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