Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-28-1999 City Council Minutes MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 ****************************************************************** CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Kelley at 7 :00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by City Manager Watenpaugh. INVOCATION The Invocation was provided by Pastor Ron Butler representing Canyon Lake Community Church ROLL CALL - PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BRINLEY, METZE, P APE, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, City Attorney Leibold, Assistant City Manager Best, Administrative Services Director Boone, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Police Chief Walsh, City Engineer O'Donnell and City Clerk Kasad. PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation - RTA Poster Contest Awards. (F140.12) Councilwoman Brinley, assisted by Andrea DeLeon ofRTA, read and presented Certificates & gift bags to the following student winners: Zachary Leyendecker - Grand Prize Winner - 2nd Grade Jennifer Arthur - Best Use of Color - 8th Grade Gina Guglielmana - Grand Prize Winner - 3rd Grade J ames Will - Grand Prize Winner - 5th Grade Taylor Evans - Most Original - 6th Grade Erica Schultz - Best Use of Color - 6th Grade - Not Present Gabe Creason - Most Original - 7th Grade Mathias Juhas - Best Theme Interpretation - 7th Grade Amanda March - Best Use of Color - 7th Grade - Not Present Mario Arteaga - Most Original- 8th Grade - Not Present Adam Paradise - Best Theme Interpretation - 8th Grade - Not Present PAGE TWO - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 They then presented Certificates & gift bags to the following Bus Pass Design Winners: Sara Miles - 7th Grade Bryan Vallieres - 7th Grade Breanna Stewart - 3rd Grade Jade Atnip - 8th Grade - Not present Britni Litchenbert - 8th Grade Kristin Blanford/Gray - 6th Grade Melissa Kunstel - 5th Grade Jerry Flores - 7th Grade - Not present Alexandria Colunga - 7th Grade Ricky Gonzalez - 7th Grade - Not present Cory Miller - 7th Grade Kristen Long - 7th Grade - Not present Katie Cary - 8th Grade - Not present. Councilwoman Brinley stressed the talent of the participating students and commended the students and parents for their participation and support. 2. Presentation - Business of the Quarter. (F:56.1)(X:70.1) Mayor Kelley called Kevin Haughian, General Manager, Lake Elsinore Storm Baseball Club forward for presentation. Mayor Kelley displayed the perpetual plaque and presented the individual plaque to the Lake Elsinore Storm Baseball Club, recognizing them as the Business of the Spring Quarter, 1999. Mayor Kelley highlighted the Team's accomplishments and contributions to the community, including attracting over two million fans since opening in 1994. She indicated that they also hosted the California/Carolina League All Star Game, provided support to numerous local charities and contributed fireworks to last weeks Philharmonic concert. She noted that the Storm is one of the largest employers in the region and was recently selected to participate in a new fall baseball league with the new Land Sharks team. Mr. Haughian thanked the Council for this recognition and noted the other worthy businesses in the community. He also thanked the City Council, staff and community for the overwhelming support of the team over the last six years. He indicated that the main reason for this level of support is the Diamond itself, noting that people come from all over the world to see the Diamond. He further indicated that much credit should be given to those who were instrumental in the construction of the Diamond. He noted that they participate as an active community member and have assisted in raising over $800,000 for charitable causes in the community. He commented on the new fall league and noted that it will bring top single and double 'A' prospects to the Diamond. He again thanked the Council for this recognition and indicated that it was a good decision for the team to come to Lake Elsinore. - - - PAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 3. Proclamation - Deputy Mike Driever. Crime Prevention Officer of the Year. (F:56.1)(X:127.2) Mayor Kelley called Deputy Driever forward for presentation. She read and presented the Proclamation to Deputy Driever, detailing his efforts in the community. Deputy Driever commented that as with any award given to an individual he was assisted by many others. He stressed the assistance provided by volunteers who assist with the crime prevention programs; and thanked those who had participated. He expressed hopes for continued success of the programs. 4. Presentation - Lake Elsinore Marine Search And Rescue. (F:56.1) Representatives were not present for presentation. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDIZED ITEMS Requests were received to address the following items and deferred to those discussions: Item Nos. 3,4 and 21. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS Mayor Kelley noted that there was a need to add an Item #6 to this Agenda. City Manager Watenpaugh detailed the item and requested consideration of adding it to the agenda. He indicated that the item was presented Friday afternoon after the agenda went out, but it was important to consider this matter at this time. He further indicated that staff and the attorney had reviewed the item. MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY P APE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADD ITEM #6 REGARDING THE SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY MARKETING AGREEMENT. The following items were pulled from the agenda for further discussion and consideration: Item Nos. 3,4 and 6. MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY METZE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. . 1. The following Minutes were approved: a. Regular City Council Meeting - September 14, 1999. (F:44.4) The following Minutes were received and filed: b. Planning Commission Minutes - September 1, 1999. (F:60.3) PAGE FOUR - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 c. Design Review Committee Minutes - September 1, 1999. (F:60A) 2. Ratified Warrant List for September 15, 1999. (F:12.3) 5. Approved Public Hearing Date of October 26, 1999, for the following: - a. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23848-13, Amendment #1. (F:160.2) PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Tentative Tract Map No. 29304 - APN 386-100-007.386-120-001. 387- 110-001. 012. 018. 019 & 020 and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 99- ~. (F:160.2) Community Services Director Brady detailed this request and the Planning Commission consideration. He noted that the applicant was present this evening; and clarified that the design review for the homes will come at a later date. Don Lohr, 43513 Ridgepark Drive, Temecula, indicated that they are in concurrence with all of the proposed original conditions and those added by the Planning Commission. - Mayor Kelley opened the public hearing at 7:27 p.m., asking those in favor of the item to speak. The following person spoke: Calleen Smothers 33140 Trabuco Drive, indicated that she was in support of the map but not aware of the amendments made at the Planning Commission meeting. She noted the need for a pocket park for the children in the area, and suggested that it could be a simple park with very limited improvements and minimal maintenance. She also indicated that a signal light should be installed at the intersection of Grand A venue/Macy Avenue; noting the heavy traffic leaving this residential area. She also requested revision of the flood map for her area, noting that they are tired of paying increased fees for flood insurance. Mayor Kelley asked those persons in opposition to speak. Hearing no one, the public hearing was closed at 7:30 p.m. Councilman Pape noted his discussion with Councilman Schiffner this morning about the need for a signal at Macy/Grand and the FEMA requirements. He indicated that he was very aware of the extra flood - insurance required, and noted Mr. Schiffner was also aware due to the proximity of his home to this project. He inquired whether the City Manager had any additional information based on their discussion. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that a letter was received from Caltrans regarding the signal request, but they do not support one at this time. Mr. Watenpaugh indicated that staff has been requested to pursue the request further, as well as pursuing the flood hazard insurance area adjustment. PAGE FIVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 - Councilman Pape inquired whether the applicant was working with staff to coordinate the FEMA changes. Mr. Lohr indicated that there is a condition which requires that they deal with FEMA regarding the issue, and they are willing to do so. Councilman Pape noted other areas where it has taken a long time to change. Mr. Lohr indicated that he was aware of potential delays and they would be starting early to confirm the changes. Councilman Pape noted the Caltrans denial, but stressed that there are other considerations, and suggested moving forward in next year's budget to put a signal there. He indicated that he would like to coordinate budgets with Caltrans for reimbursement. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that he would be happy to do so at mid-year budget review, based on discussions with Caltrans. Councilwoman Brinley asked about the perimeter wall, and inquired if the applicant would be bonding for landscaping outside the wall in the public right-of-way. Community Services Director Brady indicated that the standard condition would be to provide maintenance for two years at 100%. Councilwoman Brinley indicated that it should be 120% bonding, and requested the addition of this condition to the approval. - Councilman Schiffner noted that most of his issues were covered by Councilman Pape and stressed the concern that traffic warrants were based strictly on traffic counts. He suggested that a little more investigation is needed because of the conditions and the flow of traffic. He stressed that it was not the number of cars, but the pattern in which they come to that location; he suggested that a different set of circumstances was considered. He requested that staff review the situation for further options, such as a median island to allow better access. He stressed the potential for accidents at that location, noting the number of near misses. Mayor Pro Tern Metze indicated that his concerns had been addressed by the other Councilmembers. - Mayor Kelley noted that this project will be in the vacant lot across from her home and the change will be bittersweet. She noted that kids play in the field continuously, so she would be interested in looking at a pocket park or a small green area. She concurred with the concerns for landscaping along the wall on Highway 74 and stressed the need for landscaping and maintenance. She indicated that she will be interested in the design of the homes and noted that the developer will be contributing toward a stoplight at Grand/Macy. MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY METZE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29304 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 99-5 BASED ON EXHIBITS 'A' THRU 'E', THE RECOMMENDED FINDINGS, AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, WITH THE ADDITION OF CONDITION 73 FOR LANDSCAPE BONDING OF 1200/0 FOR TWO YEARS. PAGE SIX - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 Findings 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provision for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). - 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. 3. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. Conditions of Approval- Tentative Tract Map No. 29304 PLANNING DIVISION 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 29304 will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time a final map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. Additional extensions of time (thirty-six months maximum per the Subdivision Map Act) may be granted per City Council approval. - 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 29304 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 3. The version of Tentative Tract Map 29304 date stamped by the City on September 1, 1999 and the associated environmental document Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 99-5 shall be revised to incorporate any corrections and revisions and any topographical errors subsequent to their approval. If a final revised version of the map and Mitigated Negative Declaration is necessary, these items shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director or his designee within 30 days of approval by the City Council. No permits shall be issued until final administrative approval of the Tentative Map and Mitigated Negative Declaration by the Community Development Director or his designee. - 4. Developer of this subdivision shall comply with all mitigation measures established within the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Mitigation Negative Declaration No. 99-5 and the supplements which accompany it. 5. The applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department. PAGE SEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 PRIOR TO FINAL TRACT MAP 6. Prior to Final Tract Map approval by the City Council, all lots within this subdivision shall conform to the standards of the R-l, Single-Family Residential District of the LEMC. 7. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per LEMC. 8. Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site preparation activity will require the appropriate City permits from the Engineering Division. A Geologic Soils Report with associated recommendations will be required for all grading permit approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to the approval of the Chief Building Official and Planning Division. Interim and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond 100% for material and labor for one year for erosion control landscaping at the time the site is rough graded. 9. Grading of lots shall be done in a matter to prevent downward slopes to the street. 10. The City's Noise Ordinance shall be met during all on site preparation activity. Construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and cease at 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Construction activity shall not take place on Saturday, Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. 11. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Planning Division. 12. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Riverside County F ire Department. 13. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). 14. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the EVMWD. 15. Meet all requirements of Southern California Edison Company. In addition, the developer shall submit plans to Southern California Edison for a layout of the street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation as well as energy charges shall be the responsibility of the developer and/or the association. Said plans shall be approved by the City and shall be installed in accordance with the City Standards. 16. The access for adjacent properties must be maintained throughout all phases PAGE EIGHT - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 of construction. PRIOR TO DESIGN REVIEW 17. The applicant shall conduct a Noise Study for the lots along Highway 4 74, Ortega Highway prior to building permits. The outcome of that study will determine the height requirement for the wall along the Ortega Highway boundary line. This wall height will require approval by the Community Development Director. - PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMITS 18. Arrangements shall be made between the City and the applicant for fiscal impacts by the project prior to issuance of the first building permit. The applicant shall participate in a Cost Recovery Program or make other arrangements with the City to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety and maintenance issues in the City, including city-wide improvements and facilities relating to fire and police protection and maintenance of roadways, etc. 19. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Unified School District including payment of fees based on State Law Requirements. - 20. All development associated with this map requires separate Design Review approval in accordance with Section 17.82 of the LEMC prior to building permit issuance and shall be subject to review to determine the required level of environmental documentation subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 21. House plotting, architectural drawings, floor plans, landscaping and fencing shall require Design Review approval prior to issuance of building permits. All standards of development and procedural steps in effect at the Design Review submittal shall apply for this project. 22. A masonry or decorative block wall shall be constructed along the entire tract boundary. In situations where views are to be considered a combination of wrought iron and block wall may be used subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or his designee. All other fencing shall be provided subject to Section 17.14.130D of the LEMC. A fencing plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division that designates where the various types of fencing are to be located prior to building permits. - 23. The applicant shall provided a Fire Mitigation Plan to the Riverside County Fire Department and the City's Landscape Architect prior to issuance of Building Permits. 24. All trailers and/or mobile homes used during construction, mailboxes and signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to PAGE NINE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 Installation. 25. The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees in force at the time, (including park in lieu fees), prior to the issuance of building permits. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 26. Slopes on individual lots that are in excess of three-feet in height shall be installed, landscaped and irrigated by the developer. 27. The applicant shall meet all the requirements of the serving gas utility. 28. The applicant shall meet all the requirements of the serving telephone utility. ENGINEERING DIVISION 29. 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. - 30. Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assIgnee (LEMC 16.52.030). 31. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85-26). 32. 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. 33. 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). 34. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a Calif. 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). 35. 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. 36. Dedicate sufficient property along Grandview Ave. frontage for a 68 ft. right-of-way (34 ft. half street) 37. Applicant shall obtain any necessary Caltrans permits and meet all Caltrans requirements, including conditions listed in Caltran's letter of June 7, 1999. PAGE TEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 38. Applicant shall dedicate 15 ft. of additional right-of-way along Ortega Hwy. frontage. 39. Moderate grades are desirable for local streets. A maximum grade of 15% should only be used because of design constraints. _ 40. Pay all fees and meet requirements of encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of public works improvements (LEMC 12.08 and Resolution 83-78). 41. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 Yl" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. 42. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval. 43. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire Department. 44. Provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street improvement plans as required by the City Engineer. - 45. Developer shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations. 46. 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 final inspection of public improvements. This includes No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract. 47. All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized. At Certificate of Occupancy applicant shall submit tapes and/or discs which are compatible with City's ARC Info/GIS or developer to pay $300 per sheet for City digitizing. 48. All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving utility. 49. If grading exceeds 50 cubic yards, grading plans shall be prepared by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer and approved prior to grading permit issuance. Prior to any grading, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit and post appropriate security. 50. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. PAGE ELEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 51. Individual lot drainage with in the tract boundary 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. 52. 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". 53. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 54. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer and the Riverside County Flood Control District prior to approval of final map. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 55. Applicant shall construct an inlet structure at the end of Trabuco Ave. with a connection to the storm drain in the street. 56. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 57. An agreement must be executed between developer, the city and Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) for ownership, maintenance and construction of the storm drain system prior to final map approval. 58. Storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegally dumping in the drain system, the wording and stencil shall be approved by the city engineer. 59. Ten year storm runoff should be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm runoff should be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceeded, drainage facilities should be installed. 60. Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations. This site is in FEMA Flood Zone AO. The lowest floor shall be elevated above the highest adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet on the FIRM, or at least two feet if no depth is specified. 61. Applicant to provide FEMA elevation certificates prepared by his engineer of work prior to certificate of occupancy for each dwelling unit. 62. Applicant must submit a conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) prepared by his engineer of work to FEMA prior to issuance of building permits. The CLOMR must be approved by FEMA prior to the tenth certificate of occupancy. The applicant shall should submit a letter of map revision (LOMR) prepared by his engineer of work to FEMA if feasible PAGE TWELVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 prior to the last certificate of occupancy or contribute $4,000 for the preparation of a letter of map revision for FEMA in the future. 63. Developer shall be subject to all Master Planned Drainage fees and will receive credit for all Master Planned Drainage facilities constructed. 64. Applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program with a storm water pollution prevention 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. - 65. 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 can be obstructed, a special limited use easement must be recorded to limit the slope, type of landscaping and wall placement. 66. Intersecting streets on the inside radius of a curve will only be permitted when adequate sight distance is verified by a registered civil engineer. 67. Local streets shall have sixty (60) ft. right-of -way with forty (40) ft. curb- to-curb. - 68. No residential lot shall front and access shall be restricted on Ortega Highway and Grandview Avenue, and so noted on the final map. 69. Trabuco Road southerly terminus in the tract shall end with an off-set cul- de-sac, if the applicant cannot obtain an agreement with the neighboring property owner for an off-site cul-de-sac. The off-set cul-de-sac shall be constructed per Riverside County standards at the end of Trabuco Avenue using the front portions of Lot 24 and Lot 25, per Engineering Division approval. 70. Applicant shall record CC & R's for the tract prohibiting on-street storage of boats, motorhomes, trailer, and trucks over one-ton capacity, roof mounted or front yard microwave satellite antennas. The CC & R's shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to recordation of final map. 71. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood control district facilities, outside the public right-of-way will be owned and maintained by either a home owner's association or private property owner. - 72. Developer shall contribute $3,000 towards the design and construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of Macy St. and Grand Ave.; and contribute $1,500 towards the design and construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of Ortega Hwy and Grand Ave. This development will increase traffic at these intersections and should contribute towards construction. PAGE THIRTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 73. All waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the construction shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The applicant should contract with CR&R Inc. for recycling and storage container services, but the applicant may use the services of another recycling vendor provided that the recyclable materials are either donated or sold to the vendor. Another recycling vendor, other than CR&R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for recycling bin rental, recycling services, or other services related to recycling or solid waste disposal. Unless the applicant is using CR&R Inc. for recycling services, the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a recycling center, including verification of tonnage by certified weighmaster tickets. 74. All landscaping improvements shall be surety bonded by a 100% Faithful Performance Bond for two years. BUSINESS ITEMS 31. Ordinance No. 1053 - Amending the Municipal Code relating to Fishing & Lake Speed Limits. (F:92.1) - Mayor Kelley noted that there was a need to pull this item from this agenda. City Attorney Leibold explained that her office was concerned with ensuring that the Ordinance was in compliance with State regulations. City Manager Watenpaugh detailed the content of this item and clarified that it is not a new issue, but an attempt to bring the Code into compliance. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA 3. Investment Report - June. 1999. (F:12.5) Dick Knapp, City Treasurer, indicated that he wanted to bring this item to the public's attention, and detailed the investment totals for the month of June. He indicated that he has been in accounting since 1971 and had asked the Administrative Services Director for this information many months ago, but has not received details for April, Mayor June. He indicated that if he was still in accounting and it took three months to get a month end report they would not be there anymore. He suggested that the reports should be current as of the end of the month, noting that if he made the Council this would be a requirement. - MOVED BY P APE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECEIVE AND ORDER FILED THE INVESTMENT REPORT FOR JUNE, 1999 AS PRESENTED. 4. Agreement with Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District & Increased Contract with Norris-Repke. Inc. for Design of Main Street Improvements. (F:68.1 )(X: 156.1) George Alongi, 649 Mill Street, noted that this item indicates that the City PAGE FOURTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 is going to secure funds for the improvements to Main Street, but it does not give a dollar amount and there are no major developments occurring at this location. He questioned why the City would spend so much money when the street is fine for traffic. He indicated that it would be a waste of tax dollars to involve the City in this project; and suggested that no more money should be spent at that location. - City Manager Watenpaugh noted this was part of the adopted Capital Improvement budget, and explained that there is a large section of Main Street with underlying concrete which is deteriorating. He reiterated that the proj ect was already approved and work is now beginning, but it is being done in conjunction with the Water District changing out water lines, which they intended to do in about two years. He further explained that this would prevent future cuts in the new improvements. Councilman Pape noted that construction will start in March of next year with completion by June of next year. He further noted that these improvements will essentially complete Main Street from Lakeshore Drive to the Freeway. Mayor Kelley clarified that the City will administer this project, but each agency will be responsible for their own costs. MOVED BY METZE, SECONDED BY P APE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIP AL WATER DISTRICT TO COMBINE THE WATER/SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT AND APPROVE THE INCREASE TO THE CONTRACT WITH NORRIS-REPKE, INC. BY $13,500 TO INCLUDE THE DESIGN OF THE WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS. - 6. Southwest Riverside County Marketing Agreement. (F:68.1)(X:70.1) City Manager Watenpaugh noted the funds budgeted for a coordinated effort between three cities and the County, to market businesses and growth. He explained that the partnership requires participation by each agency, and the Economic Development Agency will provide office space and a staff person. He further explained that the scope of work has been identified and will target businesses and industries which will assist the Community. He noted that a concern was mentioned that the work will focus on Murrieta and Temecula, but assured the Council that through the scope of work that will not happen. - Mayor Kelley noted that efforts have been underway to establish this agreement for quite a while and the plan has now been worked out to balance it for the communities. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY BRINLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED MARKETING AGREEMENT FOR BUSINESS ATTRACTION SERVICES AND PAGE FIFTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 AUTHORIZE STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTATION MEETINGS WITH NEIGHBORING JURISDICTION REPRESENTATIVES. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 7:44 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 7:51 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Jan Barnett, 13589 Abington Drive, Corona, stated her concern regarding the proposed raceway. She stated that she lives in HorsethiefCanyon and fears the impact that this project will have on homes in the area; as well as the increase in noise, traffic and pollution that the project would cause. She asked how Council could possibly consider the raceway proposal, since the area was zoned residential. - John Banks, 13543 Dalton Drive, Corona, stated that he also lives in Horsethief Canyon and questioned the zoning of the property. He noted that he felt that the City would benefit the most from the area being residential and not commercial, since the project would not benefit the area directly, but new homes would. Mayor Kelley asked City Manager Watenpaugh to address the raceway. City Manager Watenpaugh gave an overview of the history of the project and explained that there had been numerous public meetings held in regard to this project. He noted that the Raceway was currently in the Environmental Impact Report stage and that it would not be available for review by the public until mid- October from the consultant. He explained that once the EIR is reviewed by the various agencies, letters of the different agencies must be commented upon. He noted that there would be a public hearing at the Planning Commission level, as well as the City Council and the public will be given a chance to express their concerns. Community Development Director Brady stated that in fact there would be several public hearings at each level; two to address the amendments to the Specific Plan; and at least one to address Design Review. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that the property is not zoned for residential, but rather it is zoned a Specific Plan and a change would have to be done through a Specific Plan Amendment. Mayor Pro Tern Metze encouraged the public to put their concerns in a letter, and then the applicant would have to specifically address those concerns in the final draft of the EIR that is presented for City Council review. Mayor Kelley stated that it is important for the public to know that they should put their concerns in writing. She explained that it would be a long process. John Mahaffey, 13198 Haven Rock Court, stated his concern regarding the Alberhill Raceway and noted that there have been two sound engineers that have worked on the project and could not make it work, and now the developer has hired a third sound engineer, hoping that he can make the project work. He further noted that he was not sure if the Council was aware of this fact, and wished to PAGE SIXTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 bring the information forward. City Manager Watenpaugh questioned the Community Development Director in regard to the number of sound engineers that have been used. Community Development Director stated that he would check on this fact and get back to the City Manager with the information. - George Alongi, 649 Mill Street, stated that Main Street could wait for attention, since there are many other streets that need attention. He noted that there are several streets that are unpaved and have been promised by EVMWD that if the City paves the streets they will run sewer lines into the area for service. He noted that the area has failing septic tanks and they are up to their ankles in mud every time it rains. He extended an open invitation to all candidates to appear on his T.V. show, "More Than Three Minutes", on September 30, 1999, from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. He indicated that the public would be invited to call in and ask the candidates questions. He noted that there has been only one forum planned that he is aware of, and this will give the candidates the opportunity to present themselves to the public. Dale Hite, 115 N. Kellogg Street, stated that he believes in the judicial system and stated that he felt that the City should not take the easy way out and if the City feels that they have no liability in the Lake Elsinore Recreation Area case, then they should pursue it, instead of settling out of court. He stated that if the City is not guilty, then the truth has cost the City $1.5 million and he felt that this was an easy way out. He explained that the City has lost more than money, they have lost trust. He stated that if this whole thing were done right in the beginning, then the City would not have to worry about a sympathetic jury in the end. - Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest Drive, addressed her comments to Mayor Kelley and noted her responsibilities as a teacher. She stated that she felt that Mayor Kelley was part of a conspiracy to rob Jess Watkins of his property, civil and work rights. She demanded the resignation of the Mayor and the balance of the City Council. James Gray, 15159 Mimosa Drive, stated that because of reckless Council policies, the City faces major financial troubles due to a $39 million debt. He noted the debt payment that is due, the settlement agreement, as well as the potential increase in the Joint Powers Insurance Authority fee. He asked how Council was going to resolve the debts and suggested that the public vote this Council out of office. He further stated that the back door, back room secrets have gone on long enough. He addressed political signs and stated that he is getting tired of resetting and replacing his signs. He stated that if his signs were not returned, he would file a police complaint for petty theft. - Dick Knapp, City Treasurer, stated that he was personally responsible for the repaving of Machado Street, as well as the paving of some of the streets in Country Club Heights, ten years ago. He stated that sometimes you have to rake City staff over the coals to get something done and suggested that was what he did. He questioned the amendment to the contract on the paddle-wheel boat with the City. He stated that he had found a typo and that it should be addressed and corrected. He questioned the insurance on the paddleboat; and what would happen PAGE SEVENTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 if they do not follow through with the boat; and asked if the City would be stuck with the boat. Daryl Hickman, 19 Corte Madera, complimented Mayor Kelley for raising the money for the philharmonic concert. He expressed concern with the Council's past decisions and noted the problems with the parks, the appeal by Williams, the Watkins suit and the racetrack. He asked how much money the RDA was going to fund for the racetrack. He noted the Town Hall Meeting in Tuscany Hills and the discussion of the bond of which $1 million was to complete the landscaping. He stated that the project was to be finished in October and there has been nothing done to date. He noted the stop sign Tuscany Hills residents have requested and indicated that it has not been addressed. He stressed that this was a developer who had not completed his landscaping and his bond should be called. Barbara Cady, 32524 Wildomar Road, stated that the concert in the park was a great success. She thanked the City Council for all their encouragement and all the people that attended. She addressed the paddlewheel boat and highlighted the progress that has been made. - Leroy Tucker, 3532 Cherry Blossom, asked that the sound system be addressed to facilitate the listening audience. He suggested that if Mr. Watkins did not do a good job when the State was in control of the park, then the State would have taken action against him. He questioned the City's action in regard to removing him from the park. He felt that $1.5 million was a lot of money to be spent on this suit, which could have been better used for other things in the City that are truly needed. He asked for an explanation by the Council. He also asked if the racetrack goes in, would they be responsible for building a new sewer plant. - Lorraine Sostre, 29363 Schooner Lane, stated her support for Council's decision regarding the Watkins settlement. She stated that she felt that it was in the best interests of the City to settle. She noted that the testimony of former Councilman Alongi was damaging and was not truthful. She further noted that Mr. Alongi recanted his original deposition and told a totally different story. She stated the fact that Mr. Alongi was removed from office for 14 counts of willful and corrupt misconduct in office. She criticized the Press Enterprise newspaper for an article they did on Jess Watkins' military service, which had nothing to do with his conduct at the park; however the prospective jurors could read the article and this would have an impact on their decision. She encouraged people to get out and vote and restated her support of the current City Council and the fine job they have done. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Watenpaugh commented on the following: 1. Stated that the Racetrack proposal is not within an RDA area and could not utilize RDA funds. 2. Stated that the City did not loose the case regarding the Watkins settlement. PAGE EIGHTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 He stated that he would present the facts of the case this evening, since the Council and staff has not been able to comment on the case. 3. Addressed the proposed stop sign on Summerhill Drive and stated that the City has met with the School District, Homeowners' Association and private individuals. He noted that the City has provided a crosswalk and a slow sign, however the City cannot place a stop sign, unless the City is willing to accept the liability of being sued by someone that is cited for running the stop sign. 4. Stated that the plans and specification for landscaping at Tuscany Hills will be done this week and the City can move forward. He noted that the funds are intact and have not been spent elsewhere. He noted that the streets have been capped and the City is working on the sidewalks. 5. Agreed that the parks were closed, but stressed that they have been reopened for sometime now and services have been returned. 6. Commented that HorsethiefCanyon is in the City's Sphere of Influence and not in the City of Corona. 7. Stated that he felt that the public had a right to know what has occurred regarding the Lake Elsinore Recreation Area, Inc. trial. He explained that it was not a personal suit of Mr. and Mrs. Watkins, since their suit was removed in pre-trial motions. He noted that the trial was to address the City's alleged breech of contract. He indicated that he had some notes that he would be referring to since he felt it important that all of the information be disclosed. He explained that he was not judging the case, however, so few have said so much and there has been so much press; and the City has issued no statement to date, due to advice from legal counsel while the case was under litigation. He stated that because it is not now under litigation, he wants to present information to inform the public so they can make their own decision. He stated that there has been extensive coverage on the trial and the settlement agreement, but none of the information came from the City or the plaintiff, since there was a mutual agreement not to say anything. He stated that he did not know where all of the information came from, but stressed that the City was advised by Counsel not to say anything since the City was in litigation and the only place that the subject could be discussed was in Closed Session, which is considered a legal meeting. He stressed that it is not a backroom meeting, nor is any hanky-panky going on. He noted that the City Manager and the City Attorney are present in those sessions and Closed Session is the only means that Municipal Government and the elected officials have to deal with litigation, personnel issues or acquisition of property, without just going out and saying I just want to buy your property and expecting it to work. He stated that not too many people want to do that. He explained that the Council was strictly requested not to comment on this and that is why they have not commented all this time. He stressed that the Council and staff do listen to legal advice, it is advantageous. - - - PAGE NINETEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 City Manager Watenpaugh explained that for those people who are new to the community, the State of California conveyed the Lake, Campground, and beaches to the City of Lake Elsinore in 1993. The property came with a preexisting concession agreement that the City was bound by. He noted that the State had the opportunity to buyout the agreement for $700,000 and chose not to do that; and the buyout was not passed on to the City, therefore the City inherited the concession agreement with the Lake Elsinore Recreation Area as it stood. He stated that the City was also required to continue to guarantee that the Lake, Campground and public beaches would remain in public use and ownership in perpetuity for recreational uses, which could only be modified with State approval. He explained that after the City's acceptance and takeover of the campground, and receiving a number of complaints off and on, the City received more negatives on the campground, and met with the campground concessionaire to discuss possibilities of cleaning up the campground, changing to meet codes and correct violations. The concession agreement requires that the concessionaire comply with State, Federal, local laws and ordinances; the concessionaire was not doing so; there were outstanding code violations documented by the City; there were several individuals injured in the campground for which the City was liable. He further indicated that the ADA requirements were not met and there were complaints in regard to that and the concessionaire felt that he was not obligated to do so; ADA is a State law and not a local law. He explained that the City was required to bring all of the City's public facilities up to ADA requirements by 1995, and the campground is one of those facilities; the campground was not brought into compliance until the City reopened it; a trailer was on site with no handicap access. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that the City terminated the agreement in late 1996 because of the inability to negotiate any compliance; and the concessionaire vacated approximately 6 to 7 months later in mid 1997, only after he held an auction to sell off what properties the concessionaire felt were personal property. He clarified that the concession agreement listed the items as public property, but it was sold anyway. After that the concessionaire then filed a lawsuit for a number of issues. He also explained that the original suit included Mr. & Mrs. Watkins claiming approximately $7 million dollars, which was not really set until after court started. He further explained that the suit alleged various causes on behalf ofLERA and the Watkins'; however the City was very successful in discharging part of those trial motions. He stressed that the Watkins' were individually removed from the lawsuit and it was now just the Lake Elsinore Recreation Authority; noting that some of the remaining issues at that time included the allegation that the City was trying to remove the concessionaire from the Campground so the City would be able to use the revenue from the Campground to payoff the bond debt for the new Lake Elsinore Recreation Authority. He stressed that this allegation was absolutely false. He indicated that the documents were available for review by the public; and stressed that it was in black and white in the official statement for the bond issuance that the recreation concession and concession agreement were useable facilities and exempt from the bond issuance. He further stated that he had the title report PAGE TWENTY - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 available to the public which stated that the concession was an acceptable use for the site and stressed that the Official Statement and the agreement also specifically state that the City's General Fund is obligated to back the debt with a guarantee from motor vehicle fees. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that any revenue from the Campground; any revenue from the Lake, activities on the Lake goes into a Lake Enterprise account which is a separate account and is not General Fund. He noted that all of the revenue goes to the maintenance and operation of the Campground and the Lake; with not one dime going into the General Fund, nor can it be used for that. He stated that therefore, the use of those funds or that property for repayment of the debt is not true. He noted the accusations that the City manufactured the charges; and clarified that the City has documentation for it. He noted that the information presented at the original trial was on a very myopic scale and wasn't presented on a broad base which staff felt it should have been, however that did not cause the mistrial; the mistrial was caused and the theory of conspiracy came about, when a previous Councilmember changed his testimony on the stand and said that the Attorney would not allow him to tell the whole truth therefore there was a conspiracy because the City wanted to use the revenues to payoff the debt. City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that there was never a question about the revenues of the concessionaire when the bond issue was being done; it happened when the concessionaire had already been removed. He reminded the public that the suit was filed three years ago. He noted that a new concessionaire might not be exempt under the bond agreement, when the old concessionaire was, and that was where the issue arose regarding the bond debt. He noted that the finding was that it could be allowed to go to another concessionaire with no impact. He noted that there were also points brought up in the trial, that had a major impact on the City's case; particularly when the City was informed that a major part of the City's case was going to be denied, since the City was not going to be allowed any testimony or information regarding the Campground prior to the City taking it over; none of the records from the State; no testimony from State Employees would be allowed whether it was good, bad or indifferent. He explained that there was no way for the City to enter into the court, tax records which show revenues and expenditures; specifically revenues from insurance companies that were paid to LERA for damage. He noted that in the concession agreement it specifically stated that any damage from flooding and related payment must be spent on the Campground. City Manager Watenpaugh eXplained that after the mistrial a new date was set by the court; and clarified that the City Councilor staff has nothing to do with a trial date, as it is set by the judge, and after three years it came up just before elections. He stated that it is not a political issue, but rather the court system. He further explained that he would note some of the issues presented to Council, both by the attorneys and the JPIA which covers the majority of the cost and not the taxpayer. He stated that when a new court date was set, the City was required to get new counsel because of purported conflict of interest, therefore new trial lawyers were assigned by the JPIA; the City provided all of the files, records, depositions to the new attorneys; the attorneys did a review of the records; and in a Closed Session, not a - - - PAGE TWENTY-ONE-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 28,1999 - back room nor illegal meeting, but in a legal Closed Session with the Council and staff, they were informed where they stood in relation to the case. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that the only things he could say in this regard were general. He noted that the Council was informed that the facts were in the City's favor, however sympathy was not in the City's favor; after 20 years of being the concessionaire, the Council must consider that fact when it is presented in court. He noted that the City had not presented any of its case in court. He explained that this is the first time that the City's information has been discussed and he was only presenting an overview of the case and could not go any deeper. He stated that the evidence that was deemed inadmissible had a major impact on where the City went. He noted that it was purported that some people were unable to tell the whole truth; well in this case the City wasn't able to tell the whole truth. He stated that the question was not anymore whether the court system in all cases was looking to find truth or if it was looking to solve a problem. He stated that some of the settlement issues Council had to consider that the general public doesn't have to consider since they know all of the facts, and all the general public has to go on is what is reported in the newspaper. He stated that what is reported in the press doesn't have to have any truth to it; however Council must consider what would happen to the General Fund, and whether there is revenue to cover the suit and if there is revenue to cover the City's general debt. He explained that the amount of the settlement would be split 50/50 between the JPIA and the City at this time. He further explained that if the City settled the case at this time for an amount of $750,000 and $750,000 of JPIA funds, then it relieves any future liability; Watkins doesn't have to prove anything; the City doesn't have to prove anything; it will go away for a known amount and protects the future financial strategy the Council, staff and community have worked so hard to facilitate. He noted that the cons the Council had to consider were that if the City were to proceed, there would be additional litigation costs for attorneys with no guarantees that the JPIA would pay for those; potential of no continued funding from the JPIA; if the suit were found to be a non tort then every dollar would have to be paid by City tax dollars from the General Fund. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that Council was reminded that jurors do consider sympathy; they do tend to deal with the small person and look at governments or corporations as deep pockets, even though the money comes from the taxpayers' pocket, the jurors are still sympathetic; there is no way of knowing what would happen with a jury trial. He noted that on a level playing field in front of the judge it is felt that it would be very clear cut, however with a jury it is not. He stated that from staffs point of view and watching the discussions that staff and the legal counsel had, and knowing the facts it is a tough decision to make, however he is just presenting some of the information and he is not judging it since that was up to the public. He stated that the Council admitted no wrongdoing; LERA had to present nothing else; it is settled and over; and answered the comment "Gee if the City was right why did they settle", by stating that "Gee if the plaintiff was right why did they take less than 25% of the amount that the claim was filed for" and be happy and walk away. PAGE TWENTY-TWO-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 28,1999 Mayor Kelley asked Mr. Alongi to refrain from interrupting the speaker or she would ask that he be removed. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that the decision was really tough for Council and staff. He stated unfortunately the elected officials take the brunt of the criticism because they have to vote on it. He explained that it is not easy for Council to decide if they should spend $750,000 of taxpayer money, however in this case they got a bargain. He stated that there was no way the City could go forward and have it end up better. He stressed that this is a solved situation and it is over. He stated that the City is moving forward and the revenues are generating enough to meet the bond debts with the financial strategy in place, and the City has a strong Council and staff to make this work. He noted that the City is not out of the woods yet, and not the people on the dais or in the audience created all of the problems the City is facing. He stressed that the situation does not solve itself overnight and no one has all the answers, however the elected officials are doing the best job they can in making the right decisions. He stated that the situation is not political and there is no vendetta. Mayor Kelley asked for clarification if when the State owned the Campground there were complaints about it then. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that there were. Mayor Kelley asked if the complaints were ever corrected. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that they were not. Mayor Kelley clarified that there were quite a few complaints that had gone on for quite a few years. City Manager Watenpaugh stated that there were a lot of issues that had not been resolved, however he is not going to put words in the State's mouth, since they were not allowed to testify or come forward. He stated that from working with the State two years before the City took the lake over, there were concerns. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS City Attorney Leibold commented on the following: 1. Stated that she wished to underscore a couple of points that the City Manager made. She stated that she would be available if anyone had questions. She indicated that there were a couple of false statements that have been generated in connection with the litigation that she wished to clear up. She cited the statement that the Campground revenues were necessary in connection with the bond issue or that the Campground property itself somehow needed to be free and clear of the existing concession agreement in order to insure the feasibility of the bond, were absolutely false. She explained that the Campground revenues are restricted and must be kept in a special fund, which can only be spent on Lake Operations, Capital Improvements and Maintenance of the Campground and Lake Facilities. She addressed the property of the Campground and the existence of the concession agreement and noted that it clearly states in the bond documents that the property does not serve as security for the bond debt, but is rather secured by lease payments from the City's General Fund. - - - PAGE TWENTY-THREE-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28, 1999 - She stated that she felt that the whole thing was just a red herring to confuse the jury and public. She stressed that the City has not had the opportunity to dispel the rumors and they are totally false. She addressed issues at the trial and considerations that the City Council was asked to take into account looking towards the second trial. She stated that the City was successful at eliminating the individual plaintiffs from the lawsuit, the civil rights action was dismissed; however the City was prohibited from introducing important evidence for the City's case. She made note of the newspaper article in which the plaintiff alleged charges in regard to violations and insufficient campground facilities. She noted that the City was prohibited from influencing others with prior State inspections and items recorded by the State that failed to be corrected. She noted that the City had intriguing allegations of conspiracy, and none of that was true. She stressed that there were four City Councilmembers that were participating in all the discussions with respect to the circumstances leading up to the expiration of the concession agreement for failure to comply with the terms. She stressed that there was no conspiracy. She noted that there was an individual who claimed that there was a conspiracy and the City was prohibited from introducing evidence in regard to that person. She indicated that person had vowed a vendetta against the City and all the persons who rendered testimony to remove him from office. She noted the monies received from insurance's that the plaintiff failed to reinvest into the park. She further noted that in terms of a jury system, as an attorney she is sworn to uphold the laws and she has faith in the system to a degree and in any experienced litigator. She stressed that the litigator, as the City's special defense counsel indicated that there was no certainty in a jury trial. She explained that in front ofajudge the facts of the law are in the City's favor and in front ofa jury it would be an uphill battle. She further explained that there was a significant risk of a runaway jury; there was risk with respect to insurance coverage issues; City Council was advised that ongoing litigation was costly; appeals could be costly; there might be protracted disputes with the insurance carrier for recovery issues and for anyone to think that this was an easy decision for this City Council to make was wrong, since it definitely was not. She stated that it may be right to say that if your right, you fight all the way, and that is something that an individual can do when it is warranted, however Council was faced with the public trust in deciding and evaluating how best to protect the City's General Fund against the uncertainty that the City's legal counsel was advising existed in regard to this trial. She noted that they choose to settle the case and she believed that was a prudent decision which protected the General Fund. She stressed that it was not an easy decision for the Council to make. She addressed the settlement agreement and stated that it clearly states that there is no admission of wrongdoing and it is simply a settlement agreement of compromise to avoid extended trial. She stated that she found it unfortunate that the plaintiffs counsel intimated that there was some admission of guilt or wrong doing. She stated that but for the provision of the settlement agreement that there was no admission of wrong doing the City would not have settled. She offered to discuss further, any of the PAGE TWENTY-FOUR-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28, 1999 issues discussed. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Pape commented on the following: 1. Stated that this gives him the opportunity to make some comments since the Council has been muzzled for quite some time and not allowed to discuss the issue. He stated that he voted against the settlement, since he felt that the City should pursue the issue and felt that the City would prevail. He stated that he bowed to the majority and the settlement took place. He indicated that he was pleased that the opportunity to discuss the issues that faced the City and he was looking forward to taking the stand and giving facts on the City's side. He stated that LERA was allowed to present their case prior to the mistrial being declared, therefore the City did not have a chance to present their case. He suggested that he might have gotten in trouble if he took the stand because he was told by Special Counsel that there were certain things that City officials could not bring up, however he felt that in taking an oath to tell the whole truth when he took the stand, that he would do so. He stated that he felt that the jury had a right to know all the facts and part of LERA's case was conspiracy between the City Council and the City Attorney and it is hard to defend against something that never happened. He felt that the jury had a right to know that the one person that was making that accusation had no credibility. He stressed that the person was found guilty of 14 counts of willful and corrupt malfeasance in office and sat on Council to use his position for his own gain. He noted that on one deal the person made a $50,000 profit and he felt that the jury should be aware of that as well as the FPPC findings that Mr. Alongi was guilty of 4 counts of conflict of interest and fined $6,500. He indicated that this points directly to Mr. Alongi's credibility as a witness. He further indicated that previous comments pointed out that Mr. Alongi was caught in a lie and there was one other time that he even admitted to telling a lie. He stated that Council was instructed not to bring that up, however he was going to and the judge could deal with him as he wished since he wished to affirm that he was testifying to tell the truth and the jury should hear all the facts. He stressed that there was one individual with a vendetta against the City and he would be willing to lie in his testimony in court to promote himself. He noted an incident where Mr. Alongi stated to the City Manager and himself that he was going to get his own way and he didn't care anymore about this community and he was going to get what he wanted. He stressed that Mr. Alongi wanted to be in control. He further stressed that there was no conspiracy and there were four Councilmembers, two attorneys and the City Manager who will tell the public that it never happened and there was no reason for it to happen since the Campgrounds had no impact on the bonds. He questioned why a candidate would continue to protect the myth of the bonds; and challenged the press to sit down with staff and review the documents to understand the issue. He stressed that maybe once the press understands the facts they can stop perpetuating the myth that the bonds depend on the Campground. He commented" Shame on City Treasurer - - - PAGE TWENTY-FIVE-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28,1999 Dick Knapp, who knew the truth and did nothing to correct the errors." He stated that it was Mr. Knapp's job to inform the public of the truth and give correct information and he did not. He stressed his disappointment with Mr. Knapp since he had open access to City staff and had the ability to ask questions and find out what was going on and did not. He stated that there was more interest on Mr. Knapp's part to attack the City and gain political attention than to provide true information. He stressed that the Campground was unsafe and it was that way when the City took it over from the State. He noted that during the trial process, the State told the City that they were about ready to do something, however when the City was willing to take over, the State left it to the City to deal with the problem. He stressed the fact that if the City had not done something to address the unsafe conditions at the Campground, the City could have placed itself in a position for a major lawsuit ifno action was taken. Councilman Pape stated that Mr. Watkins refused to correct the requested items, time and time again, and made it clear that he did not want to spend a dime on the Campground and it was obvious that he was financially draining the Campground and had no intention of investing a penny in it. He noted the different items found in disrepair and the inability to meet the ADA Codes and Mr. Watkins' unwillingness to comply. -- 2. Announced that on October 7, 1999 at 3 :00 p.m. there would be the ribbon cutting for the West End Fire Station. Mayor Pro Tern Metze commented on the following: 1. Stated that he does have the documentation regarding Mr. Alongi's removal from office available. He noted that the newspapers make it sound like Mr. Alongi was removed on one or two counts, however it was 14 counts and he further noted that Mr. Alongi tried to influence Council votes and tried to influence a Building Inspector. He noted the candidates that are currently running for office that support him and suggested that those candidates need to be asked point blank if they condemn or condone willful and corrupt misconduct while in office. He indicated that obviously they condone that type of action, since they all run together. He stated that he found it totally amazing that some of the candidates have called for Council resignations, when they have a person that they support that has been convicted of willful and corrupt misconduct of office. He commented that willful and corrupt are major words to leave out when the press is commenting on misconduct in office by Mr. Alongi. He indicated that he has reminded the press of the entire sentence and read a portion of a newspaper article from January 23, 1999, noting Mr. Alongi's conduct. He noted that in the article Mr. Alongi claimed that since his removal from office, he could not honor the confidentially of a Closed Session if asked a question. Mayor Pro Tern Metze stressed that is not true and explained that Councilmembers are bound by Closed Session and even if a member leaves office he or she cannot disclose the information. He questioned Mr. Alongi's actions and asked if he was establishing a vendetta and questioned his ability to tell the truth. He stated that Mrs. Hyland has sued the City regarding Lake Terrace PAGE TWENTY-SIX-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28, 1999 and is on record as having the developer's attorney as her attorney. He stated that she is the only one on record as being in bed with the developer. He further stated that you wouldn't find that with any of the Council, however she was the one making accusations about the Council. He reminded the public that she was the one that sued the City on behalf of the developer. He noted that the case was thrown out of court with prejudice, which means go away and don't come back. He stressed that the FPPC case on Mr. Alongi, and Mrs. Hyland's suit cost the taxpayers money, since the City has to defend the suit and be present for FPPC hearings. Mayor Pro Tern Metze stated that two years ago when Councilman Pape and himself ran for office, they ran against Mr. Knapp and Mrs. Hyland. He noted that their main agenda was to fence the Stadium and stop paying on the bonds; and asked if that was still part of their agenda and stated that the public should ask them that question. He noted their involvement in three recall efforts which all failed and noted that in a recall the accusations do not have to be proved and anything can be placed on the petition. He noted a bumper sticker on Mrs. Hyland's car, which reads "I'd rather live in Cleveland Ridge". He asked who she supports and encouraged people to question that. He noted several flyers that were distributed by Mrs. Hyland's supporters that are beyond good taste and made note of the misinformation that was placed in the flyers. He questioned the motives of the flyers and asked if the purpose was to take a cheap shot at the Mayor and incumbents. Mr. Metze address the residents of Horsethief Canyon and stated that Mrs. Hyland stated that she has always been opposed to the Racetrack; but cited City Council Study Session Minutes from August 5, 1997, which do not show opposition by Mrs. Hyland; and Mr. Alongi was in favor of the project with his only concerns being how long it would take to come to fruition. At that same meeting Mrs. Hyland's only concern was that they didn't go after RDA money, and it was explained at that time that the Racetrack was not in an RDA area and, therefore could not get any RDA money. Mayor Pro Tern Metze noted the criticism of the location of Councilwoman Brinley's sign, however no one has commented on the signs that have been nailed to trees. He encouraged the public to consider all these facts. He reminded Mr. Gray to show respect to other candidate's signs, since they have the right to remove his signs if he places his on theirs without permission. He stated that one of the major problems that he has with some of the candidates is that they will stand at the podium and "bagg" on the issues that they feel are wrong, however he has never heard them offer solutions. He noted that those same people complain about the decisions that the Council makes, however they offer no alternative. He noted all the promises that some of the candidates are making in the newspaper, however they don't say how they are going to pay for all those things. He asked City Manager Watenpaugh how much it cost to do the small section of Machado Street. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that it cost $22,000. Mayor Pro Tern Metze questioned that if just that small section of Machado cost that much, how do they plan to pay for all the other streets that they propose to pave. - - PAGE TWENTY-SEVEN-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28,1999 Councilman Schiffner commented on the following: 1. Stated that he was not a member of the Council at the time of the Watkins incident in question, therefore he felt that he could speak without his comments being termed a self-serving defense. He stated that he finds it disturbing that some members of the community, as well as some members of the press, have criticized the administration of the City. He stated that this criticism was being based on allegations of a self-serving plaintiff and witnesses that had a vested interest in embarrassing the City and it's Council, regardless of the damage to the City and its financial welfare. He indicated that this rhetoric was done by people that were under no restraint to prevent them from speaking or requiring them to prove any of their allegations. He stated that this criticism was done without hearing one bit of testimony or seeing one shred of evidence that was to be presented by the City in their defense. With the negative press immortalizing the plaintiff, he believed that a settlement was in the best interest of the City of Lake Elsinore, and he did vote to offer such a settlement. He invited the citizens of the City to reflect on the following thought: "Why if the plaintiff was so righteous and his case so solid did he settle for less than one fourth the amount of his claim, only part of which he will receive." He noted that the real winners in the LERA case are the attorneys and the losers are the citizens of the City of Lake Elsinore. He noted that the citizens can thank those folks, who could care less what the cost is or who pays for it, just so they can embarrass the Council. Councilwoman Brinley commented on the following: 1. Stressed that at no time did the City Council conspire against Mr. Watkins. She stated that never did the Council sit in a Closed Session that wasn't publicly noticed and announced from the dais; never did the City Council meet in a Closed Session regarding Mr. Watkins without the City Attorney and City Manager present; never would the Council have asked for the termination of the concession agreement except for the failure by the operator to comply with the agreement, as well as Federal, State and Local laws. She noted that Mr. Alongi had said that he was unable to tell the whole truth when he was deposed, however like rest of Council he raised his right hand and swore under oath to tell the truth. She commented that later he contradicted his own deposition. She questioned which was the truth since it cannot be both ways. She stressed that at no time did legal counsel encourage any member of Council to be untruthful. 2. Addressed Mr. Hickman and stated that Council did support the efforts of Mayor Kelley and the Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra. She stated that she personally raised money for the program for that evening. She noted that prior to the performance scheduled in the City the only concern Council had was the financing of the performance. Mayor Kelley commented on the following: PAGE TWENTY-EIGHT-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28,1999 1. Addressed Mr. Gray's comments regarding signs and reminded him that he should not attach his signs to other candidates' signs without permission. 2. Complimented staff for the tree trimming done on Gunnerson and Highway 74. She indicated that it looked great. - 3. Noted that the Philharmonic concert was a great success and stated that she looks forward to having them back next year. She indicated that the fireworks were donated by the Storm and she thanked them. 4. Invited the public to attend the groundbreaking for the Fire Station on October 7, 1999, at 3:00 p.m. at McVicker Park. 5. Announced that the Lake use was way up for July through September. She noted that the Lake Revenue Use fund has gone up to $234,363 and advised that at the Boat Launch a new fish recording station was installed, which will aid in restocking the Lake. 6. Noted that the decision to settle the LERA case was not an easy one. She stated that the case was very complicated and there were many factors out of the Council's hands with many variables. She noted that the credibility of witnesses, mistrial, evidence that the City was not allowed to be presented including testimony from the State regarding their attempts to get Mr. Watkins to comply. She commented on the article that ran in the local newspaper that featured Mr. Watkins, which garnered more and more support, and was run the day before the trial was to begin. She explained that the Council had to weigh the possible outcome and the consequences and make decisions based on the legal advice of the Special Counsel and the City Attorney. She stated that the risks were far to great to chance ending up with a runaway jury then ending up in appellate court with a possible entanglement with the insurance carrier in the future. She noted that it would have been irresponsible to go in that direction. She stated her belief that the Council did nothing wrong, it was a simple breech of contract case and Council did what they felt was best for the City. She stated that she felt that the people that backed the lawsuit should have their actions examined, since she felt that they could not truly represent the City and wish to see the taxpayers financially injured. 7. Announced that the City Council would be going to the League of California Cities in San Jose and noted that October 12, which is a City Council Meeting day, would be a travel day and there was a possibility that the Council Meeting might be called for a lack of quorum. She advised the public to watch for notices relating to this. - CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Leibold stated that she did announce that with respect to the Redevelopment Agency and the Lake Authority that there would be no Closed Session, however for City Council three items had been agendized as follows: PAGE TWENTY-NINE-CITY COUNCIL MINUTES-SEPT. 28, 1999 a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9) Lake Elsinore Recreation Area v.s. City of Lake Elsinore, et. al. - Case No. 302435 b. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL CONSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9) Lake Elsinore vs. all persons interested, et. al. (Cleveland Ridge) - Case No. 311942 c. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9) City of Lake Elsinore vs. all persons interested, et. al. (Meadowbrook) - Case No. 317305. She noted that LAFCO continued their consideration so there was no need to consider items B or C at this meeting. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 9:27 P.M. ENIEKE~LE~ CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: ( ''L 81 ( , / ''I \ i ! ,_!... I I .. " . Lv'-CL(') ~SAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE