Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC-11/28/2000MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 289 2000 CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Brinley at 7:04 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mr. Pete Dawson. INVOCATION The Invocation was provided by City Treasurer Ralph Ferro. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: KELLEY, METZE, PAPE, SCHIFFNER, BRINLEY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Boone, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Police Chief Walsh, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, City Treasurer Ferro and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. PRESENTATIONS a. Presentation - Press - Enterprise Reader's Choice Award. (F:56.1) Jerry Castro & Marla Garvanzo, representing the Press Enterprise, explained the Reader's Choice Awards and presented the banner award for the favorite baseball diamond to the Lake Elsinore Diamond Stadium. Mayor Brinley thanked them for this recognition. b. Presentation - Fall Business of the Quarter. (F:56.1)(X:70.1) Mayor Brinley noted the contributions of My Buddies Pizza to the Community and their efforts to rebuild and expand their business following its destruction by fire in 1999. She noted that they are strong supporters of the youth in the valley and youth athletic programs. She thanked them for their efforts and introduced the Richardson family. She presented them with the Business of the Quarter Plaque and congratulated them on their efforts. PAGE TWO - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 C. Presentation - Website Demonstration. (17:65.1) Information/Communications Manager Dennis noted that last update in September at which it was anticipated that the website would be rolled out by the end of this year. He introduced the Ken Pollard of Site Creators and noted that they had been working together to gather the necessary information; and compared the process to making a quilt. He advised that they currently had over 60 pages of information and noted the potential growth of the site. He presented the Home Page and detailed the permanent navigation tools on the site. He noted that the site will include changing graphics to provide a theme for what the City has to offer. He showed the quick link finder and noted the inclusion of information on special events and meeting announcements. He displayed various pages of the site and noted highlights of each. Mayor Brinley questioned the inclusion of current events and activities. Mr. Dennis indicated that the site will have the ability to include those. Councilwoman Kelley inquired how an organization could have information on their meetings included in the site. Mr. Dennis indicated that this information would be included in the Community Calendar section and at this point they would need to do so through the Webmaster link. Councilman Metze noted that the site would be a constantly evolving tool. Mr. Dennis concurred noting that sites tend to get bigger and more expensive as time goes on. Councilman Metze indicated that the site was quite impressive. Mr. Dennis noted that the web address is www. lake - elsinore . org, and the new home page and material would be placed on that site. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDIZED ITEMS Requests were received to address the following items and deferred to that discussion: Item Nos. 31 and 35. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS Mayor Brinley clarified that with regard to Item #8, the proposed change would be to Canyon Hills Parkway, rather than Canyon Hills Road. The following item was pulled for further discussion and consideration: Item No. 3. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY METZE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. PAGE THREE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28,'2000 1. The following Minutes were approved: a. City Council Study Session - November 2, 2000. b. City Council/Redevelopment Agency Study Session - November 14, 2000. (F:44.4) The following Minutes were received and ordered filed: C. Planning Commission Meeting - November 1, 2000. (F:603) d. Design Review Committee Meeting - November 1, 2000. (F:60.4) 2. Ratified Warrant List for November 15, 2000. (F:12.3) 4. Approved Final Tract Map 23848 -4 for Pardee Construction Company's 66 Lot Subdivision for Single - Family Residential Uses; authorized signature and recordation of map and authorized signature of the agreement for Construction of Public Improvements. (F:160.2) 5. Approved Final Tract Map 23848 -6 for Pardee Construction Company's 50 Lot Subdivision for Single - Family Residential Uses; authorized signature and recordation of map and authorized signature of the agreement for Construction of Public Improvements. (F:160.2) 6. Approved Final Tract Map 29568 for Pardee Construction Company's 45 Lot Subdivision for Single - Family Residential Uses & Open Space; authorized signature and recordation of map and authorized signature of the agreement for Construction of Public Improvements. (F:1602) 7. Approved Transfer of Drainage Easements Pardee Construction Quitclaim Deed, authorizing the Mayor to sign and date Exhibit A Quitclaim Deed to transfer the drainage easement which is no longer needed to Pardee Construction company and accept the drainage easement for Tract 25274 for recordation. (F: 134.1)(X:160.2) 8. Approved Public Hearing date of December 12, 2000, for consideration of Proposed Road Name Change from Cottonwood Hills Road to Canyon Hills Parkway. (F:158.1) PUBLIC HEARING 21. Public Hearing on 2000 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program Award. (F:84.8) City Manager Watenpaugh advised that the City had been awarded a grant of $59,144 to supplement overtime costs and a variety of programs. He further advised that the City would be required to provide matching funds in the amount of $5,572. Mayor Brinley opened the Public Hearing at 7:25 p.m., asking those persons PAGE FOUR - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 interested in this item to speak. Hearing no one, the public hearing was closed at 7:26 p.m. The City Clerk reported no written communications on this matter. Councilman Metze noted the City's willingness to accept this $50,000 grant. Councilwoman Kelley indicated that she had no problem with this item and pointed out some of the programs the money would be used for, such as graffiti prevention, gang suppression, narcotics suppression, city park vandalism prevention, etc. She expressed support for this action. Mayor Pro Tem Pape expressed support for this action. Councilman Schiffner indicated that the City's $5,000 would be money well spent. Mayor Brinley concurred that this was a favorable action. MOVED BY PAPE, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE USE OF THE GRANT FUNDS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ADVISORY BOARD FOR: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PATROL, LAKE ELSINORE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, LAKE ELSINORE NARCOTIC ENFORCEMENT, PAROLE AND PROBATION ENFORCEMENT, LAKE ELSINORE BIKE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, GANG SUPPRESSION AND IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM, GRAFFITI ERADICATION PROGRAM, PROSTITUTION ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS, CITY ENHANCEMENT AND SAFETY PROGRAMS, CITY PARK VANDALISM ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM AND THE HOLIDAY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. BUSINESS ITEMS 31. Appointments to Lake Elsinore Community Advisory Committee. (F:59.1) City Manager Watenpaugh noted that appointments to this Committee was requested by ENRON North America, for the Lake Elsinore Advanced Pump Storage Project; and highlighted the proposed project. He indicated that it was requested that each Councilmember appoint one member to the Advisory Committee to serve for approximately one year. Kathy Russeth, public affairs consultant for the project, confirmed the request by Enron and offered to answer questions. Mayor Pro Tem Pape appointed Art Bakewell as his representative to the Committee; noting that this would be a large project and there were a lot of questions to be answered. PAGE FIVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 Councilman Schiffner appointed Donna Franson; and noted that he thinks it will be a useful committee. He indicated that on the face the project looks good, but prior to approval there needs to be an opportunity to hear what everyone has to say about it. Councilman Metze appointed George Rivera; noting that it was still early in the process for any of the heavy questions. He stressed the importance of appointing people who will get in and ask the appropriate questions. Councilwoman Kelley appointed John Gonzales, noting that he has served on her behalf on several committees. She commented that this Committee had garnered a lot of response from interested parties. She suggested that it was unfortunate that there was not an allowance for more members or alternates. Ms. Russeth clarified that no additional representatives were needed at this time. Councilwoman Kelley questioned the term of the appointments. Ms. Russeth indicated that they would run throughout the licensing process, which will be approximately 12 to 15 months. Mayor Brinley appointed Donna Niehouse, noting that she was a business owner in the City, and resident of the County area. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY METZE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENTS OF ART BAKEWELL, DONNA FRANSON, GEORGE RIVERA, JOHN GONZALES AND DONNA NIEHOUSE TO THE LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE ADVANCED PUMP STORAGE PROJECT. Ms. Russeth thanked the Council for their assistance and cooperation. Ace Vallejos, 15231 Cobre, noted that EVMWD was the agency responsible for the CEQA requirements and public input for this project. He indicated that the composition of the Committee was not representative of the community. He indicated that the only legitimate committee would be the one formed by the County. He expressed hopes that the committee would work with the County and EVMWD. Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest, questioned what this committee was for and noted that she had contacted the First Amendment Coalition regarding the matter. She indicated that the Council's "puppets" had been appointed. She noted billboards in the vicinity of Madera, CA, suggesting that they get rid of Enron; and noted that the committee might have been appointed, but others will fight the project tooth and nail. 32. Second Reading- - Ordinance No. 1071 - Graffiti Ordinance. (F:79.1) MOVED BY METZE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1071 UPON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY: PAGE SIX - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 Councilman Metze noted that this was the second reading of an Ordinance regarding Graffiti, as discussed two weeks ago. Mayor Brinley noted that the City Attorney was looking at the options discussed at the last meeting. City Attorney Leibold concurred noting the reference to a Model Graffiti Ordinance developed by the National Association of Municipal Lawyers and indicated that her office would prepare a written report for the Council and assist in comparing the provisions of that ordinance to Ordinance No. 1071 and work to amend this ordinance with any appropriate new provisions. ORDINANCE NO. 1071 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, AMENDING CHAPTER 9.52 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO GRAFFITI AND ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE STORAGE AND USE OF AEROSOL PAINT CONTAINERS, DYE CONTAINERS, MARKERS, AND TOOLS OR INSTRUMENTS CAPABLE OF INSCRIBING OR ETCHING GLASS, METAL, CONCRETE OR WOOD. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: KELLEY, METZE, PAPE, SCHIFFNER, BRINLEY NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE City Manager Watenpaugh noted the City had hired an additional graffiti company to assist in removing graffiti more quickly. He also noted that the Sheriff s Department caught someone doing graffiti and intended to prosecute in the case. 33. New Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Resolution No 2000 50. (F:156.1) City Manager Watenpaugh explained that this was a new requirement for federal funding; and staff was not yet sure if annual consideration would be required. He stressed that this was a requirement to ensure the award of federal funds. MOVED BY METZE, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT THE NEW DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM AND ESTABLISH THE DBE PAGE SEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 GOALS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 AS 8 %, AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2000-50. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-50 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ESTABLISHING A DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 7:45 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 7:55 P.M. Mayor Brinley noted for the record that Councilmembers Metze and Pape and City Attorney Leibold would be sharing a microphone for the balance of the meeting; and apologized for the inconvenience. 34. Design Review for Miscellaneous Project No. 00 -02 for New Sony: Calvary Chapel a Church Located at 31507 Machado Street. (17:60.1) Community Development Director Brady highlighted the proposed project and detailed its location. He advised that the area was currently zoned R -E Residential Estates, with minimum lot size of 1/2 acre. He indicated that churches are permitted in the residential zone under a Conditional Use Permit. He further indicated that they would be providing 101 parking spaces rather than the required 87 spaces and would also be exceeding the landscaping requirements. He noted that one resident to the southwest of the project had expressed concern with a church at this location, particularly with regard to the access easement. He indicated that the Planning Commission modified the condition to require a block wall to mitigate noise and traffic impacts for the adjacent property owner. He noted a sample board of materials to be used and advised that the applicant was present to respond to questions. He also noted a new rendering provided this evening. Dean Murphy, Pastor of New Song Calvary Chapel, located on Riverside Drive for the last seven years; indicated that they feel that they fit into the neighborhood well. He looked forward to being able to reach out to serve the community; and offered to answer questions. Councilwoman Kelley indicated that most of her concerns were answered at the Agenda Review meeting. She inquired with regard to the neighbor who was concerned with the access and asked if she was aware of the fence proposed for mitigation. Community Development Director Brady clarified that the neighbor left the Planning Commission meeting prior to the decision to place a block wall to mitigate her concerns. Councilwoman Kelley expressed hopes that the neighbor was listening to this meeting and aware of the mitigation. Councilman Metze indicated that the neighbors might be pleasantly PAGE EIGHT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 surprised, but churches tend to make good neighbors. He noted that it was good that this church was obtaining its own facility. He requested the addition of Condition #21.a. requiring that they submit a graffiti removal program to address graffiti within 72 or 48 hours, subject to Community Development Director Brady's approval. Mr. Murphy agreed to this requirement. Mr. Brady indicated that the condition would be added. Councilman Schiffner questioned a comment at the Planning Commission meeting regarding the property owner needing to care for both sides of the wall. Mr. Brady indicated that the only concern with that requirement would be that the fence would be on the property line and they would have to obtain permission to enter and address graffiti. He noted that due to the configuration of the property only the front portion of the wall would be an issue. He further noted the requirements with graffiti resistant paint. Mayor Pro Tem Pape noted that the drawings show a nice project and was pleased with the plans for expansion and extra parking. Mayor Brinley noted that the future school would be coming back for further approvals. Community Development Director Brady confirmed that a school would require a Conditional Use Permit before the Planning Commission and Design Review Approval before the City Council. MOVED BY PAPE, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT NO. 00 -02 FOR A 69300 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, CONVERSION OF A 19300 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING TO A CHURCH OFFICE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 31507 MACHADO STREET; BASED ON EXHIBITS "A" THRU "E" AND THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS; AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Findings 1. The project, as recommended by the Planning Commission, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. 3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.82.070, of the LEMC including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to insure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of this Chapter and the planning district in which the site is located. Conditions of Approval for Design Review for Miscellaneous Project 00-02 PAGE NINE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 Planning Division 1. Design Review approval for Miscellaneous Project No. 00 -2 and Conditional Use Permit No. 00 -6 will lapse and be void unless building permits are issued within one (1) year of City Council approval. The Community Development Director may grant an extension of time of up to one (1) year per extension, prior to the expiration of the initial Design Review approval. Application for a time extension must be submitted to the City of Lake Elsinore one (1) month prior to the expiration date. 2. Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans submitted to the Building Division Plan Check. All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 3. Any violation or non - compliance with the Conditions of Approval shall be cause for the revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. 4. All site improvements approved with this request shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations. Revisions to approved site plans or building elevations shall be subject to the review of the Community Development Director. All plans submitted for Building Division Plan Check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by Conditions of Approval, or the Planning Commission/City Council through subsequent action. 5. Seating for the sanctuary shall be limited to 210 chairs and controlled by the Fire Marshal of the City of Lake Elsinore. If the church facility expands to a larger number, and/or they increase their hours of operation and find that they need additional parking spaces, a church representative shall be required to meet with the Community Development Director or designee to determine a course of action. 6. Any air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Roof mounted equipment is not allowed. 7. All exterior on -site lighting shall be shielded and directed on -site so as not to create glare onto neighboring property and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of the fixture. All light fixtures shall match the architectural style of the building. 8. Applicant shall meet ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements. 9. No outdoor storage is allowed. 10. A six foot (6') wrought iron fence with landscaping material that will screen the parking lot shall be required the northeast and northwest boundaries. A PAGE TEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- NOVEMBER 28, 2000 six foot (6') decorative block wall with anti - graffiti paint shall be constructed to approximately the end of the neighbor's house subject to the approval of the community development director. The remainder shall be wrought iron. 11. The trash enclosure shall be constructed per City standards as approved by the Community Development Director. 12. Noise shall be regulated per the regulation of Chapter 17.78 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 13. The two access driveways shall be assigned as a primary and secondary driveway. Signs shall be posted at the entrance to these driveways notifying patrons to use the primary driveway in most cases. 14. Applicant shall use roofing materials with Class "A" fire rating. Asphalt roofing materials shall be of the quality of a Presidential Shake, a three dimensional shingle. 15. Any exterior downspouts shall be painted to match with building exterior color. 16. The Planning Division shall approve the location of any construction trailers utilized during construction. All construction trailers shall require a cash bond processed through the Planning Division. 17. Materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the applicant and approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 18. On -site surface drainage shall not cross sidewalks. 19. Parking stalls shall be double - striped with four -inch (4 ") lines two feet (2') apart. 20. Signage shall conform to the provisions of Title 17, Chapter 94. The Community Development Director or designee shall approve all signs for the project. 21. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, approved by the Planning Division. 21.a. Applicant shall adopt a Graffiti Removal Program, as approved by the Community Development Director requiring removal within 72 hours. Prior To Building /Grading Permits 22. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permits, the applicant PAGE ELEVEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shall return the executed original to the Planning Division for inclusion in the case records. 23. Three (3) sets of the Final Landscaping/Irrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. A Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee plus forty percent (40 %) City fee. a) All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100% plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. b) Applicant shall plant street trees, selected from the City's Street Tree List, a maximum of forty feet (40) apart and at least twenty -four -inch (24 ") box in size. c) All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (611) high and six inch (6 ") wide concrete curb. d) Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress /egress points shall be no higher than thirty -six inches (36 "). e) Landscape planters shall be planted with an appropriate parking lot shade tree to provide for 50% parking lot shade in fifteen (15) years. f) Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan. g) The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering. h) All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two years from installation sign -off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be requested by the applicant at the end of the required two years with approval /acceptance by the Landscape Consultant and Community Development Director or Designee. i) Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan. j) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. 24. Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley PAGE TWELVE - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 Municipal Water District. Proof shall be presented to the Chief Building Official prior to issuance of building permits and final approval. 25. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department have been met. 26. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall pay park -in -lieu fee in effect at time of building permit issuance. 26A. The hours of operation shall be 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM daily. Engineering Division 27. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to building permit. 28. Dedicate a 15 ft. wide strip of additional street right -of -way along the frontage of Machado St. to the City prior to issuance of building permit. 29. Public right -of -way dedications shall be prepared by the applicant or his agent. Deeds shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permit. 30. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Res. 85- 26). 31. 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 applying for a building permit. 32. Construct all public works improvements per approved street plans (LEMC Title 12) subject to City standards and approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. Plans must be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit (LEMC 16.34). 33. 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). 34. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of off -site public works improvements (LEMC12.08, Res.83 -78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy. 35. Applicant shall maintain right of access for the existing 15 ft. easement along southerly property line. PAGE THIRTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 36. The applicant shall furnish a signing and striping plan for Machado Street, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 37. If grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified, 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. 38. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 39. Provide street lighting, show lighting improvements on street improvement plans, as required by the City Engineer. 40. On -site drainage shall be conveyed through landscaped areas to reduce urban pollutants before draining to Machado Street subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 41. 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. 42. Roofs shall drain to a landscaped area. 43. 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. Another recycling vendor, other than CR &R Inc., cannot charge the applicant for bin rental or solid waste disposal. If the applicant is not using CR &R Inc. for recycling services and the recycling material is either sold or donated to another vendor, the applicant shall supply proof of debris disposal at a recycling center, including verification of tonnage by certified weighmaster tickets. 35. Initiative Petition - Resolution No. 2000 -51. (17:72.1) City Attorney Leibold commented that the item before Council involves an Initiative Petition. She explained that in February a Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition for an Initiative Measure was submitted to the Office of the City Clerk. She further explained that in accordance with the Election Code she prepared an impartial title and summary of the proposal. She indicated that during the discussions as to whether or not the Initiative contained the full text of the proposal, or whether what was submitted contained the full text of the proposal, the proponents did submit a revised petition and a revised title and summary was prepared. She further PAGE FOURTEEN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 indicated that the petition was released for circulation on April 10, 2000 with a filing deadline of October 7, 2000. City Attorney Leibold stated that 992 qualified signatures were required for a Regular General Election and on October 5, 2000, the proponents' submitted 360 petitions containing approximately 1,726 signatures to the City Clerk's Office for verification. She stated that the petitions were delivered to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters for verification of signature and on November 15, 2000, the Registrar's Office completed the verification and certified their findings that 1,187 signatures were qualified. She indicated that based on the circumstances the petition had qualified for placement on the next regularly scheduled General Election, in November, 2001. She explained that under the California Election Code, when an initiative is qualified, the City Council is given three alternatives which are: 1) the City Council may adopt the Ordinance as submitted, which was not an option available to the City Council in this case since California Government Code Section 34870 et seq. requires that a system of electing the City Council by or from districts must be established by ordinance, and approved by the voters; 2) the City Council may order the election by adoption of proposed Resolution No. 2000 -51; 3) or the City Council may order a Report on the Impact, Consistency or other matters of the proposal. City Attorney Leibold stated that there had been some discussion regarding the clarity or ambiguity of the petition, as well as legal issues, which had been raised with respect to the form, as well as the substance of the initiative. She indicated that the kinds of issues that may be relevant if Council chooses to request a report could be legal issues, as well as the fiscal impact of converting to an election by districts with a City -wide elected mayor. She stated that if Council chooses to request the preparation of a report, they need to identify what issues they wish to have reported on and the report must be presented back to Council within 30 days. She noted her request to pull Item No. 3 from the Consent Calendar regarding the cancellation of the December 26, 2000 City Council Meeting; and explained that the 30 days would begin on this date, since the petition has qualified and was presented to Council at this Meeting. She explained that Council could either receive the report and take their next action on their regularly scheduled meeting of December 26, 2000 or a Special Meeting could be set for this purpose, however Council must have to have a meeting sometime between this date and December 28, 2000. She indicated that if Council wished to request the preparation of a report to identify or clarify some of the issues that have been raised, that report could be prepared by any City department or Agency; if there are fiscal matters that best be addressed by Administrative Services and the City Clerk with respect to cost of elections etc. She further indicated that legal counsel, either her office or an independent third party, might best address the legal issues. She recommended using the law firm of Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart, which specializes in the representation of cities and other public agencies and have had experience in election law matters, including voter initiatives. David Walsh, proponent of the Initiative, thanked the registered voters of the City of Lake Elsinore for taking a few moments out of their busy day to PAGE FIFTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 sign the petition; recognized the circulators of the petitions; asked the residents to read the proposal and the accompanying City Attorney summary of the initiative. He stated that the public could find the proposal and summary at the local library and on the web site for Elsinore Magazine. Mr. Walsh detailed the initiative highlights as follows: It would establish four Council Districts based on population; Council Candidates would have to live in their District and only draw votes from the people that live in their Districts; the Office of Mayor would be a separate elected position with a two year term of office. He stated that his group is confident that they can win votes at the polls provided that all the chads are punched through. He requested that the City Council establish a Study Session to consider how the initiative might be implemented. Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest Drive, noted that in the beginning of the initiative the Council griped about the cost of a Special Election and now the City Attorney was proposing to use a separate Attorney to do a report. She indicated that Councilman Schiffner had stated that the Initiative group did not have a program where the Districts would be allocated and she stated that it would be done by census and by the Registrar of Voters; rather than making random lines around areas. She quoted an article from the newspaper, which quoted Richard L. Hansen from Loyola Law School, indicating that "The initiative is on solid legal ground and that the Council would not have the power to overturn or ignore the proposal if it passed, but would have the power to fill in the holes, such as determining District Boundaries. If the Councilmembers refused, they would be taken to court. There is no State law governing how long City Council terms should be." Ms. Hyland noted that the entire text of the initiative would be available for public review at the Library. She stated the Council was politicalizing something that the people want, or they would not have signed the petition. She further stated that it was not a matter of what Council wanted, since they would not be sitting on Council much longer anyway, since she was going to get rid of them. She commented that they were not trying to help, but rather hurt the community, and the people won't let them. Mayor Pro Tem Pape noted that Council had a decision to make, whether to place the issue on the next Election, or to gain additional information from a third party impartial law firm, which would be retained to research this issue specifically to provide additional information prior to Council making a final decision. He indicated that it was Council's goal to determine what was in the best interest of the community as a whole, as opposed to personal vendettas a few may have against the current Council. He stated that he would personally like to have the recommended law firm provide additional information since he had some specific questions because of the way the initiative was written. He stated that as mentioned earlier, the Initiative was written by a layman; was quite vague; and did not provide enough detail to implement the Initiative. He noted he was not sure that Council could implement the Initiative since there was so little detail and it was more like a summary than a proposition. He indicated that he would like to have the attorneys report on the legal language for the proposal, since he felt that PAGE SIXTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 when someone was proposing a law there was a need to have certain things within the text to make it enforceable. He questioned if there was language in the text that could be placed in the City Code and enforced. He stated that if the attorneys felt that there was sufficient information to move forward with the Initiative, he would like their recommendation on how the City would implement the proposal as it is written. He questioned if it would be legal for a Councilmember to serve a two -year term, or if the Initiative was in conflict with State Law. He asked if there was sufficient detail in the Initiative to draw district lines, since there was no mention where the lines will be; who was going to draw the lines; or when the lines would be redrawn as the population changes. He stated that he did not know if Council was supposed to draw the lines or if someone else was supposed to do it; or if there was total freedom to place the District Boundaries wherever they want. He questioned as a practical matter regarding two -year terms if all five seats would be up at one time, or it they would be staggered with Elections held every single year. He stated that he was not sure if Council was supposed to guess what the intent was and noted that the people signing the petition had no idea either. He stated that he would like information from the Finance Department and City Clerk regarding how much additional cost there would be to the City if it were to hold Elections every year. Mayor Pro Tem Pape stated that there were multiple issues addressed in the Initiative; and noted that it was his understanding from past discussions that if a proponent had a proposition on the ballot, it should deal with just one issue, and there were clearly four separate issues in this Initiative. He asked if that would create a problem or if it was in conflict with State Law. He asked if the initiative could be implemented or if it was too vague. He stated that the questions he posed were some of the details he would like to have addressed in a report that Council would review in 30 days. He stated that he had no problem with having the regularly scheduled City Council Meeting on the 26"' of December, to allow Council to address this issue in a timely manner. Councilman'Schiffner stated that he felt that the Initiative was a bad idea, however he did not feel it was his choice to make the decision, other than at the election polls. He stated that it was the Council's responsibility to try to get clarification, if it was going on the ballot so it would be something that the people would know what they were voting on. He indicated that the intent was not clear in the Initiative. He noted that in Mr. Walsh's narrative, he mentioned that the candidate would have to live in his or her district, however it does not state that in the Initiative. He stated that some people might like to elect a Mayor, but do not care about Districts. He stated that the Initiative does not give people choices, and he suggested that it might even be the law that they have to provide choices. He further stated that he was not opposed to the system to give the people a choice, however he felt that it was Council's obligation to see that the issues put before the people are something that they know what they are voting on. Councilman Schiffner stated that he clearly feels that the people who signed the petition did not have anything explained to them. He commented that the people had a right to know what they were supporting when they signed the PAGE SEVENTEEN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 28, 2000 petition and a greater right to know what they are voting on. He supported hiring the Attorney to prepare a report, which will inform Council on what should be done and how to implement the proposal. City Attorney Leibold stated that some of the issues had been identified, and were issues when the petition was initially presented. She stated that in a very abbreviated form, she had correspondence with the circulator and the proponent and asked if there was additional text. She noted that the response was "no this was the full text of the initiative ". She indicated that she had not been instructed to prepare a report or do any type of in -depth analysis, but based on quick issue spotting from previous experience, there was an express statutory provision in the Government Code which specified that a General Law City could establish City Council Electoral Districts and the procedure for doing so was outlined by statute. She explained that it had to be presented to the voters, but it had to contain a description of the boundaries of each District and the Districts have to be numbered. She stated that it must state if the City Councilmembers are elected by or from the District. She stated that there are specific statutory requirements, and her concern was whether the Initiative adequately satisfied those statutory requirements and whether there was clarity so there's a consensus of intent by the people that signed the petition. She indicated that there had been comment about a General Law City shortening up terms to two years. She noted that there are a number of Government Code provisions, particularly in connection with establishing Districts that refers to a four -year Council term; there is a separate statutory provision relating to the authority of a General Law City to adopt an elected Mayor and states that a Mayor is a member of the City Council and has all the duties and powers of a City Councilmember and can be designated to a two -year term, however the balance of the Councilmembers serve for four -year terms. She stated that the questions presented relate to the sufficiency of the form, whether there is an ordinance which can be adopted and implemented; and whether there is clarity. She stated that there had been some suggestions that the City Attorney's Office or the Registrar of Voters Office or the Attorney General's Office could fill in the holes; and while there is a very treasured interest in the peoples' right to legislate, the power of the Initiative is something very unique and powerful in the State of Califbrnia; o and while it is very protected, it is the people who have to establish what is being implemented. She further explained that the people have to draft the ordinance for the Initiative process to work. She stated that she could not substitute her interpretation and somehow undermine the intent of the people. She stressed that her interpretation could be different, as could be the interpretation of the Registrar of Voters or the City Council. She reiterated that she had not conducted any kind of in -depth analysis, however these were issues which merited further review. She indicated that if the resolution were approved to place this on the next General Election, these same issues would need to be researched, evaluated and reported on so they can be presented in the impartial analysis as well as the arguments for and against the measure. She stated that at some point the City needs the clarification and she suggested that Council needs to decide if they are PAGE EIGHTEEN - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 going to do it now or later. Councilman Metze concurred with the rest of Council; and indicated that he was not opposed to holding the Regular City Council Meeting on the 26' of December to receive the report on the Initiative. He stated that he would take his position at the time of the report, noting that the people have spoken. He noted that the same person hassles the City Council every two weeks and threatens to have Council thrown out. He stated that the Council does not serve at the will of one person and will not be removed by the will of that one person. He addressed the situation of calling Ms. Franke from the First Amendment Collation and a college professor for their opinion, and suggested that those that can do, while those that can't teach. Councilwoman Kelley stated that she took offense to Mr. Metze's statement. Councilwoman Kelley clarified that the City Attorney had cautioned Council to either address the ambiguities at this meeting or when the Initiative was to go on the ballot. She stated that there was one issue she wished to address and that was the statement made by Mr. Walsh asking Council to call a Study Session to fill in the holes. She stated that it was her understanding that the people signed the Initiative the way it was presented and that if there was going to be a community committee and they started reworking the Initiative, then it would be null and void. She noted that it is not the intent of the Initiative process to dilute it down after it had been signed. City Attorney Leibold stated that a Study Session was not necessarily a bad idea, however the suggestion of a Study Session to fill in the holes was troublesome, because the holes are filled in to express the intent and identify the practicality and the protocols of implementation. She noted that if the 1,187 people were to attend a meeting together, and the Election by District and Election for District were explained, she was not sure there was enough clarity to allow for uniform understanding. She stated that Council could not fill in the holes. She posed the question of if an Initiative, by itself was not clear in terms of how to stage elections and those types of issues, was it appropriate or lawful for the Council or City Attorney to fill in the holes. She suggested that if the text of the Initiative is changed, it can not be placed on the ballot, unless it is recirculated, since it would be a different Initiative. Councilwoman Kelley stated that the Initiative was one lengthy paragraph and stated, "will serve two terms with no term limits" and did not address whether the Councilmembers seats all turn over at once. She stated that if the entire Council turned over at the same time there would be no consistency in Government. She noted that it does not address whether the terms are staggered either. She stated that it was very frustrating to the voters to vote on an Initiative on the ballot, only to find out that it was challenged afterwards. She suggested that it was very frustrating and PAGE NINETEEN -CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 distasteful for the voters. She indicated that she would rather clarify the issues before it is placed on the ballot, so when it is voted on, the public will know exactly which direction the City is going. She further indicated that she would like an impartial person and not the City Attorney's Office to provide a report. Councilwoman Kelley stated that Council would be able to do their homework on this issue and gain some clarity. She indicated that no member of Council was opposed to Initiative process from the people, therefore clarification was necessary to move forward. She indicated that she would be in favor of a report and returning on December 26th, to consider the matter. Mayor Brinley concurred with her follow Councilmembers; and requested clarification that the expertise of the proposed Attorney was initiatives and election law. City Attorney Leibold stated that the law firm's field of practice was public law with widespread City Attorney experience, as well as other public agencies. She indicated that they do have significant experience with election laws and initiatives. Mayor Brinley stressed that the City would have the use of their experience and their expertise. She stated that she felt that it was needed to address an issue of this importance to the Community. She commented that the Initiative was vaguely written and did not give the community all the information the voters need to have to make a sound decision on the manner in which they wish to have their local government operate. She further stated that there was a need for further study and questioned the fiscal responsibility of the proposal. She stressed the questionable legality of the Initiative and if the City could enforce or implement it. She stated that she felt the Initiative was very confusing in its intent to the community. She stated that she felt the Initiative should have been drafted by someone with legal background and encouraged the Initiative proponents to hire a good attorney. She concurred with the other Councilmembers regarding the need for a study and report. She asked that the person making the motion include the Council returning to hear the item on December 26'. City Attorney Leibold presented an overview of the concerns of Council. MOVED BY METZE, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, NOT TO EXCEED $109000 FOR THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT, WITH SAID REPORT TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 269 200, ADDRESSING THE FOLLOWING CONCERNS REGARDING THE SUBMITTED INITIATIVE: 1. Issues regarding proper legal form of the proposed "Ordinance" of the initiative. 2. The methods of implementation regarding the staggered or uniform term replacement. PAGE TWENTY - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 3. The legality of a two -year Council term. 4. The sufficiency of the detail with respect to the establishment of the Districts themselves. 5. Are the issues on the initiative uniform enough or sufficiently different to violate the Single Subject Rule? 6. The Government Code provisions that deal with an elected Mayor referring to the Mayor having the same powers as the other Councilmembers. 7. The fiscal impacts of the proposed initiative. 8. How the transition takes place. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Cancellation of December 26 2000 Meeting. (F:44.1) Mayor Brinley questioned the appropriate action on this item in light of the discussion on item no. 35. City Attorney Leibold suggested a motion against the cancellation of the December 26' Meeting. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY PAPE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO NOT CANCEL THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 26, 2000. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 8:40 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:45 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON - AGENDIZED ITEMS Woody Woodward, 29108 Sunswept, addressed the proposed Lake Elsinore Sports and Entertainment Center. He indicated that he did not know of the project until recently, but once he saw the map and information he was whole - heartedly behind the project. He noted comments about property values plummeting, and suggested that he has heard from Realtors that they are all very enthusiastic and feel it would increase property values. He further suggested that he believed the improved appearance over the existing weeds and trash would certainly help in marketing local property. He indicated that the opposition appears to be very well financed and are working hard to negatively impact the City in every aspect. He indicated that a web site had been set up regarding the proposed raceway and received over 1,950 hits with predominantly positive comments. He indicated that his friends and neighbors are enthusiastic about the project. He encouraged the public to view the website at www.elsinore- racing.com, and call him if they want to get involved to support and better the community. PAGE TWENTY- ONE -CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 Ann Marie Bachmeyer, 32475 Somerset Drive, volunteer for the Lake Elsinore Historical Society, announced the upcoming holiday home tour; and announced that they would be touring four homes in the City on December 9' from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m., followed by refreshments and a small boutique at the Museum. She detailed the ticket prices and explained the tours. Debra Crawford, 15135 Knollwood, President of Elsinore Valley Arts Network, announced the festivities of the coming weekend including Winterfest, which will include holiday entertainment at the Cultural Center; and the First Annual Autumn Festival of Art, show and sale, on Sunday December 3`d at the Community Center. She encouraged attendance, and indicated that interested parties could contact her at 678 -5924. Linda Nanetti, 16293 Cimarron Road, addressed the racetrack with regard to what it will include being three racetracks. She indicated that the traffic, noise and citizen safety issues will be chaotic. She questioned who to blame if the property values went down, and who to look at if the property values went up. She questioned who would want to move in next to a racetrack, and suggested that it would be a hard sell. She expressed concern that the now peaceful community would be covered with drag racing, cars and noise. She suggested that there were other forms of entertainment available and indicated that the boat racing was not as bad as cars would be. Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest, addressed the racetrack and questioned the information provided by Mr. Woodward; indicated that there won't be a racetrack here. She indicated that they are developing a "legal" petition for circulation and encouraged interested parties to contact her. She noted a survey being done in the community and suggested that lawsuits will prohibit a racetrack, because it would produce smog and impact property values. She noted that the study session originally set for Thursday would not be occurring, but had been postponed to December 7'. She encouraged participation, attendance and assistance in getting the petitions signed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Watenpaugh commented on the following: 1) Noted an article in the newspaper, and announced that the City would be stocking the Lake this Thursday or Friday with trout. 2) Reiterated that staff had hired a firm to assist in removing graffiti; and advised that Caltrans had been contacted to address graffiti on the Freeway median at Main Street. 3) Noted that the Council was working closely with Supervisor Buster, with efforts such as the recent press event for Mission Trail improvements. He indicated that he spoke with Supervisor Buster at that event regarding the Enron committee appointments, and staff would be working closely with the County on the Enron Project. He PAGE TWENTY -TWO -CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 indicated that after discussions with Mr. Stahovich this morning, City representatives will sit in on the County's committee to stay informed as it goes forward. 4) Announced that Lake Street will be under construction in mid to late February. 5) Announced that there will be a study session on the Alberhill Specific Plan for the staff to provide information to the Council. He stressed that this was not a discussion of the environmental process and indicated that Council would not be making decisions until the processing is complete. He stressed that the Study session was intended to address the proposed changes to the project, and not to discuss the pros or cons of the EIR. 6) Indicated that he was perplexed by the comments at this meeting, noting that he heard from the podium that the proponents of the Initiative who do not trust the Council would have them "fill in the blanks" and implement the process. He questioned what the other signers of the petition would say and indicated while staff is happy to write up the process, he was not sure the other signers would agree. He questioned how staff could "fill in the blanks ". 7) Noted that calls are being received at City Hall because the opponents of the specific plan sent out a letter suggesting that the public do so; and indicated that the majority of the calls received have been in support of the raceway. He again questioned staff s ability to move forward, but complimented the Council on a job well done and expressed his admiration for their tolerance in the face of adversity. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS City Attorney Leibold reiterated the success of the City with the California Bank and Trust lawsuit Demurrer. COMMITTEE REPORTS No Comments. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilwoman Kelley encouraged the public to attend Winterfest. Councilman Metze had no comments. Councilman Schiffner commented on the proposed racetrack and Enron project; indicating that he had seen very little about either one. He stressed that he had not made up his mind with regard to a decision on either one whether he would support them or not. He indicated that he intended to listen to everything on both PAGE TWENTY -THREE -CITY COUNCIL MINUTES- NOVEMBER 28, 2000 sides, but will not base his decision on uninformed comments. He stressed that he wants to hear facts over opinion; and expressed hopes that before it is all over, Council will hear from a lot of people who know what they are talking about and will base their decision on the information received. Mayor Pro Tern Pape commented on the following: 1) Concurred with Councilman Schiffner and stressed that the Council was just starting the public dialog on two major projects. He stressed the importance of expressing opinions on the information, and noted that it was time to get more input and hold hearings. He reiterated that the process was just getting started. 2) Reiterated that Winterfest would be on Friday, starting about 5 p.m. Mayor Brinley commented on the following: 1) Concurred with the other Councilmembers regarding the raceway, and stressed the importance of keeping an open mind and not listening to rumors. She further stressed the importance of getting the facts. She indicated that the Council would be very open and direct in dealing with the raceway project. She announced the upcoming Study Session on December 7' and looked forward to community input and participation. She encouraged he public to call City Hall and ask their questions directly; and keeping an open mind as the Council proceeds through the process. 2) Announced Winterfest 2000 for December 15` from 5 to 9 p.m., noting that there would be entertainment, Santa, snow and local entertainment. She encouraged attendance and participation. 3) Announced that "Tootsie" the trolley was back for the holiday season and will house Santa at the Winterfest event. 4) Announced the Open Air Market on December 3' from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. 5) Announced the Autumn Festival of the Arts on December 3ra 6) Announced Breakfast with Santa on December 16' at 8 a.m. at the Community Center. 7) Announced the painting of a 45' RTA bus with children's handprints being done at the Town Center on December 16' starting at 10 a.m. 8) Announced Baja Promotions Jet Ski Race on December 16' from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. 9) Announced the EDC Lunch scheduled for December 14`t', with Assemblyman Elect Dennis Hollingsworth as the speaker; and encouraged attendance. PAGE TWENTY -FOUR -CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 10) Reannounced the Historical Society's Christmas home tour on December 9'. 11) Announced that Tootsie the Trolley will be running on December 2nd 9d', and 16t' in a route to include the Outlet Center, Main Street, Senior Center, Walmart, the Town Center and Brookstone Landing. She advised that the cost will be $.25 per person. 12) Congratulated My Buddies Pizza on their Business of the Quarter award, as well as their dedication to the Community. She stressed that they are a real asset to the community athletic groups and the community as a whole. She noted that every year they help with the Temescal Canyon High School Grad Night, delivering pizza every hour on the hour. 13) Noted the contribution of Blast from the Past to the Cops for Kids; and stressed that it was due to the support of the business community. She expressed her appreciation for the assistance. CLOSED SESSION None. ADJOURNMENT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:15 P.M. /1 AT -EST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I1/_I_� WLAIIDW CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 SOUTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 289 2000 CALL TO ORDER The City Council/Redevelopment Agency Study Session was called to order by Mayor Brinley at 4:03 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Brinley. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: KELLEY, SCHIFFNER, BRINLEY METZE, PAPE Also present were: Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Community Development Director Brady, Information /Communications Manager Dennis and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. Agenda Review (F:44.1) Mayor Brinley noted the absence of City Manager Watenpaugh at this meeting; but advised that he would be present for the Council Meeting this evening. Presentations Mayor Brinley questioned the Reader's Choice Award. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that the Mayor would be accepting the award from representatives of the Press Enterprise. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that the Business of the Quarter would be My Buddies Pizza, and Mr. & Mrs. Richardson would be present to accept. Councilwoman Kelley noted that My Buddies delivered pizzas for three years at Grad Night festivities for Temescal Canyon High School; and worked Grad Night after the restaurant closed in the evening. She stressed that they have contributed heavily for many years. Mayor Brinley inquired if Information/Communications Manager Dennis would be providing the Website Demo. Staff confirmed. Consent Calendar City Attorney Leibold indicated that she would be pulling item no. 3 for discussion PAGE TWO - STUDY SESSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 28, 2000 after the business items. Mayor Brinley noted the need to clarify that item no. 8 would consider changing the street name to Canyon Hills Parkway, rather than Canyon Hills Road. PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Brinley suggested that item no. 21 was a housekeeping item. Assistant City Manager Best concurred, but explained that the grant had already been received, so this was the procedural requirement of a public hearing. She also noted the list of programs included in the agenda item. Councilman Schiffner suggested that there might be some interest in hearing about the item at the meeting. BUSINESS ITEMS Councilwoman Kelley noted the level of interest in the appointments to the Enron Committee requested by item no. 31, and inquired if there would be a need for alternates or more appointments. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that she knew they were not looking for elected officials, but Kathy Russeth would be in the audience to respond to the need for alternates. Mayor Brinley questioned the ability to pick a representative from outside the City, within the County area. City Attorney Leibold indicated that there were no legal grounds or statutes to regulate this committee or require residency. Councilman Schiffner suggested this might ease some of the concerns. Mayor Brinley noted that her choice was from the county area and had been involved in the community for a long time. City Attorney Leibold noted that Enron had requested a diversified group of community representatives. Councilman Schiffner noted that he would have also had several options from the County area. City Attorney Leibold questioned the balance of the appointments. Councilman Schiffner indicated that issue had not been resolved as Supervisor Buster was not planning to appoint anyone to the Committee. Mayor Brinley noted that it was a City /County issue and she believed the Committee should be diversified, but wanted to be sure if there was any legal restriction. Councilman Schiffner noted that it was not necessarily a bigger issue for the City than the County. Councilwoman Kelley noted that she would ask about alternates; and indicated that her appointment would be a City resident, however an alternate would be a County resident. City Attorney Leibold advised with regard to the item 32 the report on the Graffiti Ordinance was not ready now, but analysis was underway. She suggested modification on Page 3 of the ordinance, moving the last sentence out of paragraph c. Mayor Brinley indicated that questions might arise on this item at the meeting. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she would check on the status of the review, prior to the meeting. Councilwoman Kelley noted that she had several addresses for graffiti clean-up. Mayor Brinley noted that the Police Department caught a tagger and suggested that the Police Chief provide an update at the meeting. PAGE THREE - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 Councilwoman Kelley questioned the project location on item no. 34. Community Development Director Brady clarified the location. Councilman Schiffner noted that there had been some controversy regarding use of the easement. Councilwoman Kelley expressed surprised at the inclusion of 101 parking spaces. Mr. Brady noted that staff desires to obtain more parking than is needed in the case of churches. Councilwoman Kelley stressed that this sounded like a large parking area for a residential area. Community Development Director Brady clarified that churches are allowed in residential area with a Conditional Use Permit; and noted that this one is located on a major thoroughfare, so the intent is to get all of the parking off the street, by putting it on -site. Councilman Schiffner noted that the parking would not be visible from the street. Council questioned the inclusion of play equipment on -site. Mr. Brady indicated that there were turf areas, but no play equipment was shown. He further indicated that the existing house would be office. Councilwoman Kelley noted the future intent to take over additional parking and questioned the notification provided to the property owners in the area. Mr. Brady indicated that the standard notification had been provided and only one property owner came to the Planning Commission meeting, and the Commission tried to mitigate her concerns by providing a block wall. Councilman Schiffner questioned the neighbor's level of concern with the project. Mr. Brady clarified the discussion. Mayor Brinley questioned how soon they planned to add the school. Community Development Director Brady indicated that was a future plan, which would need to come back for further consideration, as there was no formal application for that use at this time. Councilman Schiffner inquired how the primary ingress and egress issues would be controlled. Mr. Brady indicated that the regulation would be through signage to encourage use of the primary driveways. Mayor Brinley inquired if it was possible to condition the use of the driveways. Mr. Brady indicated that it became a matter of enforcement. Councilman Schiffner questioned the ability to close off one driveway. Councilwoman Kelley questioned the reason for the barn design. Community Development Director Brady indicated that the area has a number of larger lots and some horses in the area; an presented a sample of the colors and materials to be utilized. He suggested that the project would improve the appearance of the existing property. Councilman Schiffner inquired if there would be hedges along the driveway. Mr. Brady indicated that he was not sure of the materials to be used, but plans would be submitted later in the process. City Clerk Kasad advised that the Resolution for item 35 should be 2000 -51 rather than 2000 -50. Councilwoman Kelley questioned the legality of a two year Council term, rather than a four year term, and how the terms would roll over. Councilman PAGE FOUR - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 28, 2000 Schiffner indicated that this was an issue that was not established. Councilwoman Kelley further questioned how such a change would impact the current elected terms. City Attorney Leibold addressed the laws for establishment of electoral districts and staggering of terms; but indicated that those issues are not specified in the Initiative. Mayor Brinley noted that there would probably be several questions at the Council meeting, but if they are asked at this point the City Attorney could be prepared to answer them. Councilman Schiffner noted the two options. City Attorney Leibold clarified that there are three options associated with an Initiative, but under the Government Code there is a requirement that the people vote on the establishment of districts, so the Council could not just enact the Initiative. Mayor Brinley inquired if the proponents would have an attorney present at the Council meeting. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she was not certain. Councilwoman Kelley questioned the two choices. City Attorney Leibold clarified that the election could be set for November, 2001, or a report could be ordered to respond to any questions or clarify issues; and noted the type of issues which could be identified by the Council to be included in the report. She explained the potential for consideration of fiscal and legal issues, noting that because of the brevity, there was not the full text of an ordinance, as would typically be presented. She indicated that there were several questions relating to legality, form and substance, however she had not yet done a substantial analysis. She noted that Council could utilize her office or independent counsel to review the matter and provide the report. She noted the experience of the independent counsel she would be proposing at the Council meeting, noting that the Council could have anyone do this report, but cautioned that the report must be prepared and presented back to the Council within 30 days. She stressed the need to act quickly. Councilman Schiffner inquired if the report is requested and comes back with problems, whether it would still go to the ballot. City Attorney Leibold noted the benefit of third party counsel, and explained that in addition to an independent analysis, the report would include recommendations on how to proceed. She indicated that in the event the report comes back and says there are some ambiguities, but the statutes can fill in the holes and the issues can be resolved, the recommendation might be to set the election. However, if the findings are that the Initiative is not specific enough for clear direction or enforcement, then the matter could be set for election and those issues discussed in the materials, or decline to set the election. She stressed that she was not sure what the report would suggest. Councilwoman Kelley inquired what would happen if the Council set the matter for the election. City Attorney Leibold indicated that if the Council chose to set the matter for election, between now and then, there would be a series of deadlines and material to be prepared and the kinds of issues presented would come out in those materials, but it would not be the same as a thorough analysis. PAGE FIVE - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 289 2000 Councilman Schiffner inquired if the report would discuss what would happen if the matter is set for election, as is. City Attorney Leibold indicated that would be fair information to ask for. Councilman Schiffner asked if it was possible to put the matter on the ballot at a later date. City Attorney Leibold clarified that if a report is requested, it must be presented back to the Council within 30 days; and at that time there would be a recommendation and request to adopt the Resolution calling the election. Councilwoman Kelley inquired if the Council had the complete text of the Initiative. City Attorney Leibold confirmed. Mayor Brinley questioned the City Attorney's preference with who would prepare the report. City Attorney Leibold indicated it was up to the Council, however for appearance sake an independent counsel, with no interest in the City might be better. Councilman Schiffner commented that the independent counsel would be a specialist in that area of law; and noted that the proponents might express concern with the cost of legal fees, but they were in full agreement with the cost of a special election. City Attorney Leibold stressed the volume of case law and statutes to be reviewed in a relatively short period of time. Redevelopment Agency RDA Chairman Schiffner noted that most of the Redevelopment Agency items were concurrent or Minutes, aside from the Closed Session. City Attorney Leibold confirmed that there would be one Agency Closed Session item for this evening. Mayor Brinley inquired if staff had any further clarifications. Hearing no additional comments the Study Session was Ad;CITY 4 EY, OBVTL CH IFFNE , A RMAN REDEVELOPMENT A ENCY ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ CLERK OF THE BOARD I