Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-12-2000 City Council/RDA Study SessionMINUTES CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2000 ........................................................................, CALL TO ORDER Mayor Brinley called the City Council Study Session to Order at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRE5ENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, BRINLEY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: METZE, PAPE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Community Development Director Brady, Inforxnation/Communications Manager Dennis and Deputy City Clerk Bryning. DISCUSSION 1. A~enda Review. Invocation Mayor Brinley noted that Bishop Brad Fife of the Church of Latter Day Saints of Jesus Christ would present the invocation. Consent Calendar Councilwoman Kelley questioned Item No. 4, which addresses a Claim Against the City. She commented that she did not understand why the Claim was filed against the City since the incident did not occur within City Limits. City Attorney Leibold explained that people file claims and lawsuits whether the incident occurred within the City or not. Councilman Schiffner stated that he would be pulling Item No. 6, regarding the Award of Contract for Tuscany Hills Landscaping and ~ Lighting Project for public information only. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that Councilman Pape would pull Item No. 8, regarding the Waiver of Fees for the Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce. PAGE TWO - STUDY SESSION - DECEMBER 12, 2000 Public Hearing City Manager Watenpaugh noted that it had been requested to pull Item No. 21 from the Agenda and now the applicant wishes it to move forward. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the applicant wishes to have Cottonwood Hills Road changed to Canyon Hills Road. Business Items Councilwoman Kelley addressed Item No. 31, regarding the Auto Citation Program and questioned the number of citations that will be issued since the report shows that it would increase 35% initially. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that one of the problems that the City had experienced was the Code Enforcement citing after the street sweeper is gone because it takes so long for the Code Enforcement to write all the information on the ticket. He further explained that some of the cars were on the street and some were not when the sweeper went by. He noted that it was the intent of Council to cite those cars that were left in the street when the sweeper goes through and the proposed method will facilitate that action. City Attorney Leibold stated that she was suggesting two minor additions as follows: Section 1.6 Contested Citations, at the end of the section add "in accordance with applicable law of the Agency, which is defined as City of Lake Elsinore in the State of California; and Section 6.6 - Bonding and Other Fees, should read "Any fees for Performance or Fidelity Bonds, or Errors and Omissions Insurance coverage required by the Agency and....". She noted that if the City wishes to require additional insurance, the clarification is necessary. She clarified the Recommendation in the Staff Report and asked that Council strike item #3. Councilwoman Kelley addressed the Item No. 32, addressing Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), and indicated her fiustration with the MSHCP. She stated that they were supposed to bring more information back to Council and they have failed to do so. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that Councilman Schiffner as ', Council representative, himself, Community Development Director Brady recently attended a Meeting with MSHCP. He indicated that a number of issues were addressed and the membership selected Alternate 1, subject to answering questions from the membership. He explained that Alternate 1 represents 8,500 to 10,003 acres of land ' from the City of Lake Elsinore and represents 27% to 29% of the total City contributions for land; Beaumont's requirement would be 8,600 to 10,005 acres; Temecual's requirement would be 500 to 600 acres. He further noted that the City of Murrieta does not participate, however they have been levied with the same amount of acreage as Lake Elsinore. He detailed the questions that the membership has regarding the Mitigation plan. He explained that the PAGE THREE - STUDY SESSION - DEC. 12, 2000 purpose of bringing the item forward was because the City of Hemet has adopted an interim Mitigation Fee and Temecula will be adopting an interim Mitigation Fee at their next meeting. Councilwoman Kelley stated that she understood that a complete study was never done for Habitat Conservation and what has occurred was as each independent developer comes on line, the EIR's are examined and then the County identifies the endangered species on their project and then designates the amount of land that the developer must contribute. Councilman Schiffner indicated that the basic idea was to develop a plan that Fish and Wildlife would accept however DUDAC from the County of Riverside created a broad band to address the issue. Mayor Brinley noted that the County was told in October that the City ; was not happy with the situation, since they have not returned with information that Council asked for. Councilman Schiffner stated that they do not have the information that the City requested. He noted that at the Habitat Meeting, what the County was looking for was a consensus of which alternate to move forward with. He indicated that at the MSHCP Meeting he made it clear it did not make any difference which alternate was seiected because all the choices were ' devastating to the City of Lake Elsinore. He suggested that they might as well move ahead with Alternate l, however under no conditions was the City acknowledging that they would accept or ' become party to the end result. He noted that no one at the meeting stated their consent to the plan. There was general discussion in regard to how Fish and Wildlife could set the requirements. City Attorney Leibold stated that the Habitat Land Acquisition amount was unrealistic and felt the amount was too low. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that the reason Fish and Wildlife like the City of Lake Elsinore is because of the large Specific Plans. He indicated that it allows Fish and Wildlife to negotiate with just one person at a time to dedicate land. Mayor Brinley asked how the Habitat Plan would affect the Murdock area. City Manager Watenpaugh stated he was not sure, however if the MSHCP were considered as it was presented, it would wipe out Ramsgate, Alberhill, Liberty and Northpeak. He indicated that the e~sting Development Agreements entitle 15,065 units in their developments, which would result in a loss to the City of sales and property tax in the amount of $14.5 million dollars annually, plus $45 million dollars in one-time developer fees. Mayor Brinley asked what PAGE FOUR - STUDY SESSION - DEC. 12, 2000 made Lake Elsinore the target. City Manager Watenpaugh e~lained that the City of Lake Elsinore was the last to develop and noted that amount of open space that the City has. He further explained that other cities, such as the City of Orange and Los Angeles, did not set aside open space for endangered species. The City of Lake Elsinore was being placed in the position of providing the areas of Orange and Los Angeles, with land that they did not dedicate. Councilman Schiffner stated that Western Riverside County is being asked to add to the new homes the cost of saving for national posterity, certain species. He noted that it was a Federal program and the species happen to be in our County, so they wantus to pay for it. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that only new residents would pay for the program. City Attorney Leibold stated that there was no mechanism to collect on existing homes. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that all staff was asking Council to do was to encourage Riverside County to evaluate a more equitable program; evaluate the economic impacts on the cities; and present a more finite program. He noted that there are already homes in some of the 10,000 acres. Mayor Brinley asked if the meetings were open to the public and if they were did Ramsgate, Alberhill and Eastlake receive notification. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that the meetings were open to the public and that the developers know about the meetings, however they were not in attendance. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that the City has concerns and needs answers to the questions that were e~ressed earlier. He indicated that the City may not participate and it might be more beneficial to the City not to participate, but rather negotiate for ourselves. Councilman Schiffner noted that at time of development there is a real possibility that there would be no endangered species at all. He presented an overview of how a decision is made to declare a habitat. There was general discussion regarding the program. Council expressed real concern. Mayor Brinley suggested that the City work with the City of Murrieta to address our concerns. Mayor Brinley addressed Item No. 33, Southwest Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program and asked how the fee was figured. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that it was through the TUMF Fee. He explained that Riverside County had developed a PAGE FIVE - STUDY SESSION - DEC. 12, 2000 plan for infrastructure for Southwest Riverside County. He detailed the projects that would be addressed. He stated that the request is for $10,000 to assist in payment of an environmental document. He stated that staff recommends the City continue to participate in the Technical Committee and Policy Committee and complete the City's street improvement fee study prior to the adoption of a regional TLTMF. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that staff needs direction from Council. Councilwoman Kelley stated that the Council has been informed of the City's concern regarding the amount of the TUMF fee; the priority of the projects. She noted that the City of Murrieta feels that they could collect their own TUMF fee and accomplish quite a bit more than the County could. Mayor Brinley asked if the City was considering that action. Councilwoman Kelley stated that was why the City was doing a study. There was general discussion regarding the cost of projects done by the County versus the cost if the City did the same projects. Community Development Director Brady detailed the various projects that need to be done and noted the amount that the County has suggested for each house in TLTMP fees. Mayor Brinley asked if the City, after the study, found that it would be more feasible to do our own program would the City be able to ' apply for the same grants. City Manager Watenpaugh explained the grant procedure and stated that the City would be eligible to apply for grants. Councilwoman Kelley noted it was her understanding that for cities that did not join a program, there would be a slow down on consideration of their grant applications. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that Mr. Haley indicated that there would probably be an incentive for cities that participated in a regional fee to get their projects funded through RCTC State Funds. MayorBrinley asked what the incentive would be. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that it had not been determined. He explained that staff was requesting Council to allow them to continue to sit at the table, and when the City has put our fee in place, then an evaluation can be made to determine if Lake Elsinore needs or wants to participate. Mayor Brinley addressed Item No. 34, regarding CETAP's request for additional funding. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that this was a request for additional funding for studies that proved to be more expensive than anticipated. He noted that they are asking each one of the cities to play $1 per capita spread over a two-year period. Mayor Brinley asked how far CETAP was into the program. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that CETAP had originally completed what had been previously funded, expanded on the plan and now PAGE SIX - STUDY SESSION - DEC. 12, 2000 , needed to fund that part of the study. Mayor Brinley asked what corridors were they funding for study. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that it was two east/west corridors; a north/south corridor; and interior corridors, which connect Hemet, San Jacinto, Lake Elsinare, Perris and Corona. , Councilwoman Kelley asked if Mayor Pro Tem Pape would be giving a report on this item. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that since Mayor Pro Tem Pape was on the committee, he was sure that there would be more information a~ailable at the meeting. There was general discussion regarding the corridors. Councilman Schiffner stated that at the Study Session that was held regarding this subject, the public seemed to be in favor of this project. Councilwoman Kelley stated that she would like more information regarding phasing. Mayor Brinley asked how many members were on the RCTC Board. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that there were 54 members representing each city in the County of Riverside. Mayor Brinley addressed Item No. 35, regarding the Rights-of-way Use Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Leve13 ' Communications, LLC. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that Level , 3 Communications had purchased the 12 conduits previously installed by GST Telecom California and under the terms of the Rights-of-way Agreement, Leve13 is obligated to pay all encroachment permit fees and charges; return the public rights-of-way to their original condition; and provide a bond. Councilman Schiffner noted the GST did a good job of closing the trench when they completed laying the conduit. City Attorney Leibold noted that GST is going through a bankruptcy and Time Warner Communication has acquired all of GST assets: She noted that there would be Leve13 representatives at the Council Meeting. Mayor Brinley addressed Item No. 36, regarding the Ordinance for Towing Services. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that the Towing Ordinance was developed because there were operators from outside the area that wished to tow for the City in rotation through the Sheriff's Department. He explained that the City and Sheriff's Department needed some type of Ordinance to address regulations. He further noted that the Franchise Agreement would be used for the renewal of any e~sting franchises and any new facilities. He detailed the requirements of the franchise. Councilmember Schiffner stated that at one time he had a car towed and noted the difficulty he had in getting his car back. PAGE SEVEN - STUDY SESSION -DEC. 12, 2000 Mayor Brinley addressed Item No. 37, regarding Neighborhood Enhancement Team Program. City Manager Watenpaugh presented an overview of the program and noted that he had instructed the Neighborhood Enforcement team to concentrate on one neighborhood at a time for consistency. He explained that it was impossible to cover the entire City, therefore it was decided to select areas where the ~ police gets numerous complaints; provide notice to the residents; advertise in the newspaper in advance; provide enough time for the residents to clean up their property; do a first sweep to enforce the proposed area; and then a second sweep to be sure that the properties ' are in compliance. Councilwoman Kelley asked if the program was patterned after another city's program. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that it was not, however other cities have similar programs. Councilwoman Kelley asked who was going to head the program up. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that it was a joint venture between Code Enforcement, Community Development and the Sheriff's ' Department. He detailed the different people who would be working ' on the program. He noted that the program is open to the entire City and r~ot just the Multi-Family units. There was general discussion regarding the presentation of item No. 38 and it was decided that Council would adjourn to the Redevelopment Agency and reconvene to hear item No. 38. Councilman Schiffner noted that the Redevelopment Agency would have to adjourn to the Public Finance Authority. City Manager asked if the Redevelopment Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council could hear the appointment of officers at one time. City Attorney Leibold stated that the three entities could be concurrently in session at the same time. She explained that when the Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency came to the item of appointment they would stay open, then the City Council would reconvene and the Public Finance Authority would open their meeting to make the decisions for appointments concurrently. Mayor Brinley noted that she would conduct the nominations and the new officers would assume their seats at the next meeting. City Attorney Leibold asked when the new appointments would take seat. Mayor Brinley stated that they would take seat at the City Council Meeting of December 26. She explained that there would be a reception following the meeting for the new Mayor. Redevelopment Agency City Manager presented a brief overview of the Redevelopment Agency Agenda. Chairman Schiffner stated that he had no questions regarding the Agenda. PAGE EIGHT,- STUDY SESSION - DEC.12, 2000 Public Comments Dan Uhlry, representing Town and Country Towing, stated that there was suppose to be some amendments to the Ordinance for Towing. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the Chief of Police had implemented the amendment into the Ordinance and it was being presented. Mayor Brinley stated that Chief Walsh would be at the City Council Meeting and could clarify the amendments. Mr. Uhlry questioned the implementation of the Franchise Agreement. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that they should check with the Chief to make sure that the amendments to the Franchise Agreement were included and asked if he could define his concerns. Mr. Uhlry stated that on Page 11 of the Franchise Agreement, Section 13.0, should include verbiage at the end of the paragraph to read "Should any additional franchises be granted, the City will show a need for the additional franchise." Mr. Uhlry stated that it would help to control the number of Tow Companies in the City and would assure the City's Police Department the ability to have more companies should the existing Tow Companies be unable to keep up. City Attorney Leibold stated that what was being asked for was an exclusive franchise and what is being presented is a not an exclusive franchise. Merton Fragoso, owner of LEAR Auto Body & Towing, stated that if the Police Department and the City were receiving adequate service at this time, then why would the City wish to change the system. He stated that it could create a saturation of the area by tow companies. There was general discussion regarding the conditions and requirements for another Tow Company to enter into a franchise agreement. Mayor Brinley asked if the verbiage were added if it could be considered discriminatory. City Attorney Leibold stated that a City could grant an exclusive franchise, however typically it comes with a higher franchise fee. Mayor Brinley indicated that the Tow Company's concerns could be addressed at the Council Meeting. NIr. Fragoso noted the problems with storage of School Buses, Motar Homes and other large vehicles, which should be included in the Franchise Agreement. ADJOUItN1VIENT THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REVIEW STUDY SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 5:15 P.M. PAMELA BRINLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE _ ~: PAGE 1VINE - STUDY SESSION - DEC. 12, 2000 ~ ~.J CHIFFI~~, CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ATTEST: ~~LJ " ` ADRIA L. BRYNING, DEPUTY CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE