they didn't either. Bates said it was put in on the Senate side and the author had not yet been identified. On the issue of the 32 acres, he inquired as to whether the Port and the Navy were seriously considering the 32 acres since they weren't aware that this was in there. Mayor Waters said he thought they were and asked Captain Berkebile to comment. Captain Berkebile said the key from their perspective was that they were building a $30 million dollar repair pier in National City. The repair pier was specifically geared to keep more of the ships and repair work here. The difficulty is where the pier is being constructed, the land is needed to adequately support the pier and provide the facilities they fill is necessary. Bates pledged his support in meeting Berkebile's obligations, as long as something could be worked out that would be acceptable to the National City Council. He inquired as to if the pier was an expansion to the current pier or what. Berkebile said that part of the Naval Station had been a junk yard previously. The pier was a brand new one. Bates inquired as to whether the Navy occupied all of the shore of National City. Berkebile said he was well under 20%. Bates inquired as to if there was a way if they took the 32 acres, if they could free up some other land. Captain Kelly said there was no waterfront property being considered. Bates asked how long the Navy had been working on the pier. Berkebile said construction started last summer. Bates inquired as to when they decided they needed the property around the pier. Berkebile said when he arrived a year ago he said he would be unable to support the pier and began looking. Kelly said it was an '88 project, construction started last summer so the pier requiremant had been in the system for a long time. Bates said that's what he meant, so when did the Navy decide they needed the 32 acres? Berkebile said he Book 71/Page 26 1/30/89 was afraid to say that nobody had looked ahead. Bates summarized that the Navy didn't look ahead and then suddenly realized they needed the property, the City didn't realize the Navy would be going after the land, but the legislation had already been put in there without going through the public airing. He then asked Berkebile what would happen if they didn't get the property. Berkebile said that the requirements for the property are not only for the pier but also for expansion in building facilities on those sites that are now spread all over San Diego. Some of it would be consolidation of facilities from elsewhere in San Diego, bringing them here, where they work If the parcels were not obtained, the people at the pier would be isolated, basic services could not be provided. In land existing on the Naval Station, because of explosive arcs, nothing can be built inside the Navy fence line. Basic support services, they consider quality of life such as maintance services, minor exchange functions, all the day to day things to support that many sailors and marines. Bates inquired as to what National City had planned for the property use. Admiral Nay said the property was to be used for marine related, industrial uses. The present uses were ship repair, lumber yards. It is disadvantaged land as it is not on the waterfront Bates asked Nay if the Port has been coordinating with National City on the land. Nay explained that last spring, they had received a call from the San Bruno Naval Real Estate Office who informed them that there was a piece of legislation which was being considered for introduction that they faxed down. It was very brief and said it would allow for the Navy to coordinate with the Port for an exchange of land. Since the Port does not own the land outright and fee simple, all they could do was give a lease. They said they were thing of having the bill introduced. Nothing else was heard until Captain Schlesnger came to see him and brought in the already passed legislation. It says that the Port and the Navy are free to negotiate for a transfer of land, rather specific land in National City in exchange. It said that the Port could accept back from the Navy, land that is in San Diego. Nay talked to Captain Schlesnger and suggested the Navy speak with the National City, City Council. Schlesnger has since advised Nay that they are proceeding with this project and requested that the Port advise him of some land that the Navy now occupies in San Diego which could be accepted in exchange for this land. Nay has not yet given him a list The land that has been discussed as a possibility is that located at 1220 Pacific Highway. So far, there have only been exploratory meetings. Bates said it sounds like this was not done straight forward and that he couldn't imagine that the Navy would ask a Congressman to introduce this legislation and not be aware that it wasn't the Congressman in who's district this was involved, and not to have advised him of this. He asked the Navy representatives to find out who requested this legislation and of whom and why he wasn't advised so that this can be out in the open. He said he will be forced to introduce legislation on different defence authorization and appropriation legislation that will attempt to undo this and maybe deal with other land matters in the Port, the Broadway Complex and a whole series of land exchanges that will have to be tied into forcing the Navy and the Port to be good neighbors with the Cities that have the jurisdiction adjacent or underlying of the tidelands overlay. This will leave for the City , the Navy and the Port will then have to see if they can accommodation of everyone's interests that would be acceptable to everyone. Waters said that the way he felt about the Port District property, was that the voters voted to establish an income to create jobs for the people as a whole. He questioned if they have the right to give it away without those things in mind. He said Berkebile did come down and meet with the City. The City has very little ocean front and even the little piece that is wide open, he is sure piers will go there. But what he is mainly concerned about is that the big boys in San Diego are working to put more improvements on the ocean front The Navy has old anchors, boats and storage up there taking up space. He was hoping they could clean this up which would give them extra space. He is concerned with the income to the City. Councilman Van Deventer said the key element is that National City had nothing to do with this to start with. His concem for the City is the multiple problems. It's a swap to San Diego. We will get nothing and loose what businesses we do have in that area. We will get no income from that business which is a sales tax entity type. Also the revenue by giving them the 12th Street project in exchange, they will get revenue from the City of National City and we will get nothing. It will also have an impact relating to the storage and the cars that will be parked in National City. This is a problem we have had for years and it will now be impacted. 19th Street is not designed to carry the traffic it carries now. Businesses at Tideland and 24th will be impacted by the people leaving the base as we have recently experienced. To allow this impact the businesses with the cars and the non revenue type business. Personally he could see if the land were right next to National City on 8th Street and we could use it, the Port could take over and lease to other business, but this is a complete swap from National City to San Diego. It will impact all the proposed business we have and goes all the way to 24th. This impact needs to be addressed before this goes any further between National City, the Navy and the Port District just to make San Diego happy. We've done that enough through the years, that's why National City is so small. We respect the Navy and they've done a lot of good for us, but there are issues here that really need to be negotiated. Long discussions need to be done before we let this land out of National City. Book 71/Page 27 1/30/89 Vice -Mayor Pruitt said everybody in the room realized that San Diego County is one of the most growing counties in this nation. If you take San Diego County and take it's bayfront it's even more precious than the rest of the county that's growing in leaps and bounds on a National scale. You take a city the size of National City and you want to tale what little bayfront it has and swap that to San Diego, it hurts. The Port has already mentioned that the present use of this property is commercial and industry, but we all realize that if the right individual came forward, for example, we've had inquiries from people that want to bring $300 million dollars to our bayfront What happens when you take twelve acres of our bayfront out of that potential? He said he was sure that Mr. Nay would be willing to sit down with anyone who would be willing to bring that type of money to the Port District But if we do not have anything to offer, they go elsewhere. The things that could be brought to National City with bayfront development, could be multiplied three or four times in salaries and construction. None of this would happen if our bayfront is given access to the Navy. Our potential for developing our own bayfront, with the agreement of the Port District, grows every month with more and more people in this Nation and in the World wanting to bring more development here. We will have literally taken ourselves out of the market with this the way it is proposed. There are several other things that haven't been mentioned. Being that we are primarily dealing with the Navy and the Port why couldn't the Port authorize what ever properties are given up in San Diego, to come under the jurisdiction of National City? That would be feasible and fair. What ever is developed on those properties, the revenue would be benefit to National City. If that agreement could be reached, we wouldn't need to be discussing this. Mr. Nay was asked to comment He said he did not understand the question. Pruitt said that several pieces of property have been mentioned, part of the baseball field, part of the property out by the airport, part of the property out by Point Loma was mentioned as an exchange for these 32 acres. Why couldn't those acres in the Port District come under the jurisdiction of National City. It would make a negotiating point to start at. Nay said he assumed that the City was interested in the sales tax revenue. Pruitt added and room tax in the case of potential hotels. Nay said he thought this would be something the City of San Diego would have to be involved in negotiations on. The Port District is really just operating as a Trustee for the property for the State and is required to get a fair retum, whether it's for a part or a ship yard. If there's room tax, it's really a matter between the city that it would go to so would have to be worked out with the City of San Diego. Mayor Waters reminded Nay that Mr. Hahn of San Diego took it upon himself to go to Washington DC to talk to an Admiral about 75 acres of our property where the ITT building is. He did come talk to Waters, after the arrangements had been made. Waters said that people have been dumping over the years on the South Bay and there are four City Councils in the South Bay now that think a little different We don't mind helping people, but we don't want to be used as a storage area. Councilman Inzunza said the exchanges that could be made are unbelievable, but those things were never discussed or negotiated. He would be in favor of legislation to nullify everything and start over at ground zero. Ifs National City property, ifs the Port District property, now let's negotiate like we're supposed to and pass legislation based on that negotiation. We have to start on a fair basis. hcJ Councilman Dalla said in some ways this came about is almost academic because it's been done. He doesn't know the ins and outs of Congress, or what the likelihood of voiding a bill is but it seems that we're here now, where do we go from here. There's the Navy, the Port, the City and Congress involved in this situation which no one is willing to take total credit for. His question to Nay and the Navy is, from your perspective with the legislation as you understand it where do we go from here? Who is going to be or should be the lead agency in determining if voiding the legislation is possible? Where do we go from here and where does National City and it's desires fit into this process? Is the Port on it's own going to select land in San Diego? Do you envision National City having some choices in an amount of that land or all of it? Same thing from the Navy, we asked this before, if we decide we're not willing to proceed as you would like, is it your intention to pursue it through some other means and acquire the property as you need it? Nay said this legislation that was passed, is not a command. It only permits. So it permits the Port and the Navy to negotiate to some point. And the Congress has made that possible for that to happen. The Port has the limitations that it cannot transfer the land permanently; it cannot transfer the land if it thinks it's not getting a fair shake; and it probably won't negotiate with the Navy if it's constituents feel it's not appropriate to do so. He assumes the Navy is driven by a need to support the Pier Facility. The Port will continue to meet with the Navy and if the Navy can convince National City that the things they are going to do on the National City property are beneficial to National City, they'll probably come back to us. If the National City Council is opposed to this, then the Board of Port Commissioners would be hesitant to consummate any independent trade at all. Captain Schlesnger introduced himself as the Local Engineering Field Activities Skipper. He said his boss was in San Bruno and when the legislation came down he was appointed to be the contact for discussions. He said as mentioned by Nay, it is "permissive legislation" which means if they can't, the Navy and Port District come to an agreement which has to be approved by Congress and can't be formally acted upon until then, there is nothing that will happen. Secondly, they have already discussed informally what they feel might be tradable. It almost has to be something that is currently on Port District property since there's not going to be an exchange of land, it will be an exchange of leases. It turns out about the only thing they have happens to be the property that his command is located on. So a process must be Book 71/Page 28 1/30/89 gone through of appraising both properties. There is nothing that's locked in that will make something go forward that will require legislation be changed to stop it It's a rather formalized procedure that has to be gone through. Right now the only two pieces of property that the Navy currently occupies is their compound which will need to be relocated and the possibility of granting an easement on property that the Navy Training Center holds that is contiguous to the access to the West Terminal at Lindbergh. Della said that Nay said whatever National City and the Navy decide will be the determining factor as far as how the Port proceeds. The Captain says whatever the Navy and the Port decide. Schlesnger said what he was saying was that the agreement could not be approved without Congressional. This is very specific in the legislation. Kelly said that when the legislation occurred, the Navy came on a very up front basis to the City of National City, to enter into some very preliminary discussions of what they wanted. They clearly recognize that anything they are going to do has to be worked out with the City of National City. Berkebile said they came to National City first Kelly said this was not being railroaded through and he believed the Navy was scheduled to come back to National City very shortly for some further discussions to work this out. The presumption appears that the permissive language is going to allow for something to happen without due process and consideration by the City that's involved, the Port, the Navy and the Congress. Waters added that the workshop was called to air these things to eliminate these presumptions. He felt it has been made pretty clear that National City has some jurisdiction here without a doubt and must work with the Port District The Port District says that if National City basically is against it, they will not proceed. The Navy is wanting to work with both of them. Bates said he thinks getting together like this was a great idea One of the areas of apprehensiveness is that even though it's a workshop and preliminary, as it has appeared in the paper, the people don't share the workshop and that's a concern. How we got here has put him in an embarrassing position in which he didn't know about this and wouldn't do this in someone else's district even if it would benefit National City's revenues. He would not do a land swap that would take San Diego's land and have it swapped in reverse. For this reason, he feels it is important to find out how we got to this place because this isn't good public policy or good legislation. Whether it was an accident or intentional or whatever, this needs to be cleared up at some point. The fact that it does have to come back to Congress, and he immediately wrote the Chairmen of the various committees that would have jurisdiction because there is a practice where if there is opposition, it wouldn't move forward through that committee. That's why he did that and laid that groundwork and was hoping to get some more facts before going to the Secretary of the Navy, but felt that this was a necessary action. He does think that although they may not prevail were they to try to nullify this, he thinks that there's a good chance that they could. He only says this to give National City a strong bargaining position or leverage, so that even though you (the Navy) wouldn't ignore them, someone else who could come along and replace you, would realize that they couldn't do that. That's a point he wanted to make, that the City of National City should be an equal partner here. Having said all of this, he thinks now everyone could try and come up with something that would respond and this is encouraging to him. Waters asked City Manager McCabe when we had the Navy scheduled to come back. McCabe said it had been scheduled for the meeting of February 7th. The date could be changed. Berkebile asked if it would be convenient for the Council, they would like a little more time. He wants to present completely open and lay out all of their requirements to the City of National City so they can come to an agreement and negotiate. Waters requested Berkebile let his office know when they are ready to return. Berkebile agreed. Van Deventer asked if this could be scheduled for March or April. Berkebile said he would look at March. Waters said that any member of the City Council who wanted to meet with the Commanding Officer of the Naval Station or his Staff, could. He has the phone numbers and they could call to set up a meeting to discuss the properties in general. They could do this and bring it to the next meeting in March. Berkebile added that Councilman Van Deventer mentioned the parking/traffic problems. On Harbor Drive and the South end where they are putting chains and posts to keep Navy people from parking on the base due mostly to DWI's and complemented National City on helping them. This is the same thing they would do at 19th and Tidelands. They would work with the City. Van Deventer said the problem incurred there is that the cars end up in the business and residential area and the people are walking. What is being solved is their problem but not ours. Berkebile said he had some other ideas on how to solve both of their problems. Van Deventer said he would like to discuss those. Book 71/Page 29 1/30/89 Inzunza said he loved what he was hearing, but he still sees the same situation remaining. The City is still on the defence and the Navy on the offence. He would like some kind of a working committee made of a few members of the Council and Staff as a sort of offensive thing. Why should we wait until they give us their requirements and zone off different things that we respond to what they put there? Why can't it be a continual working type thing. Pruitt said Mr. Nay and the City Manager were scheduled to get together with the Navy, no Councilman has been mentioned to sit in on that Inzunza said he thought maybe Rip Reopeile ought to sit down, and our Vice -Mayor who's in charge of the Navy, Council and maybe some Staff people to continually have some kind of a plan of offence as to what is best for this City. Waters informed Inzunza that a maximum of two Councilmen at a time was all that could be there and anything discussed would have to be brought back to the whole Council so everyone wouldn't be going in different directions. Inzunza said the "Committee" would continually report back to the Council. If you wanted to know any kind of information you would call them up. They would keep us abreast of what was going on so that when we do come back together with the Navy, we are singing off of the same sheet of music. Van Deventer suggested that Congressman Bates has a representative and if the City puts two plus Staff, the Port and the Navy sit down in discussions and we try to thrash out the questions that we all have before the next meeting in March or April, we will be able to put forward what we would like to see. This is a way we can move forward. Waters said that the Vice -Mayor and Inzunza could serve on that and the City Manager, George Eiser, the City Planner, Don Nay or someone from the Port District along with whoever Captain Berkebile would like to send. The Vice -Mayor has the responsibility to set that up. If phone numbers are needed, the secretaries have the numbers. Waters then said there were some businessmen from that area that would like to speak Arthur Tillery, President of A & E Industries at 1440 Tidelands introduced himself. He said he had been there for the last 9 years. He was concerned that nobody had mentioned about the loss of jobs. He has about 200 families that he is concerned about and responsible for. He has done a lot of work in the area. He was told that about 2 years before his lease was up to come in and negotiate and consideration would be given to what he has done. He is in the process of malting drawings and plans to do some more construction before his lease is up. He hoped to get more credit for the $200,000. to $300,000. he has already put into it. He doesn't want to move, or the disruption. It would be foolish. He's been on the waterfront since 1947 here in San Diego. He's not seen the pier much busier than it is today. There's a lot of room on those piers today. Furthermore, as far as hotwork is concerned, his firm is a Master Ship Repair Contractor, they do hotwork on the Naval Station everyday. He would hate to see A & E have to move and disrupt everything. There would be down time, loss of revenue for the City and themselves. He would like some consideration. Ken Cooley, Assistant General Manager of A & E Industries. He said one of the problems that they have is that they are in favor of the Navy expanding because that is their business. On the other hand, they are restricted almost exclusively to requiring waterfront type property or close to the waterfront because their work is strictly with the Navy. In any kind of an exchange that we would have or that would be worked out here, we all know that if we approach Don Nay and the Port Commission, to exchange our property here for that property at Broadway and Harbor Drive for a ship repair facility, you know what kind of reception we would have. It just wouldn't happen. On the other hand there is no property available for us to move our business. One of the problems they have is the same one everyone else has eluded to of how this came up. The first time they heard about any of this was reading the newspaper. The second thing was when the bankers started calling asking what they are going to do when they are out of business. All of the employees, subcontractors and suppliers are raising the same question. So, anything that comes up they would like to have some say in. They are land restricted to an area near the Naval Station. He then gave his phone number to the Mayor, Council and Staff. Dalla requested clarification of Nay that the position of the Port would be to see what the City and the Navy worked out prior to proceeding. Nay said he was not authorized to say what the position of the Port was. He re-emphasized that legislation permits the Navy to negotiate when it's looking for an exchange. The Board of Commissioners hasn't taken this up formally at all, he has just kept them informed that the legislation was passed. As Schiesnger mentioned, when this first came up, he suggested that they come to National City because National City would have a real interest in what activities would go on that property. He believed that the Board of Port Commissioners would also be very interested and like to know about that property, in fact he used the analogy that if the Navy is planning to store LCVP's and involve dangers, they probably wouldn't have a very good chance of success with the Board or anybody else. But if they're going to do something with some employment producing activity that will stimulate commercial traffic and activity there, that they would probably be more inclined to think that would be good for everybody than just a dry storage area. He would be very interested to work with the Navy and keep the Council Book 71/Page 30 1 /30/89 informed at frequent intervals. As he understands the most pressing interest is to try to get some kind of a place for their contractor to work and for some kind of support area for the new Naval activity to come. He believes that the position of the Port would be that they would want to hear what the Navy proposes by way of an exchange and what activities the Navy plans to carry out on the property. Della inquired if that meant that it was possible for the City and the Navy to be working on this issue and in parallel, the Port and the Navy could be working out another arrangement or what? Nay said he didn't think the Board of Port Commissioners would not be likely to try to do something with land in a particular City which would be repugnant to the Officials of that City. He believes that anything the Navy might work out with respect to an exchange, the Port could certainly keep the City informed as well as any activity on the property was going to be. If the Board of Port Commissioners was going to swap land with the Navy, this is a discretionary language decision which would require an Environmental Assessment under the Califomia Environmental Quality Act Before they could make any final decision on granting a lease to the Navy they would have to go through all of this. This really is going to be a desire that everyone be kept fully informed. Dalla said he wasn't concemed about being informed. He was trying to find out if the Navy and the Port in his view were going to be pursuing this independently on their own, at the same time the City and the Navy are pursuing it. Nay said as he mentioned earlier, he has no direction from the Board of Port Commissioners yet to negotiate with the Navy. But if the Navy calls and says they want to get together and talk about potential things that could be presented to the Board with respects to what land could be swapped for what, he certainly will have a meeting with them. The last communication they got from San Bruno was why haven't you told us what property you want in San Diego and in view of what limited amount of property is available, he hasn't gotten any list together. He will certainly keep anyone the City desires to be informed. Della inquired if Nay suggests the City approach the Board formally and ask for something more specific in the way of how the Port District will proceed on this particular item. Nay said he was sure the Board would understand this and put it on the record. Waters said the Congressman had to leave for another meeting and thanked him for coming as well as Don Nay from the Port District ADJOURNMENT Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Pruitt, the meeting be adjourned to the next regular meeting, Tuesday, February 7, 1989 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Carried by unanimous vote. The meeting closed at 3:20 p.m. CITY CLERK The foregoing minutes were approved at the regular meeting of February 7, 1989. MAYOR CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CA ALL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED. YOU MAY LISTEN TO THE TAPES IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE_