Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-1995 Special Joint CC/RDA MINUTES SPECIAL JOINT MEETING CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA FRIDAY, JANUARY 6, 1995 ~. : I ................................................................. I CALL TO ORDER The Special Joint Meeting of the city council and Redevelopment Agency Meeting was called to order at 9:01 a.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by city Manager/Executive Director Molendyk. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS/BOARDMEMBERS: ALONGI, BENDER, BRINLEY, PAPE, WASHBURN ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS/BOARDMEMBERS: NONE - Also present were: City Manager/Executive Director Molendyk, Assistant city Manager/Assistant Executive Director Rogers, City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper, Manager of Special Projects Watenpaugh, Community Services Director Sapp, Interim Chief Building Official Russell and City Clerk/Clerk of the Board Kasad. BUSINESS ITEM 1. Lake Elsinore Diamond - Grand Jurv Letter & citv Response. (F:134.10) City Manager/Executive Director Molendyk explained that a letter had been received from the Grand Jury with comments regarding the Stadium project; and Council and the Staff did not feel those comments were accurate, and noted that what is presented today is the proposed response prepared by the City Attorney. City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper read each finding of the Grand Jury and the appropriate response from the "Response to Interim Report of the Riverside County Grand Jury (Lake Elsinore Stadium Project". Councilman/Chairman Pape noted that the word "excepted" on page two of the response should be "accepted". He stressed that the Stadium project had been done right from the beginning and is a first class facility. - Councilman/Chairman Pape commented on finding #6 and questioned whether all impacted agencies had been satisfied with regard to the EIR. City Attorney Harper indicated that ..1....'--___ '-__, ,_____ __.l.....!._~.!.~...:I "'_____.!,___........__/T'!l___..:I___1...__ T'!l_':_'__. PAGE TWO - SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - JANUARY 6, 1995 Councilman/Chairman Pape commented that with regard to finding #9, there couldn't be a better arrangement made than to recei ve free dirt for the proj ect. He also commented on finding #10 noting that there were water trucks and street sweepers addressing the dirt and debris on an ongoing basis. Councilman/Chairman Pape questioned the $4 million in off-site improvements and whether they could be factored into future developments. City Attorney Harper concurred that some of -- those costs can be offset by future development. Mr. Pape stressed that the accurate figure which should be used for accuracy was $19.1 million. Mayor/Boardmember Washburn requested and received clarification that change orders are generally for changes which occur in the field. Councilmembers/Boardmembers Pape and Brinley questioned the $8 to $10 million in change orders and where those numbers came from. City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper indicated that he was not certain where those numbers came from and detailed the sub-committee format under which the Grand Jury operates. Mr. Pape inquired how many people serve on the Grand Jury. Mr. Harper indicated that each subcommittee is approximately five or six people. Mr. Pape questioned how much expense was incurred by the City to prepare the documents requested by the Grand Jury. Mr. Harper indicated that he was not certain; and noted that he was also not certain who had testified before the committee, as he had not. Mayor /Boardmember Washburn addressed finding #18 and clarified that the $450,000 spent for equipment did increase the city share of the profit. He further noted that with regard to Conclusion Item #1, Riverside is currently pursuing a joint effort with Moreno Valley; and Temecula would have liked to have the team there, but political changes did not allow for it. .... Councilman/Chairman Pape suggested that on page 14 rather than using "substandard" to address the Adelanto Stadium, the statement be "below minor league standards". He inquired who reviews the work of the Grand Jury. Mr. Harper indicated that their work goes to the Deputy District Attorney to review for legal accuracy, but it is basically an internal process. Mr. Pape expressed concern with the amount of inaccuracies in their findings. Councilwoman/Boardmember Brinley commented on this matter being turned over to the Grand Jury and noted that indictments should have been issued if they suspected counterfeit documents. City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper concurred that if they had found something in that vein he would like to address it. Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chairman Bender suggested that this report is an open ended opportunity for a witch hunt. Mr. Harper concurred that while he was not certain what to __..___.&.. ~___ .1....'--- ____~_ .... _ PAGE THREE - SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - JANUARY 6, 1995 ~ Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chairman Bender questioned how the Grand Jury members are chosen. City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper indicated that they are appointed by the Board of Supervisors and generally consist of retired people who have the time to participate. Mr. Bender inquired whether there are specific qualifications or background requirements. Mr. Harper indicated that there are none, and the members are flooded with so much information in a short time that there is no time for in depth review. Councilwoman/Boardmember Brinley inquired whether they have staff or attorneys present for their investigations. Mr. Harper indicated that there is no staff, and attorneys are only present when witnesses are being interviewed. Mayor/Boardmember Washburn commented that this is a shadow created by criticism from the "watchdog" group. - city Manager/Executive Director Molendyk inquired whether Mr. Harper was recommending an audit as suggested by the Grand Jury Mr. Harper indicated that he was not recommending the audit because the city already employs an independent auditor to prepare annual audits. Councilman/Boardmember Alongi inquired whether those who testified could now talk about their interviews since the case is closed. City Attorney Harper indicated that his understanding was that those who testified where never allowed to discuss their interviews. Mr. Alongi expressed surprise with the Grand Jury's report; noting that it was evident that they did not read the agreement with the baseball team. He indicated that he was confident that the City Attorney would keep the Council out of trouble, but noted that there were several comments in the response to which he could take issue. He commented that from the beginning the restaurant was to be a first class restaurant open every day of the week. He indicated that there was no discussion of being a catering kitchen or a banquet hall. City Attorney Harper concurred with those statements and not that everyone felt it would be open for lunch. He advised that this issue is currently being pursued with the team and Volume Services. He clarified that discussion of what was built is appropriate, however the service level is not pertinent to this discussion. - Councilman/Boardmember Alongi expressed concern with the voting record presented by the city Attorney in the response and suggested a review of the minutes. City Attorney Harper clarified the votes as presented. Mr. Alongi clarified that he was never dissatisfied with the facility or its quality and stressed that his concern was always the financing mechanisms. He also stressed that the final total cost for the Stadium should include the costs of refinancing. He commented that the City is now in a financial dilemma because of the project. He reiterated his belief that it is a great facility for the Community, but he is still concernED with the manner in which it was financed. He indicated that which team came here was not important, but noted that the negotiations were done by two people. PAGE FOUR - SPECIAL JOINT MEETING - JANUARY 6, 1995 believe the Council should gamble with the public funds. He noted the impact of Orange County finances on this community and its ability to receive a bond rating and questioned the ultimate impact it will have on the interest rate. City Attorney Harper stressed that Standard & Poors did not down rate the City's bond rating, but they will not rate any bonds in this area for a period of time. He further explained that the period of time will be too long to wait for the upcoming requirements. He also noted that the Grand Jury report did __ not help the situation. Mayor Pro Tem/vice Chairman Bender commented that it is important to recognize that while the Stadium possibly could have been done for less, the project is now complete and the costs have been absorbed and the Council needs to deal with the facility. He further commented that the Council has a responsibility to work together to capture the most benefit possible from the facility. He indicated that the focus of this meeting should be the findings of the Grand Jury and the City's response to those findings. Edith Stafford, 54 Elm street, inquired whether the Grand Jury was invited to this meeting and expressed concern that the Council ripped the report apart without their presence. She noted the finding that there was a possibility of counterfeit documents and stressed that they must have found something to suggest that. City Attorney Harper indicated that if that was the case he would like to know about it to pursue it legally. He also clarified that the Grand Jury members never appear as a body in public. Mrs. Stafford reiterated her belief that they should have been invited and in not doing so made this meeting appear dirty and underhanded. She stressed the need for an audit. Mr. Harper reiterated the pre existing -- obligation to the State for audits, which has already been met. Councilman/Boardmember Alongi stressed that the Grand Jury suggested an audit and indicated that the audit should specifically address the Stadium. Mrs. Stafford reiterated the need for an audit and indicated that there is the appearance that something is wrong and if the City does not have the audit done she will approach the State to do it. Ace Vallejos, 15231 Cobre, advised that he owns a house in the City and pays taxes in the City even though he lives in the County area. He expressed concern with the finances of the City and what goes on in the Community. He indicated that he wants to see a proper accounting for the Stadium and suggested the possibility of "white collar crime". Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest Drive, questioned why this meeting is being held at 9 a.m. for such an important issue. She questioned the actual appraised value of the Stadium and what collateral is held against the Stadium. She commented that the District Attorney is not effective and this inquiry will not end with the Grand Jury or the District Attorney. She expressed concern that Councilman Pape was suggesting that """'___, _ _...:3...3____ __~~.! __ __..!....3 _ L!" ....L..,~ _ __ . _ PAGE FZVE - SPECZAL JOZNT KEETZNG - JANUARY 6, 1995 ".... and excitement voiced by the community. He indicated that the response as presented is accurate and thanked City Attorney Harper for his work on it. He stressed that most of the votes on the Stadium were not 3 to 2 and indicated that he was proud to participate and proud of the facility and team. MOVED BY WASHBURN, SECONDED BY PAPE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE RESPONSE AS CORRECTED AND AUTHORIZE TRANSMITTAL TO THE GRAND JURY. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY WASHBURN, SECONDED BY BENDER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY MEETING AT 10:25 A.M. ~ h UfbltL- GARY ~~HBURN, MAYOR CITY ~F~E ELSINORE COUNCILl7ELOPMENT AGENCY ~~~{J~ ~N W. ~ CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - -