Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-28-2004 City Council Minutes - MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2004 ****************************************************************** CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Magee at 5 :00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Finance Manager Magee, Information/Communications Manager Dennis, Parks & Open Space Manager Fazzio, Planning Manager Villa, Public Works Manager Payne, Recreation & Tourism Manager Fazzio, City Treasurer Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. CLOSED SESSION -- a. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Government Code Section 54956.8) (F:40.1)(X:114.13) Property: Lake Elsinore Campground and Day Use Facility Negotiating Parties: City of Lake Elsinore and Destination Resorts, LLC, a California limited liability company. Under Negotiation: price and terms of payment Page Two - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - b. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - City Clerk (Government Code Section 54957) (F:40.1)(X:42.1) City Attorney Leibold announced the Closed Session discussion items as listed above. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 5:01 p.m. The Closed Session discussion was completed at 6:10 p.m. RECONVENE IN PUBLIC SESSION Mayor Magee reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting in Public Session at 7:00 p.m. - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Planning Commission Chairman LaPere. INVOCATION - MOMENT OF SILENT PRAYER Mayor Magee led the meeting in a moment of silent prayer. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community - Page Three - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Fire Chief Gallegos, Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Finance Manager Magee, Information/Communications Manager Dennis, Parks & Open Space Manager Fazzio, Planning Manager Villa, Police Chief Fetherolf, Public Works Manager Payne, Recreation & Tourism Manager Fazzio, City Treasurer Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. PRESENTATIONS/CEREMONIALS Mayor Magee commented that he was grateful and honored to be serving as Mayor, but reminded everyone that City Council Meetings were the place for City business, not personal business. He requested that decorum and professionalism be exercised by all. A. Presentation - Eagle Scout Joshua DePalmer. (F:56.1) Mayor Magee called Joshua DePalmer forward for Presentation, noting that while the newspaper and media portray young people as troublemakers and problems, there are strong representatives such as Mr. DePalmer. He read and presented the Proclamation. Mr. DePalmer thanked the Mayor and City Council for this recognition and thanked those who assisted him in attaining this designation. B. Proclamation - Donna Lucas. (F:122.1) Mayor Magee called Donna Lucas forward for Presentation, noting her commitment to the community. He read and presented the Proclamation. Ms. Lucas thanked the Mayor and City Council for this recognition and commented that she loves being part of Lake Elsinore. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Leibold reported that the City Council met in Closed Session, for Page Four - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - discussion of the items as listed on the agenda, with no reportable action. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS - 1 MINUTE George Alongi indicated that he was present regarding the Stadium and the potential selling of it. He advised that he agrees with Councilman Hickman that the City paid a tremendous amount of money for it and the services have not been returned to the community. He suggested that with the big boxes coming to town, there was an opportunity to do so. He encouraged the Council to keep the Stadium and not sell it. He stressed that this was the time to do what was right. Frank Kaimer, 18281 Gaffey Drive, noted that he left the Council messages in the middle of the night. He indicated that he lives within 300 to 400 feet of the Costco site, and can not sleep. He commented that he did not know where it went wrong or what the limits were, but he had tried to work it out reasonably to no avail. He indicated that he has a local trucking business, but can't drive after not _ sleeping. He questioned what he was to do, and stressed the impacts on his business. Mayor Magee suggested that he meet with Community Development Director Brady to discuss the conditions on the project; or contact himself after the meeting or by phone tomorrow. Howard Steinbacher,28925 Red Gum, noted that this was the second time he was here on the Costco site. He commented that staff was going to insist that back up alarms would be changed to strobes, but indicated that the noises were now worse, and it sounded like army maneuvers. He indicated that his point was that if the Council lived there and were awakened as he was, they would not like it. He questioned why he was being subject to the noise. He commented that he was hoping the strobes would be the solution; and noted that he guessed one would have to be there to understand the concerns. Mayor Magee also referred Mr. Steinbacher to Mr. Brady or himself to discuss the concerns. Wesley Kaimer, 18281 Gaffey Drive, noted that his neighbor came to the last meeting and was promised strobe lights. He indicated that his bedroom window is near the construction and stressed the level of noise. He commented that they had - Page Five - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 been contacting Councilman Buckley and nothing had been done. He indicated that he was trying to sleep and go to school in the morning, but the noise was having an impact on his sleep and his ability to study. Mayor Magee made him the same offer for discussion with Mr. Brady or himself. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES Requests were received to address the following items and deferred to those discussions: Item Nos. 36, 37 and 38. CONSENT CALENDAR MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. 1. The following Minutes were approved: A. Special City Council Meeting - November 3,2004. B. Regular City Council Meeting - November 23,2004. C. Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency Study Session - November 23,2004. (F:44.4) 2. Adopted Resolution of Intention to Establish Community Facilities District No. 2004-3 (Rosetta Canyon) and Incur Bonded Indebtedness - Resolution Nos. 2004-76 and 2004-77. (F:22.3) RESOLUTION NO. 2004-76 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS IN THE AMOUNT NOT EXCEED $23,000,000 AND $28,000,000 Page Six - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - WITHIN IMPROVEMENT AREA NO.1 AND IMPROVEMENT AREA NO.2, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE PROPOSED CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004- 3 (ROSETTA CANYON). RESOLUTION NO. 2004-77 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE TO ESTABLISH CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-3 (ROSETTA CANYON) AND DESIGNATING IMPROVEMENT AREAS WITHIN SAID COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT. 3. Adopted Resolution Initiating Proceedings and Approving the Engineer's Report for the Annexation of Certain Territory known as Tracts 25476, 25477,25478 and 25479 into the City of Lake Elsinore Landscape and - Street Lighting District No.1, as LLMD Annexation No.4, Declaring the City's Intention to Order the Annexation and to Levy and Collect Assessments, determining that these Proceedings shall be taken pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and the Right to Vote on Taxes Act, and Offering a Time and Place for Hearing Objections thereto. Resolution No. 2004-78. (F:22.2) RESOLUTION NO. 2004-78 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY KNOWN AS THE TRACTS 25476, 25477, 25478 AND 25479 INTO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.1, AS ANNEXATION NO.4 TO THE LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1, DECLARING THE CITY'S - Page Seven - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS, DETERMINING THAT THESE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT, AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO. PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Annual Adjustment of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) - Ordinance No. 1136. (F:140.l)(X:162.l) Mayor Magee opened the public hearing at 7: 15 p.m. Community Development Director Brady provided a brief background on the fee which is placed on new development, based on the trips associated with various types of uses. He explained that it was originally adopted in 2003, with the identical fees in the surrounding communities to reduce the impact of competition between communities. He indicated that it was used for widening freeways and arterial roads, and could also be used for freeway interchanges. He advised that the proposed fee adjustment was 8.8%, across all categories of development. He indicated that the ordinance would need to be adopted by the Council, and noted that it was being considered by all of the other cities in the program. Mayor Magee asked those persons interested in this item to speak. No members of the public spoke. Councilman Buckley inquired if Ruthanne Taylor from WRCOG would like to give a background on the increase and future increases. Ms. Taylor noted that the program had been in place for about 18 months, and when it was adopted the program was the largest program in the United States. She further noted that the Board had directed staff to do a comprehensive review in two years; and indicated that they were preparing for that review process. Page Eight - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - She indicated that one of the issues regarding the TUMF adjustment was the potential for an automatic escalator, but the decision was made that it should be looked at periodically. She commented that the cost of building infrastructure was increasing significantly, but they had tried to normalize the costs and keep the program whole. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner inquired if there was any legal obligation to make this adjustment. Ms. Taylor deferred to the City Attorney. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the program as adopted committed the City to participate in the program and carry out the adjustments recommended by WRCOG. She clarified that there was some obligation to keep pace with the WRCOG recommendations, and the alternative was to back out of the program. City Treasurer Weber questioned how much money the City put into the program last year. Ms. Taylor indicated that it was about $1.4 million. City Treasurer Weber inquired how much was spent. Ms. Taylor indicated that there was about $20,300,000 allocated for this zone, in addition to the money RCTC had awarded for Railroad Canyon. Mayor Magee noted that it was about $13.5 million. City Treasurer Weber inquired how much the City got last year. Ms. Taylor indicated that no dollars had been received yet. She explained that zone committee members met to develop the . program and did a five year program and it went in December for adoption. She indicated that the City would immediately start seeing dollars come back to the community, when the contracts are entered. - Councilwoman Kelley commented that she was a reluctant participant in the beginning, because the improvements initially proposed for the area were very few in comparison to other areas, but she went along with it. She noted that this year's increase was 8.8% and in 2006, the retail fee would be $8.51 per square foot. She suggested a possible scenario for a small business of about $17,000, and expressed concern with the toll it would take on small business owners. She indicated that she would be voting no on this item. - Page Nine - City Council Minutes - December 9,2004 Councilman Buckley noted the dollars spent last year, and suggested that if it was stable over the next five years it would generate $8 million, and the City would see $33 million coming back. Ms. Taylor noted that they were having Dr. Husing doing a second study on non-residential and how it would impact competitiveness. She indicated that his main concern with the TUMF was in the office section. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner noted that the increase in retail-commercial was not only the 8.8%, but a pre-determined phasing in of the fees. Ms. Taylor confirmed. Councilman Hickman asked about the chance of agreeing to the increases until June, 2006, and then coming back to reconsider the issue. City Attorney Leibold indicated that was possible, but WRCOG had requested that participating members adopt the fee schedule as proposed. She indicated that she was not sure how they would respond to such a proposal for adoption. Mayor Magee suggested that Councilman Buckley provide input on that issue. Councilman Buckley indicated that WRCOG had decided that in late spring or early summer the Executive Committee would look at that issue, and discuss how often to come back for discussion of increases in the fees. He suggested if they were increased every three years it might be a little behind the curve, but the matter would be considered by WRCOG He indicated that his idea was to do the increase based on a major review every three years. Ms. Taylor noted that staff anticipated doing a comprehensive review every five years; and while the WRCOG Board does not have to adopt the proposed adjustments, staff would bring them for reviews. She noted that they were in hopes that the fees would ultimately come back down. She indicated that the Board did not want to continually have a public hearing process, every year. Councilwoman Kelley noted articles in the newspaper, noting the shortages of funds due to the waivers for the developers. She questioned when they might be coming back to the cities to make up that shortfall. Ms. Taylor indicated that they had done a revenue projection, when the Board said the Page Ten - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - line in the sand was June, 2003. She noted that development agreements were in place before that time, but did not necessarily signify a waiver. She indicated that staff had gone back, but had not seen any indicated after that date. She advised that they had done a review of the conditions that would offset the shortfall such as major infrastructure improvements in place of the TUMF. She explained that they were looking at the existing agreements to determine how much infrastructure will be provided to help close the gap. She noted that the program started with a gap. Councilwoman Kelley suggested that at some point in time, it would not be feasible to fill the gap. City Attorney Leibold noted that WRCOG anticipates a periodic review, and suggested that the Council could concede to increases to 2006, which would be compliant; then in 2006, they could either adopt the fee or opt out of the program, and not be out of compliance until that time. Councilman Hickman noted that retail commercial fees continue to increase _ through 2006, and expressed concern with the figures. He suggested that it looked like it would be putting retail development out of business. Ms. Taylor noted that the original fee structure was proposed by the commercial industry, and indicated that they had not heard anything to the contrary. She noted that this fee schedule had been out on the street for a long time and no one had said that it was unattainable. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner noted that in general he doesn't necessarily approve of the costs being imposed on the businesses or builders, but the purpose was to provide infrastructure and take care of the load on the highway system imposed by the construction. He commented that all of the WRCOG cities bought into the program, and he had to support the program due to the stated purpose of providing the infrastructure. He stressed that this was the way the roads were paid for. City Treasurer Weber questioned how much was collected for the TUMF. Ms. Taylor indicated that $98.2 million was collected, but clarified that the money was divided into a couple of pots. She explained that RCTC _ Page Eleven - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 received 48% of the money, which they had spent fairly quickly. She indicated that WRCOG had allocated the dollars through the five year program and the programs would be seen in the next 12 months. Councilman Buckley noted that none of the commercial business people had attended the WRCOG meetings, and reiterated that it was their idea to phase the fees in over three years. He suggested that how it was assessed in the future was that it would be done regularly through the end of the program. He noted that the $98 million was ahead of the projections. Ms. Taylor confirmed that the $98 million was way ahead of the projections for the first 18 months. Councilman Buckley commented that the 8.8% increase was from the national construction cost figures. Mayor Magee closed the public hearing at 7 :40 p.m. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1136, UPON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY: ORDINANCE NO. 1136 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM AND ADDING CHAPTER 16.83 TO THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: KELLEY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Page Twelve - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE BUSINESS ITEMS 31. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1134 - Annexation No. 71 (LusterlMerritt). (F:20.3) City Manager Watenpaugh noted that this Annexation was located near the Rosetta Canyon Development. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY BUCKLEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1134, UPON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY: ORDINANCE NO. 1134 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE - ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE (PRE- ZONE) NO. 2004-04 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN (S) 349-400- 005,349-430-011 & 012 AND A PORTION OF 349-430-006 TO R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE SUBJECT TO COMPLETION OF ANNEXATION NO. 71. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE - Page Thirteen - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 32. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1135 - Amending Chapter 8.32 of the LEMC regarding Weed and Rubbish Abatement. (F: 166.1) City Manager Watenpaugh noted the need for a correction to the ordinance regarding lot sizes. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the reference had been deleted. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1135, UPON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY: ORDINANCE NO. 1135 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.32 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 33. Term of Office for Public Safety Advisory Commissioners - Ordinance No. 1137. (F:59.6) Page Fourteen - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - City Manager Watenpaugh noted that based on a review of the Ordinance and Minutes staffhad picked up an error. He indicated that it was staff's understanding that the commissioners would have two year terms; but there had been discussion that the Chairmanship and Vice-Chairmanship would be one year terms. He explained that in codifying the actions, the term of office was shown as ending in December, 2004, so staff had corrected it to have the Chair and Vice-Chair run through December, but the terms would be complete in June, 2005. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY BUCKLEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1137, UPON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY: ORDINANCE NO. 1137 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CORRECTING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SECTION - 2.46 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMISSION. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, MAGEE NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 34. Annual Financial Reports. (F:24.1 )(X:30.1) Administrative Services Director Pressey noted that this package included a - Page Fifteen - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 variety of reports, the most significant being the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. He indicated that a representative of the Auditors was present at this meeting to comment on the report. He highlighted the report, noting that the biggest item was the City's bottom line being the Total Net Assets of$33,840,021. He noted that in addition, the change in assets was an increase of $2.4 million, due to increases in general revenues. He advised that the general fund unallocated fund balance was $5.1 million and there was a net decrease of $1.7 million to the debt service, with $2.9 million being paid during the year. He advised that in the general fund, there was a shortfall of revenues and expenditures of about $900,000, which was partly anticipated, but the expenditures were about $1 million under budget. He indicated that overall the City was better off than anticipated. He advised that intergovernmental revenues took away a portion, which would come back in 2006-07. He indicated that the second largest decrease was in the area of investment earnings, and noted that staff was looking for better earnings in the future. He noted that other taxes did increase, and overall revenues were increased by $300,000. He further noted that general governmental expenditures decreased for operations of the City. He advised that Public Safety increased by $1.1 million, and there were also increases to Community Development and Capital Outlays. He noted that the unallocated revenue at mid-year last year was projected at $1.8 million, but after the audit was complete it was $2.2 million. Administrative Services Director Pressey advised that Redevelopment Project Areas 1 and 2 were doing well, but the cap in area 1 still needed to be raised. He indicated that the debt service was covered and all other activity needs were met. He advised that Project Area 3 was the troubled area and it almost broke even. He suggested that it would be in the black next year. Councilman Hickman questioned the money in the Redevelopment Agency fund. Mr. Pressey indicated that the Fund balances were on pages 2 and 3, but for the year there was a net change in assets of $2 million to the good. He advised that the current perspective was on page 7. Councilman Hickman questioned how much the Agency had to work with. Mr. Pressey indicated it was still a tricky question. He Page Sixteen -City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - noted the factors which needed to be included before it could be calculated. Councilman Hickman indicated that he was under the assumption that the Agency had about $150,000 last year in the banle Mr. Pressey indicated that there were funds available, but he did not have the grand total. Richard Teaman, Auditor, indicated that once again, the staff was well prepared for the audit, and this completed the second year of the GASBY 34 requirements. He noted that last year the presentation looked a little different, but this year was similar. He indicated that he would expect that the City would get the CMSFO Award in financial reporting. He noted that the City had submitted and received the award in the past. He explained that there were many different types of audits, including financial, fraud, etc.; and clarified that this was a financial statement as required by State law. He indicated that as a result of this year's audit the City had a clean or unqualified opinion on all four agencies. He noted that it was the highest level that could be rendered. He indicated that as far as the other reports on _ internal controls, there were no findings or issues to be noted, and there were no management letter issues. City Treasurer Weber questioned the September 23, 1999, audit done by Mr. Teaman's firm for the 1995-99 City operations; and a comment, in that report, that the City might be overextending itself. He inquired if the City was in the same situation as in 1999. Mr. Team indicated that it was not in the same situation, and clarified that the refinancings had relieved the higher interest rates. He also clarified that the funding mechanism used then was no longer taking place. He commented that as indicated by Mr. Pressey, the City's financial position was much stronger now than it was in the past. He indicated that because the City was in difficult times, they were coming up with creative ways to finance things. City Treasurer Weber questioned the interest income plan, and when it would be ready. Mr. Pressey indicated that it was his goal to have it ready by the first quarter of the new year. City Treasurer Weber questioned the potential gains. Mr. Pressey indicated that it would gain about $260,000. - Page Seventeen - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 Mayor Magee noted that Councilman Buckley was absent for this vote. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 0 WITH BUCKLEY ABSENT TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 35. Commercial Design Review No. 2004-07 for Mission Trail Medical Plaza. (F:58.2) Community Development Director Brady noted the project and detailed the location, which was the last vacant parcel in the area. He noted that the proposed project was four buildings as noted on the site plan. He indicated that they would be providing adequate parking and had received the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval. Mayor Magee inquired if they had tenants lined up for the building. Community Development Director Brady indicated that they had no specific tenants at this time. Mayor Magee questioned the timing for construction. Community Development Director Brady indicated that he was not certain, but he believed they would like to get underway in light of the upcoming increases in TUMF fees. Councilman Buckley questioned the rental rates. Community Development Director Brady indicated that he was not certain. Councilman Buckley questioned the egress and if it will be right turn only. Community Development Director Brady indicated that there was an allowance for right and left turns, as the only access is from Mission Trail. He noted that there grade to the rear of the site was too extreme to allow for access. Councilman Buckley expressed concern based on the Sav-on site. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY HICKMAN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 2004-07 FOR FOUR DETACHED 2-STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS AT 31182 MISSION TRAIL, BASED ON THE EXHIBITS AND FINDINGS, AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS Page Eighteen - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 OF APPROVAL. Findings 1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. The proposed Commercial Design Review located within Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-016 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this medical office complex will assist in achieving the development of a well-balanced andfunctional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses, diversifying Lake Elsinore's economic base. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-016 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the medical office complex known as the "Mission Trail Medical Plaza" has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby creating interest and varying vistas as a person moves along the street. Further the project as proposed will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects in that the architectural design, color and materials and site design proposed evidence a concern for quality and originality. 3. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-016, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and Agencies, will not have a significant effect on the environment pursuant to attached Conditions of Approval. 4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Section 17.82.070 (Action of the Planning Commission) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number 363-172-016has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - - - Page Nineteen - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 GENERAL 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the subject project known as Best Western Hotel located at 363-172-016, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 2. The Design Review approval located at Assessor Parcel No. 363-172-016 shall lapse and become void one (1) year following the date on which the Design Review became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit related to the Design Review is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion. The Design Review granted herein shall run with the land for this one (1) year period and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership ofthe site. 3. Prior to the certificate of occupancy of the first building, the entire site parking lot, entry driveways, perimeter and intemallandscaping shall be completed as indicated on the approved plans attached hereto. 4. Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans submitted to the Building Division Plan Check. All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 5. All site improvements approved with this request shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations. Revisions to approved site plans or building elevations shall be subject to the review of the Community Development Director. All plans submitted for Building Division Plan Check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by Conditions of Approval, or the Planning Commission/City Council through subsequent action. 6. Any alteration or expansion of this Design Review approval shall be reviewed according to the provisions of Chapter 17.82 (Design Review) ofthe Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 7. All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Any material covering the roof equipment shall match the primary wall color. 8. All exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and directed on-site so as not to create glare onto neighboring property and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of the fixture. All light fixtures shall match the architectural style of the building. Page 1\venty - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - 9. Applicant shall meet ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements. 10. Trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standards as approved by the Community Development Director or Designee. 11. No exterior roof ladders shall be permitted. 12. All downspouts shall be concealed or architecturally screened and painted to match the exterior color of the building. 13. The Planning Division shall approve the location of any construction trailers utilized during construction. All construction trailers shall require a cash bond in the amount of $1,000.00 to be processed through the Planning Division. 14. Materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the Community Development Director or designee. 15. On-site surface drainage shall not cross sidewalks. 16. Parking stalls shall be double-striped with four-inch (4") lines two feet (2') apart. - 17. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, approved by the Planning Division. PRIOR TO BUILDING/GRADING PERMITS 18. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall pay the applicable Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fee recendy adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore. The fee shall be calculated as "Commercial-$5,620.00 per acre". (1.81 acres x $5,620.00 = $10,172.22) 19. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shall return the executed original to the Planning Division for inclusion in the case records. 20. Three (3) sets of the Final Landscaping/Irrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. A Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee plus forty percent (40%) City fee. a) All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100% plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. - Page Twenty-One - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 b) Applicant shall plant street trees selected from the City's Street Tree List, a maximum of forty feet (40') apart and at least twenty-four-inch (24") box in size. c) All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (6") high and six inch (6") wide concrete curb. d) Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than thirty-six inches (36"). e) Landscape planters shall be planted with an appropriate parking lot shade tree pursuant to the LEMC and Landscape Design Guidelines. f) Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan. g) The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering. h) All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two years from installation sign-off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be requested by the applicant at the end of the required two years with approval/acceptance by the Landscape Consultant and Community Development Director or Designee. i) All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building. All planting areas shall include plantings in the Xeriscape concept, drought tolerant grasses and plants. j) Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan. k) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. 21. Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Proof shall be presented to the Chief Building Official prior to issuance of building permits and final approval. 22. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid. Page Twenty-Two - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - 23. Prior to issuance of building penn its, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department have been met. 24. Prior to issuance of building penn its, applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fee in effect at time of building pennit issuance. ENGINEERING 25. The applicant shall dedicate right-of-way such that the centerline of Casino Drive measures fifty feet (50') from the project property line prior to the issuance of building pennit. 26. All set-backs measured from Casino Drive shall be required from the proposed property line located 50-feet from the centerline of Casino Drive. 27. Improvements to Casino Drive shall be made consistent with the interim width. Cash-in-lieu of construction shall be required for the balance of the right-of-way improvements including the pavement between existing and ultimate roadway width. 28. Access from the parking lot to Casino Drive shall not be allowed. 29. Project signage and landscaping shall be required to preserve sight distance for traffic access to the site. - 30. Show cross sections of the boundary conditions on the grading plans. One cross section for each side of the project. 31. All on site drainage shall be conveyed to public right-of-way 32. The applicant shall provide a minimum of forty (40) feet at the entrance where the area is free of parking, turning and drive aisle conflicts. 33. All signage and landscaping shall be placed so as not to interfere with driver's site distance. 34. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to final map approval. 35. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.52.030 (LEMC) and be consistent with the City's agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 36. All street improvements, including traffic signals, shall be installed and functioning prior to certificate of occupancy. - Page 1\venty- Three - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 37. The applicant shall pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85-26), mitigation fees, area drainage fee, traffic impact fee (TIF), encroachment permit fees and inspection fees associated with the project and its development. 38. The applicant shall submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Submit this letter prior to final map approval. 39. The applicant shall construct all public works improvements per approved street plans (LEMC 12.04). Plans must be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to final map approval (LEMC 16.34). 40. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). 41. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final map approval. 42. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 W' x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. 43. The applicant shall install two (2) permanent bench marks to Riverside County Standards and at a location to be determined by City Engineer. 44. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading or construction from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval. 45. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 46. The applicant shall provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by the Riverside County Fire Department. 47. The applicant shall provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street improvement plans as required by the City Engineer. 48. The applicant shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations. 49. The applicant shall submit a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All traffic control devices shall be installed prior to Page l\venty-Four - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - final inspection of public improvements. This includes No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets within the development. 50. All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized. At Certificate of Occupancy applicant shall submit tapes and/or disks which are compatible with City's ARC Info/GIS or developer to pay $300 per sheet for City digitizing. 51. All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving utility. 52. The applicant shall apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer shall be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can be conducted before grading begins. 53. The applicant shall provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 54. An Alquis-Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on-site. - 55. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 ft. in height shall be contoured. 56. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City with a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 57. The applicant shall provide to the City a photographic baseline record of the condition of all proposed public City haul roads. In the event of damage to such roads, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure payment of damages to the public right-of-way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 58. Individual lot drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility or accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement. 59. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way should be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating: "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions". - Page Twenty-Five - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 60. All natural drainage traversing site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 61. The applicant shall meet all requirements ofLEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations. 62. The applicant shall meet all requirements ofLEMC 15.68 regarding flood plain management. 63. The applicant shall submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer prior to approval of the building permit. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 64. All drainage facilities in this site shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 65. Storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegal dumping in the drain system, the wording and stencil shall be approved by the City Engineer. 66. 10-year storm runoff should be contained within the curb and the 100-year storm runoff should be contained with the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, drainage facilities should be installed. 67. A drainage acceptance letter will be necessary from the downstream property owners for outletting the proposed storm water run-off on private property. 68. The applicant shall be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any urban pollutants from entering the watershed. 69. The applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance responsibilities. 70. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 71. The applicant shall provide first flush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce storm water pollutants from parking areas and driveways. 72. Intersection site distance shall meet the design criteria of the CAL TRANS Design Manual (particular attention should be taken for intersections on the inside of curves). If site distance Page 1\venty-Six - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - can be obstructed, a special limited use easement must be recorded to limit the slope, type of landscaping and wall placement. 73. All parcels shall have direct access to public right-of-way or be provided with a minimum 30 ft ingress and egress easement to public right-of-way by through map recordation or separate instrument. 74. Existing access easements over property must be addressed to the satisfaction of the easement owners prior to issuance of building permit. 75. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal and recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R, Inc., for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 76. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall annex into the Lighting, and Landscape Maintenance District No. I to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison. - RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 77. The applicant shall comply with all Comments and/or Conditions of Approval from Riverside County Fire Department. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 78. The applicant shall pay park fees of $0.1 0 per square foot of interior space. 79. The applicant shall comply with City Ordinance 8.16.010 for the removal of all construction debris. Developer shall utilize CR&R for all recycling. 80. All drainage and/or flood control facilities to be maintained by developer. 81. The City Landscape Architect shall review all landscape plans. 82. All landscaping shall be maintained by the applicant. 36. Infrastructure Reimbursement Agreement - Lake Chevrolet. (F:68.1) - Page 1\venty-Seven - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 City Manager Watenpaugh explained that this was a request from Bob Gregory for expansion of his developments in the City and reimbursement for the public infrastructure. He noted the past agreement for reimbursement and indicated that in this case he was developing a new site of 9.73 acres for Lake Chevrolet and moving Pontiac, Buick and GMC into the existing site. He noted that the project would include traffic signalization, water/sewer, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc. He indicated that there was no final assessment engineer's report to verify the fees presented by Mr. Gregory, but suggested that the Council could approve the $2.4 million, subject to the assessment engineer's approval and review by the City Attorney. He indicated that staff did not support the payment of interest on the project. He noted that Mr. Gregory was not present for this meeting, but hoped to move forward with no delay. Councilman Buckley addressed page 7 of 29, section 4.02, item b, and indicated that the deal should be 50-50. He commented that with the Chevy and Ford dealerships the reimbursements were paid back early, however since the exact costs were not known and the applicant was not present; he suggested that the item be tabled. City Manager Watenpaugh commented that he might not be present due to the inclement weather. Councilman Hickman addressed item C and suggested elimination of "in excess of $25,000". City Attorney Leibold clarified that what was contemplated was that the City would received 100% up to $12,500, which equates to 50% of the first $25,000. She indicated that any sales tax over that would be split 50-50. She explained that this would give the City the advantage of the first sales taxes. George Alongi commented that this developer came to the City in 1993-94 and they were going to do a 10 acre development, so the City gave them $300,000 for off-site improvements. He noted that they then sold off a portion to Ford. He suggested that they had been given an opportunity to do business in the community and should now do it on their own. He suggested using sales tax dollars to put services back into the community. Page Twenty-Eight - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - He commented on mistakes with the theater and Walmart and stressed that it was time for businesses to do it on their own. He noted a business on Main Street that was built without asking for assistance, and stressed that assistance such as this would not be provided for small businesses, but big businesses get everything. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY KELLEY TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1.2 SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION OF COSTS BY THE ASSESSMENT ENGINEER, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY HICKMAN A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $900,000 SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION OF COSTS BY THE ASSESSMENT ENGINEER, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY. - Mayor Magee questioned the difference in numbers. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the smaller number did not include the additional item forwarded to the Engineer. He explained that the total number came in at four different times and were forwarded to the Engineer. He noted that he had requested $1.2 million, but those numbers had not been reviewed. He commented that he believed if the full approval was not granted, Mr. Gregory would be coming back to the Council. Councilwoman Kelley clarified that the motion by Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner was subject to the assessment engineer's final figures, so if it was less, the motion would cover the same thing as the motion by Councilman Buckley. City Manager Watenpaugh recommended verifying the costs with the Engineer and if they meet the requirements they would be covered. He clarified that cost that did not meet the requirements would be dropped. - Page Twenty-Nine - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 Councilman Hickman inquired if the infrastructure as proposed was different from the first time. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the first time it covered all of the public infrastructure, dry utilities and drainage which fell under the legal requirements. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner noted that on the previous developments the reimbursements were paid in less than three years. City Manager Watenpaugh confirmed and noted that there were less improvements the last time, but after the three years, the City received all of the sales taxes. Councilman Buckley noted that his motion was for $900,000 with no interest. City Attorney Leibold questioned the provisions of section 4.2. Councilman Buckley indicated that he would prefer a straight 50-50 arrangement, but it could remain as it was. THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2 TO 3 WITH MEMBERS KELLEY, SCHIFFNER AND MAGEE CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTES. THE ORIGINAL MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3 TO 2 WITH MEMBERS BUCKLEY AND HICKMAN CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTES. 37. Southwest Communities Joint Powers Authority Agreement - Animal Friends of the Valley. (F:68.1)(X:18.3) Community Development Director Sapp explained that this item was based on a four year discussion to fund a new animal shelter. He indicated that a Joint Powers Agreement had been developed and through the creation of the authority, they could issue bonds for construction of a shelter. He suggested approving the agreement and appointing a member of the Council to participate in the JPA. He noted the size and cost of the proposed facility and explained that the City would also continue in its existing agreement for animal control services and have to enter an agreement for sheltering of Page Thirty - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - animals. He commented that during the study session the Council requested options, and staff was working on options for presentation to Council prior to issuance of bonds. Carl Armbrust, 29876 Big Range Road, Member of the Canyon Lake City Council, indicated that he was present to recommend an affirmative vote on this item. He indicated that he felt it was beneficial for both communities. He noted that he also served on the board ofLESJWA and he would like to see the cities of Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore maintain a close working relationship on items of mutual interest. Mayor Magee noted that there was a study session on December 16th with considerable debate and discussion, with the biggest discussion being how to pay for it. City Treasurer Weber questioned page 30 of34, noting that of the five cities, - Lake Elsinore would be paying 28%, and Temecula would be paying half as much, with twice the population. He further noted that the City would also be paying fees. He suggested that the facility should be paid for by the number of persons, rather than the number of animals. He suggested the debt to Lake Elsinore should only be $250,000 a year, with Temecula and Murrieta paying more. He questioned the reasoning. Kris Anderson, representing Animal Friends of the Valley, indicated the numbers being discussed were based on the percentage of animals coming into the shelter and the housing space needed for each City and the County. She advised that other proposals for the JPA would be some deviation from past discussions. Mayor Magee noted that the recommendation was to join the JPA, with no alternative. He commented that Council had discussed the potential for joining without first determining how to pay for it and giving the representative direction to come back and report before any indebtedness is incurred. He noted that in the meantime, staff would come back with _ Page Thirty-One - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 options. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner noted that the only decision for this meeting was to form the JPA, while everyone realizes there are serious questions on the costs. He indicated that he fully expected that the information would be provided and if the City is not satisfied, it will drop out. Councilman Hickman noted that he had a math background and expressed concern with the cost of $31 per animal going to $175 per animal. He indicated that he was willing to join the JPA, if Tom Buckley was the representative, so he could stay close to Supervisor Buster. He noted that no one has evaluated the drawings yet. He commented that his feeling was that the City should join, but get out if the figures don't work out. Councilman Buckley commented that providing animal services was required by State law, but noted that it was a lot of money. He indicated that he had considered implementing an Animal Rescue Fee for the Capital side of the services. He noted that as Mayor he pointed out the need to see other options. He contrasted the cost for the City to provide the services, vs. joining the County which might cost less, but be less convenient. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO JOIN THE JPA AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO APPOINT A REPRESENTATIVE TO SIT ON THE JPA BOARD. Councilwoman Kelley commented that there was no doubt that there was a need for a shelter, but she was concerned with providing it to the exclusion of public services, public safety and public works. She noted the ultimate cost of the bonds and suggested that the Council's representative go to the JPA and make sure the Council's concerns are expressed, including the current construction costs of the facility, particularly since the plans are over a year old. She suggested that there should also be some effort made to look at phasing in of the building, so everything doesn't have to be done up front. She indicated that she heard from the City's financial person that Page Thirty-Two - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - the City could possibly handle this obligation four years down the road. She indicated that she also heard that it would be critical at this point and hurt public services. She indicated that other resources for the funds should be investigated to offset the costs, and the JPA should look at downsizing the facility. She stressed that these were all concerns that should be carried to the JPA for discussion. She commented that Murrieta and Temecula had joined the JPA with the same reservations, so it should be possible to come up with something more reasonable. Councilman Hickman suggested adding to the motion that Councilman Buckley be the representative and Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner be the alternate. THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. 38. Interim/Replacement City Manager. (F:46.1)(X:68.1) - City Manager Watenpaugh noted that this item was as discussed at the agenda review, with the Assistant City Manager being unavailable to fill the interim position. He commented that as discussed earlier, there were several options including an Interim from the League of California Cities, or appointing someone from within. He noted that the Council had suggested that Community Development Director Brady be elevated to the interim position, and suggested that could be effective January 15,2005 subject to Council action. He commented that the selection would be supported by Council, Staff and the Community, and would be the least expensive way to move forward. He noted that in the interim the sub-committee should meet and negotiate an agreement, not to exceed six months, so the scope of work can be established, the recruiter brought on and a new City Manager located. Ron LaPere, 16867 Wells, commented that as a member of the Planning Commission, he has had the opportunity to work with Community Development Director Brady for two years. He indicated that he could not think of any other staff member that would hold the highest request for - Page Thirty-Three - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 performance by staff. He suggested that there was no one superior for the position in his mind. Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest, addressed Mayor Magee and indicated that she was stunned by his dominating manner and one-sided appointment of an in-house staff member. She noted the recommendation that Mr. Brady should apply for the permanent City Manager position and suggested that the Mayor had his own agenda and could care less what was best for the citizens or the staff. She suggested that opinion would come back to haunt him. Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh, indicated that she would attempt to speak her Civil Rights under the Brown Act. She indicated that she was appalled at the recommendation to appoint the Community Development Director as the Interim City Manager; as he was involved with a staff member. Mayor Magee requested that she keep her comments professional in nature. Mrs. Stafford suggested that the Mayor did not care about integrity or morals or the staff. She also suggested that Mr. Brady had a temper and noted an incident with Mr. Stahovich. She questioned if this was best for the City, and indicated if he thought solving problems meant keeping issues covered up, he was wrong. She noted new stories reporting the truth and suggested that the reform the Mayor ran on, was what the citizens wanted. She suggested that he should let the truth be heard and stop worrying about embarrassing the City. She indicated that she had a right to speak on anything she disagreed with and would not accept the situation as it was. She stressed that citizens have rights and indicated that she would pursue hers. Mayor Magee noted that there were two issues to discuss, being how to search for a new City Manager, and the interim appointment of an Interim City Manager. He noted that City Manager Watenpaugh was retiring and Assistant City Manager Best was moving on to another position, and wished them well. He indicated that with respect to the search, he would like to request that staff bring a list of five or more recruitment firms for the Page Thirty-Four - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - western United States. He further indicated that he would encourage existing staff members to apply and suggested a committee of Councilmembers Buckley and Kelley to provide criteria for the search. He commented that for the interim position, he would like to recommend Community Development Director Brad~ and ask the City Attorney's office to draft an interim employment agreement for review by the City Council, and approval at the January 11 th meeting. He noted that the last day in the office for Ms. Best and Mr. Watenpaugh would be January 14th, so Mr. Brady's contract should take effect on January 15th. Councilman Buckley questioned the two separate discussions. Mayor Magee suggested the first one was easier regarding the search. Councilman Buckley commented that with regard to the search for the permanent City Manager, he was not necessarily sure it was necessary to spend the money for the recruiting firm, but it would simplify things. He suggested that it should be a very wide search with applicants from both the - private and public sectors. Councilman Buckley questioned the time line. Mayor Magee requested that candidates be in front of the Council in 60 to 90 days. Councilman Buckley commented that Mrs. Stafford was out of line. He addressed the process and noted that it would be no fewer than five candidates in 60 to 90 days from the time they are authorized to proceed. Councilman Hickman questioned if the applicants would come from the business sector vs. recycling a City Manager. Councilman Buckley concurred that was an important factor and the recruiter would have to do more than advertise in Western City Magazine. He stressed that it was important to be sure that possible candidates in the private sector were not missed; and indicated that would be key in selecting the recruiting firm. Councilwoman Kelley indicated that she thought a professional recruiter was needed, as they had access to more resources. She suggested that by limiting the time frame, it would limit the choices. She indicated that the City needed to select a recruiter, get their input and see the process unfold. She suggested that limiting the time frame would not do the process justice, and stressed the need to be diligent and take time to get what was wanted. _ Page Thirty-Five - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 She indicated she would be more comfortable with the process having no time limits. She suggested getting a recruiter and indicated that she would be happy to serve with Councilman Buckley to come up with the parameters for a new City Manager. Councilman Buckley indicated that there had to be a time limit; as there had to be some kind of certainty that was fair to the City, staff and Mr. Brady. He suggested that six months was more than enough time, overall. He commented on the potential time frame and suggested that the Council should be interviewing in April or May. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY MAGEE TO CREATE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKLEY AND KELLEY TO DRAFT PARAMETERS FOR THE NEW PERMANENT CITY MANAGER AND DIRECT STAFF TO BRING FOUR OR FIVE RECRUITMENT FIRMS TO BE INTERVIEWED BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE, AFTER THAT WITHIN 60 TO 90 DAYS THE RECRUITER SHALL PRESENT THE COUNCIL WITH A SHORT LIST OF 3 TO 5 CANDIDATES FOR THE COUNCIL TO INTERVIEW. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY KELLEY A SUBSIDIARY MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BRADY TO CITY MANAGER ON A PERMANENT BASIS AND PROCEED TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT TO BE BROUGHT BACK FOR APPROVAL. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner commented that Community Development Director Brady had the confidence of the majority of the Council and he would also have the confidence and respect of the staff, the business community and the development community. He suggested that this would create additional trust between the Council and staff, and there was no reason to subject him to a contest with an outsider for the position. He indicated that Mr. Brady held the institutional knowledge, was a present resident and property owner and had a personal interest in the future of the Page Thirty-Six - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - City. He suggested that such an appointment might be the only action that would heal the serious divisions that had taken place. He asked the Council to put aside personal agendas and think about the good of the City. Councilman Buckley addressed the substitute motion, and indicated that a search was necessary. He indicated that it was nothing personal, but if everyone was really honest, they would say they knew someone else who could do a better job. He commented that the point was to be sure that the best possible person was found. THE FOREGOING SUBSIDIARY MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE TO 2 TO 3 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKLEY, HICKMAN AND MAGEE CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTES. THE FOREGOING ORIGINAL MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. - Councilman Buckley addressed the Interim position and noted that Assistant City Manager Best was leaving the City. He questioned her benefits. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that she would be paid for any accruals on the books. Councilman Buckley indicated that to be honest he was concerned about the process in which the Council found out about the departure of Ms. Best. He also noted that in that case a Councilmember provided a reference; and suggested a policy in the future to prevent giving references. He indicated that as for Mr. Brady, for six months he would be happy to make the motion. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY MAGEE TO APPOINT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BRADY AS INTERIM CITY MANAGER FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS. Mayor Magee noted that the motion would include the drafting of an interim agreement for the January 11 th meeting. - Page Thirty-Seven - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 8:58 P.M. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 9:02 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh, requested that the Councilmembers read the Brown Act, noting that the Council could not say anything derogatory or call names. She clarified that a citizen could call a name or say anything pertaining to City business. She indicated that citizens had a right to speak for or against a grievance. She stressed that those were her civil rights, which could not be taken away from her. She indicated that if she had an opinion, she would pursue it; and if she disagreed with something she would speak against it. She indicated that if the Council thought it was unprofessional to speak on morals, she thought it was professional. She indicated that she likes straight forward morals and principles. She noted comments about Costco coming to town, but noted that they would be getting $9 million, while the streets were suffering. She indicated that she sees more than people think she sees. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Watenpaugh commented on the following: 1) Indicated that in regard to Mrs. Stafford's comments, Murrieta and Temecula give thousands of dollars to their development community. 2) Offered congratulations to Mr. Brady and Ms. Best on their new jobs. 3) Wished the City Council the best in the future, and noted that they had done a nice job on a tough meeting. Page Thirty-Eight - City Council Minutes - December 28,2004 - CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS City Attorney Leibold commented on the following: 1) Expressed hopes that everyone had a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. 2) Offered congratulations to Mr. Brady and Ms. Best. COMMITTEE REPORTS No Reports. CITY TREASURER COMMENTS City Treasurer Weber commented on the following: - 1) Addressed job references, and expressed concerns that at his work he can be legally responsible if he says something that is not true and they employ the person based on the reference. He suggested that there needed to be something in place that references are not provided for employees or made by employees. He suggested that all such requests should go to Human Resources, and even they should not say they were a good or bad worker. He noted that he worked for three companies since he left the air force; and inquired of the City Attorney if the City was legally bound by references. City Attorney Leibold indicated she did not believe the City was legally bound, and indicated that private industry adopts different policies. She expressed hopes that through the City Manager recruitment, people are able to provide references, but indicated that she could pursue the matter and evaluate a policy. - Page Thirty-Nine - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilwoman Kelley commented on the following: 1) Congratulated Mr. Brady and Ms. Best, noting that she did provide a reference, which was within her rights and a pleasure to do. She expressed hopes that when the City seeks a City Manager, the Council members would contact the employers and ask for references. She indicated that she had been to several seminars on recruiting managers and all are asking for reference. She congratulated Assistant City Manager Best and noted that she had worked with her for nine years and she had done a great job, but had been underestimated. She indicated that she would miss her. 2) Wished everyone a Happy New Year. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner commented on the following: 1) Indicated that he would miss Assistant City Manager Best a great deal, as she had been a very valuable asset to the City. He indicated that he believed the circumstances that caused her to leave were due to very unfair treatment and he apologized for that treatment. 2) Congratulated Mr. Brady, noting he would have liked to congratulate him more. He noted that he did not think his motion would pass, but felt it would help to heal the problems in Lake Elsinore. He commented that he believed his comments were true, and noted that he hoped his expectations of difficulties would not materialize. He indicated that there had been great mistakes in the past few weeks, and he hoped they did not come back to bite. Councilman Hickman commented on the following: 1) Informed the Community that Larry Cartier had a reaction to his Page Forty - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 - medicine and was now in a convalescent home at 2225 N. Perris Blvd., Perris, CA; and encouraged correspondence with him. 2) Requested a list of top ten items City Manager Watenpaugh and Assistant City Manager Best were working on. 3) Wished everyone a Happy New Year. Councilman Buckley commented on the following: 1) Indicated that as a former reporter he was enamored with freedom of the press and freedom of speech, but noted that there were also responsibilities of commenting publicly. He noted that there was a difference and a different legal standard for public actions and private lives. He indicated that as for references, he has no problems giving references, if contacted. He also concurred that he would hope the future City Manager candidate would have references. He suggested that there should be a sense of professional courtesy to tell the other Councilmembers that they have given a reference. He suggested that a bad reference was limited .to dates of employment. - 2) Addressed the Costco project, noting that Mr. Heimer would be calling tomorrow about the strobe lights and questioning why they are only working at night. He noted the concern with school traffic, but questioned why not weekend days. He indicated that in the future the City would have to be far more careful, and noted that he was receiving calls from people in the downtown area as well. 3) Addressed the Lake Chevrolet project, and noted that only one vote was possible with the information available. He indicated that he would have liked to have had a representative present to explain what they will spend the money on. 4) Wished everyone a Happy New Year. - Page Forty-One - City Council Minutes - December 28, 2004 Mayor Magee commented on the following: 1) Indicated that he had a request from staff for a study session on Council policies on January 13th at 5 p.m. He questioned the Council's availability and the consensus was that it was okay to schedule. 2) Announced the upcoming 56th Annual Chamber of Commerce Installation Dinner and Awards Night on January 22nd at the Diamond Stadium Club, noting that it was a black tie affair. 3) Looked forward to a smooth transition and a prosperous new year. ADJOURNMENT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:15 P.M. ST: -b A"" -"o_".- _Li tit . · . .-: J~~I MSAD; CMC, CITY CLERK! HUl\.J:A:N.RESOURCES DIRECTOR