Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout042407 CC Minutes I I I MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL APRIL 24, 2007 The City Council convened in Closed Session at 6:00 p.m. and its regular meeting commenced at 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: 5 Council Members: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Roberts and Mayor Washington. Absent: o Council Members: None. PRELUDE MUSIC The Prelude Music was provided Anthony Savitt and his father, Ron Savitt. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Reverend Larry Kroger of Hope Lutheran Church. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND FLAG CEREMONY The pledge of allegiance was presented by Arrow of Light Pack No. 367. PRESENT ATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Arrow of Licht Certificates Mayor Washington commended the following students for their outstanding achievement of the Arrow of Light Award. o Oliver Abbey o Grant Allington o Alec Bodemer o Brandon Farkas o Sam Harnett o Parker Kelliher o Prithipal Khalsa o Kyle Kitley o Anthony Pena o Grant Salts o Alec Shaw o Blaise Wopperer R:IMinutesl042407 I I I Proclamation for Teacher Appreciation Week On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Washington honored the following teachers for Teacher Appreciation Week: o Ms. Susan Elliott, President of the T emecula Valley Council PT A o Ms. Carol Leighty, Temecula Valley Unified School District Superintendent o Mr. Ed Sibby, President of the Teachers' Union o Mr. Brian Wixom, Physical Education Teacher, Vail Elementary School o Ms. Dana Miller, Fourth Grade Teacher, Sparkman Elementary o Mr. Stewart Morris, Temecula Valley Unified School District, President Accepting on behalf of the group and the 1500 teachers that work in the Temecula Valley Unified School District, Mr. Sibby thanked the City Council for the recognition. Ms. Leighty also thanked the City Council for the recognition. Sister City Presentation The 2007 Cultural Exchange Students that traveled to Nakayama-Daisen, Japan, thanked the City Council for its continued support of the program and on behalf of the Mayor of Daisen, presented the City Council with a gift. Speaking on behalf of the exchange group, Chaperones Mr. and Mrs. Jones thanked the City Council for its ongoing support. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Ms. Rebecca Weersing, Temecula Valley Rose Society, invited the City Council and public to The 1;jh Annual Rose Festival to be held at the Community Recreation Center (CRC) from May 5-6, 2007. Ms. Weersing presented City Clerk Jones with a bouquet of roses. B. Ms. Carol Leighty, representing Temecula Valley Unified School District, recognized Temecula's outstanding Police Department; noting that Chief Aim's proactive stance was very much appreciated during the week of the Virginia Tech Masacre; and on behalf of the TVUSD, students, and parents, publicly thanked the Council, Chief Aim, Sergeant Adams, Lieutenant Pino, and all officers and staff who helped to ensure the safety for high school students of Temecula. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS No reports at this time. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. R:IMinulesl042407 2 I I I 2 Resolution aoorovina List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 07-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 3 Tract Mao No. 33891 (located northwest of Maraarita Road and Dartolo Road) RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve Tract Map No.33891 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 3.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and accept the Bonds as security for the agreement; 3.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Bond as security for the agreement. 4 Acceotance of certain Public Streets into the City-Maintained Svstem within Tract Mao No. 29305 (located east of Pechanaa Parkwav and south of Wolf Vallev Road within the Wolf Creek Subdivision) RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 07-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 29305) 5 Pavement Rehabilitation - STPL Proiect No. PW06-14 Professional Enaineerina Desian Services Aareement RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve an agreement with Harris and Associates in an amount of $136,764 to provide professional engineering design services for Project No. PW06-14, and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 5.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $13,676, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. R:IMinutes1042407 3 I I I 6 Suooort for 2007 Air Quality Manaaement Plan (AQMP) - at the reauest of Mavor Washinaton RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 07-33 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA EXPRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL'S SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S DRAFT 2007 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (AQMP) FOCUSING ON MOBILE SOURCE CONTROLS 7 Acceotance of Grant Deed for Lot 21 of Tract 29305 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Authorize acceptance of the Grant Deed for Lot 21 of Tract 29305 and direct staff to proceed with the necessary actions to cause to deed to be recorded. 8 Contract for the Installation of Additional Liahtina for the Temecula Public Librarv - Proiect No. PWOO-07 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve a contract for additional lighting for the Temecula Public Library - Project No. PWOO-07 with Tri-Citi Electric - in the amount of $33,683.14 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 8.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $3,368.31, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 9 Establishment and Aooointment of Militarv Ad-Hoc Subcommittee (at the reauest of Mavor Washinaton and Council Member Edwards) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Establish an ad-hoc subcommittee to enhance the relationship between the City and the military community; 9.2 Appoint Mayor Washington and Council Member Edwards to this ad hoc subcommittee. (Item No.9 was pulled for separate discussion; see page 5.) R:IMinutesl042407 4 I I I 10 Second Readina of Ordinance No. 07-02 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 07-02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 8.36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE NON-PERMITTED USE, STORAGE, MANUFACTURING, AND SALE OF FIREWORKS Consent calendar Item No. 10 was removed from the consent calendar MOTION: Council Member Edwards moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-8 (Item No.9 was considered under separate discussion and Item No. 10 was removed from the Consent Calendar.) Council Member Roberts seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. 9 Establishment and Aooointment of Militarv Ad-Hoc Subcommittee (at the reauest of Mayor Washinaton and Council Member Edwards) RECOMMENDATION: 9.3 Establish an ad-hoc subcommittee to enhance the relationship between the City and the military community; 9.4 Appoint Mayor Washington and Council Member Edwards to this ad hoc subcommittee. Mayor Washington relayed the history behind the proposal of this item. A. Mr. Mike Heisinger, representing Veterans of Foreign War Temecula Post 4089, relayed full support to the formation of this subcommittee to enhance the relationship between the City and Military community. At this time, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Council Member Edwards moved to approve Consent Calendar Item NO.9. Council Member Roberts seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:33 p.rn., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:35 p.m., the City Council resumed with regular business. R:IMinulesl042407 5 I I I RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING 17 Prooosed Zonina Ordinances addina Chaoter 30 to Title 17 of the Temecula Municioal Code Establishina Non-Smokina Units in Multi-Family Housina: and addina Chaoter 36 to Title 8 of the Temecula Municioal Code Prohibitina Smokina in Public Places and the Workolace - at the reauest of Mayor Washinaton and Mayor Pro Tem Naaaar RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 07-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROHIBITING SMOKING IN AND AROUND MULTI-UNIT RESIDENCES AND ADDING CHAPTER 30 TO TITLE 11 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING SMOKING IN MULTI-UNIT RESIDENCES 17.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 07-05 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROHIBITING SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES, PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT, AND CERTAIN OTHER LOCATIONS AND ADDING CHAPTER 36 TO TITLE 8 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING SMOKING Senior Planner Papp provided a staff report, noting the following: o That second-hand smoke would be responsible for an estimated 38,000 deaths among non-smokers o That there would be detectable levels of cotinine (a metabolite of nicotine) in 88% of non-smokers o That second-hand smoke would be known to contribute to respiratory tract infection and acute chronic ear infections in young children o That second-hand smoke would be known to infiltrate common areas o That State Law prohibits smoking in indoor work areas; and that State Law would consider any activities that interfere with the enjoyment of life or property to be a nuisance o That the State empowers local jurisdictions to declare second-hand smoke a nuisance; and therefore, the City would be considering the two ordinances to deal with second- hand smoke issues o That there are many cities that have already adopted regulations regarding smoking in the work place and the public, which would include Murrieta, Calabasas, Solana Beach, Santa Monica, and San Clemente o That the City of Temecula would be the first in Riverside County and the first in California to adopt an ordinance that would regulate smoking in multi-family housing o That the City of Belmont will be considering a similar ordinance for multi-family housing R:IMinulesl042407 6 I I I o That the Ordinance for multi-family housing would regulate smoking in for-lease or for- rent units only, not for-sale units; that it would establish smoke free buffer zones and require grouping of the units that would be designated as non-smoking; that these would apply to all new construction projects having 10 or more units; that it would require that a minimum of 25% of those units be designated as non-smoking at the time they are rented out (including: priyate yard areas, balconies, patios, and decks associated with the units) o That compliance would be required six months after the effective date of the Ordinance; that there would not be language in the Ordinance that would prevent a landlord from requiring that more than 25% of the units be deemed non-smoking units o That for the existing housing projects, landlords of senior housing units would have five- years to comply; that all other type of multi-family housing units would have eight years to comply; and that there would be exceptions that allow up to three, one-year extensions of time if a landlord were not able to get their units identified as non-smoking o That failure to comply within the guidelines would result in administrative citations, nuisance abatement or civil penalties under the Temecula Municipal Code o That the Ordinance regulating smoking in public places such as restaurants, theaters, employment, including indoor work areas which are already governed by the State, and outdoor areas that would be accessible to employees or the public, including covered patios, stair rails, and hallways, and any areas outside that would be adjacent to enclosed areas having common ventilation o That the Ordinance would also cover unenclosed places such as public parks and playgrounds, waiting areas, places of employment including outdoor work areas, dining and waiting areas for restaurants, and service areas or transit depots o That exceptions would apply for businesses that deal in smoking tobacco products, paraphernalia, and theatrical productions where smoking would be an integral part of the production o That smoking would be permitted on private residential property and up to 25% of motel and guest rooms that are designated as smoking units o That the State of California identifies reasonable space as 25 feet; that within 25 feet of any entrance opening, vent, or crack into an enclosed area smoking would be prohibited and also within 25 feet of any unenclosed area o That the effective date for the Ordinances would be 30 days after the adoption by City Council and that failure to comply with the Ordinances would result in administrative citations, nuisances abatement or civil penalties o That at the February 27,2007, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission considered the Ordinances and unanimously agreed with the intent of the Ordinances; however, there was concern with enforcement, reasonable distance requirement, and the definition of smoking o That with regard to enforcement, staff, and the City Attorney explained that the intent of enforcement would be educate the public about which areas of smoking would be acceptable and which areas would not be acceptable o That the Police Department, Code Enforcement, and Park Rangers would enforce the Ordinance based on responding to complaints o That the City accepted the State's requirement with regard to reasonable distance (25') o That the intent of the Ordinances would be to deal with smoking, not chewing tobacco R:IMinutesl042407 7 I I I o That the City Council Subcommittee met with staff and City Attorney and made minor changes to the Ordinances such as: shopping centers were added to the definition of public place; a new definition was added for public plaza areas; public plazas were added into unenclosed places where smoking is prohibited; that smoking would be permitted in areas such as outdoor bar areas; that there were no revisions to Chapter 17.30 which would be the multi-family housing o That the Ordinances would be exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) o That the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council adopt both Ordinances. Having received a letter from the City Attorney's Office with regard to the intent of the Ordinances, Mayor Washington stated that smoking will be allowed in numerous places under the new Ordinances, relaying the following: 1. That smoking will be allowed in all private residential property exceot for the 25% of the rental units and multi-family buildinas that must be desianated non-smokina; that smoking will be allowed in all single-family homes, all condominiums, and a large majority of lease residential units 2. That smoking will be allowed in certain commercial establishments including cigar and tobacco shops and the outdoor dining areas of restaurants and bars that must exclude minors, pursuant to State Law 3. That smoking will be allowed in all outdoor locations public or private that would not be places of employment, parks, waiting areas, or public plazas; and that smoking will be allowed on sidewalks, parking lots, and in private vehicles. Council Member Comerchero relayed that he would be in full support of the intent of the Ordinances but did request clarification on the definition of "premises". In responses to Council Member Comerchero, Senior Planner Papp relayed the following: o That under the proposed Ordinance a landlord of the property will be required to submit a floor plan to the City showing which of the units would be designated as non-smoking within five years or apply for an extension of time o That there would be no language in the proposed Ordinances that would require a landlord to approach the City prior to the five-year deadline. Council Member Comerchero relayed his concern with expecting a landlord to submit a plan after 5 or 8 years and immediately requesting the landlord to comply; therefore, suggested that the landlord by given an opportunity to rent vacated units as non-smoking units become available. Council Member Comerchero queried on the following: o If there has been discussion regarding condo conversions o Have economic impacts been studied on apartment owners or businesses that would be affected with the proposed Ordinances. Senior Planner Papp advised that after a discussion with two different property owners, it was mentioned by one property owner that it would be an economic benefit for property owners because of the cost involved with having to maintain a smoking unit. R:IMinulesl042407 6 I I I Offering more information, City Attorney Thorson noted that only 25% of the units would be designated non-smoking; that 75% of the City's population do not smoke and coupled with the five-year implementation period, it would be enough time to determine if there were going to be any unforeseen economic impacts that would arise; and advised that no study was performed but it would be his opinion and staff; that there would be potential economic factors. Council Member Comerchero queried on the possibility of amending the Ordinance to prohibit a differential between smoking and non-smoking units. For Council Member Comerchero, City Attomey Thorson noted that he will amend the Ordinance, prohibiting a differential between smoking and non-smoking units. Mayor Washington stated that it would be his opinion that the market will drive smoking and non-smoking units; relayed that the intent would be to craft an Ordinance that would create a small section of apartment units that would provide an opportunity to protect health and safety. City Attorney Thorson noted that if the Council were desirous of amending the Ordinance to prohibit a differential between smoking and non-smoking units, more research would need to be made as well as findings to make necessary to invoke the City's police power to impose that type of restriction. In response to Council Member Comerchero's query with regard to buffers/common walls, Senior Planner Papp relayed the following: o That buffers and common walls were discussed at a Planning Commission meeting; that it was suggested that an entire building be designated non-smoking, but that it could potentially cause the complex to exceed the 25% minimum and that a landlord may not want to exceed the 25% minimum o That in accordance with the proposed Ordinance, non-smokers would be grouped either horizontally and/or vertically to minimize the impacts to adjacent units o That although it may not be 100% feasible to remove the second-hand smoke from encroaching onto adjacent units. Council Member Comerchero thanked Mr. Papp for his comments. For Council Member Edwards, Mr. Papp relayed that in accordance with the Ordinance, if there were an outdoor area (bar) where one would need to be 21 years of age to enter, smoking would be permitted in that area, demarcated by tables, bar area, railing, or some other buffer that would indicate For Smoking Only. Adding more information, City Attorney Thorson relayed that separation would be required by the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC); that there would be well-defined ways to separate where adults are allowed and children would not be allowed, requiring some type of wall or physical barrier between the two. Senior Planner Papp noted that the six-month period will allow staff to distribute the Ordinance to property owners, restaurant owners, and other business owners to have an opportunity to read and understand the Ordinance, advising that staff would be available to help and answer questions. R:IMinutesl042407 9 I I. I City Attorney Thorson recommended that multiple workshops be scheduled to answer questions for the public. In response to Council Member Edwards, Senior Planner Papp stated that the Police Department, Code Enforcement, and Park Rangers would have jurisdiction. Council Member Roberts relayed that after reading the proposed Ordinances several times, it would be his opinion that the language would need to be solidified and written in a more concise manner, making it easier to read and understand; relayed that violations of misdemeanors and infractions would be similar; and queried how the citing officer will differentiate infraction from misdemeanor. For Council Member Roberts, City Attorney Thorson relayed the following: o That infractions and misdemeanors would be different o That misdemeanors would have a much more severe criminal penalty o That the decision as to whether it would be a misdemeanor or an infraction would depend on the facts of the case and whether the arresting officer could make a case that the person intimidated or harassed and met that burden o That if a business were encouraging patrons to smoke they would be cited with an infraction. Council Member Roberts relayed that it would be his opinion that being cited should be based on a sliding scale and that the first offense should receive an infraction and any more than that should result in a misdemeanor. Referencing fines, City Attorney Thorson advised that criminal infractions would be set by the court; that civil and administrative citations would have a maximum penalty, this would be the sliding scale; that the Ordinance has been set up to encompass the maximum type of enforcement needed; that the section pertaining to misdemeanor and infraction would be left to the discretion of the citing officer to review at the time of the violation; relayed that the Code would have a provision that would allow civil and administrative penalties up to $2,500 per day; that criminal infractions would be $50, $100 for the second offense, and $150 for the third; that a maximum fine for a misdemeanor would be $1,000 and a maximum of six months in jail; and that the City would have existing Ordinances for the administrative citations in the civil penalties as well as for misdemeanors. At this time, the public hearing was opened. A. Ms. Donna Newton, representing In the Zone Tobacco-Free Project, congratulated and thanked the City Council for moving ahead with such a visionary issue at a City level; and relayed her experience with apartment managers expressing willingness to turn some of their complexes into non-smoking units. B. Mr. Robert Oder, Temecula, relayed that although he would support the intent of the City Council with regard to health and well being, he expressed his concern with the proposed Ordinance creating no-end to potential litigation for landlords; that the Ordinance would need more revision before adoption; relaying that condominiums should be included; and that the Ordinance should apply to all multi-family housing and single-family housing. R:IMinulesl042407 10 I I I In response to Council Member Comerchero's question, Mr. Oder noted that of his 30 years of apartment rental experience, he has only had a dozen renters stay in their apartments over an eight-year period. C. Ms. Monica Oder, Temecula, expressed her appreciation for the intent of the proposed Ordinance; relayed that from a business perspective, she would be of the opinion that several issues have not been adequately addressed; noted that there will be an economic impact with the proposed Ordinance; requested that single-family homes and condominiums be applied; and relayed her concern with litigation issues arising from the Ordinances if adopted. City Attorney Thorson advised that from a legal standpoint, extensive research has been placed on the proposed Ordinance; relayed that he would not be concerned with potential litigation; that there has not been any litigation that has established a smoker's right to smoke in a particular environment; and reiterated that he would not have any concerns with regard to litigation. At this time, the public hearing was closed. In response to Council Member Roberts' request, City Attorney Thorson referenced the following: Page 6, Section 17.30.090 Enforcement subparagraph B; that the language: Violation of this subsection shall constitute a misdemeanor, be deleted; that subparagraph C, causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this Chapter shall constitute an infraction - be reo laced by the language orohibited; that an infraction, misdemeanor, or civil penalties would be established in the Temecula Municipal Code. Council Member Roberts thanked City Attorney Thorson for requesting the changes to the Ordinances and relayed his full support. Speaking in favor of the two proposed Ordinances, Mayor Pro Tem Naggar noted that the Ordinances would be enforceable and would create less of a burden on property owners as well as tenants; stated that it would be his opinion that that the Ordinance will police itself; and advised that he would be in favor of approving the two Ordinances as written subject to the requested changes by Council Member Roberts. Although he would be in support of the intent of the proposed Ordinances, Council Member Comerchero suggested the following: o Stronger language requiring the imposition, where possible and feasible of an entire building being designated as smoke-free building, and stated that such imposition be a mandate rule for new construction o That an apartment owner has one year from the effective date of the Ordinance to submit a plan o That if the 5 and 8 year time frame were adopted, he would recommend adding a provision imposing that if there was a non-smoker or smoker within the grid that they remain until the unit turns; or eliminate the 5 and 8 time frame and impose that when units turn over they must become non-smoking. R:IMinutes1042407 11 I I I City Attorney Thorson relayed that the language in the Ordinance states that non-smoking units must be grouped together e.g. horizontally and/or vertically and physically separated from smoking units to the maximum extent of practical; and stated that the language could be revised to impose Council Member Comerchero's request. Council Member Comerchero applauded the subcommittee and staff for its efforts with regard to the proposed Ordinance. Relaying her support of the proposed Ordinances, Council Member Edwards concurred with the requested changes per Council Member Comerchero. Relaying the history behind proposing the Ordinances, Mayor Washington reviewed that the proposal would not be about desiring to be the first City to implement such an Ordinance, but rather it would be the Council's intent to provide a better quality of life for all its residents; that he would be of the opinion that the Ordinance will be self policing; and stated that he would fully endorse changes made by Mayor Pro Tem Naggar, Council Member Comerchero, and Council Member Roberts. City Attorney Thorson relayed the following changes to the two proposed ordinances: o That Section17.30.050 would require that 25% of non-smoking units be grouped in a building o That Section 17.30.060 would require that a plan be submitted within one year of the adoption of the Ordinances; and that the 5 to 8 year period be deleted, but to allow tenants renting a smoking unit to remain until they chose to leave the unit o That Section 17.30.090 Band C to eliminate the distinction between misdemeanors and infractions. At this time, City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by only Ordinance No. 07-04. MOTION: Council Member Comerchero moved to approve Ordinance No. 07-04 subject to the detailed changes as stated above by City Attorney Thorson. Council Member Edwards seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. City Attorney Thorson advised that the revised changes to the Ordinance will be forwarded to the City Council for review and consideration at the next City Council meeting. At this time, City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by Ordinance No. 07-05. MOTION: Council Member moved to approve Ordinance No. 07-05 subject to the detailed changes as stated by City Attorney Thorson. Council Member Roberts seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. With respect to Ordinance Nos. 07-04 and 07-05, City Attorney Thorson reiterated that staff and the City Attorney's office will continue to provide guidance to the business community as to benefits of the approved Ordinances, and advised that staff would be sensitive to all comments voiced by the public. R:IMinulesl042407 12 I I I 18 Adiustment of the Transoortation Uniform Mitiaation Fee (TUMF) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 07-34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE APPLICABLE TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA Director of Public Works Hughes provided a brief staff report (of written record). City Attorney Thorson advised that a revised resolution was placed on the dais for the City Council to review. At this time, the public hearing was opened and due to no speakers, it was closed. MOTION: Council Member Roberts moved to approve Item No. 18.1. Council Member Edwards seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. COUNCIL BUSINESS 19 Amendment of the Temecula Municioal Code to Imolement Chanaes in State Law Concernina Biddina for Public Works Proiects RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 07-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTIONS 3.32.010 AND 3.32.050 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE CONSTRUCTION ON PUBLIC PROJECTS Director of Public Works Hughes provided a staff report (of record). At this time, the public hearing was opened and due to no speakers, it was closed. At this time, City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by only Ordinance No. 07-06. MOTION: Council Member Comerchero moved to approve staff recommendation. Council Member Edwards seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. R:\Minutes1042407 13 I I I 20 Reaional Medical Facility Study - at the reauest of Mayor Pro Tem Naaaar RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Appoint Mayor Pro Tem Naggar to serve on this regional task force; 20.2 Authorize the City Manager to contact the County and the Cities in Southwest California to invite them to participate in the task force. Deputy City Manager Yates provided a staff report (of written record). Relaying the history of the proposed Regional Medical Facility Study, Mayor Pro Tem Naggar advised that Temecula region would be the 3'd to 5th fastest growing region in the Nation; and reiterated the importance of providing a hospital for the community to support the growing demand of residents. At this time, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Bruce Barton, representing Riverside County Emergency Medical Services Agency, relayed the Agency's support to a Regional Medical Facility Study. At this time, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Council Member Comerchero moved to approve staff recommendation. Mayor Washington seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. Mayor Washington advised that he, along with Mayor Pro Tem Naggar, will be hosting a Town Hall meeting at City Hall Council Chambers on Thursday, May 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.; advising that the following Town Hall meetings will be held on Thursday, August 9, 2007 at the Temecula Public Library, and Thursday, November 8, 2007, at the Harveston Club House; and advised that more information could be found on the City's website. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS 21 City Council Travel/Conference Reoort - March 2007 22 Plannina Deoartment Monthly Reoort 23 Police Deoartment Monthly Reoort 24 Public Works Deoartment Monthlv Reoort CITY MANAGER REPORT No additional comments. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT With respect to Closed Session, City Attorney Thorson advised that there was no formal action to report under the Brown Act. R:IMinulesl042407 14 I I I ADJOURNMENT At 9:05 p.m., the City Council meeting formally adjourned to Tuesday, May 8, 2007, at 5:30 p.m., for a Closed Session with the regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: R:IMinutes1042407 15