Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout032701 CC MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL MARCH 27, 2001 The City Council convened in Closed Session at 6:00 P.M. and convened in a regular meeting at 7:02 P.M., on Tuesday, March 27, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Councilmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone*, Comerchero Absent: Councilmember: None * - Councilman Stone arrived at 7:38 P.M. PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Eve Craig. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Gary Nelson of Calvary Chapel of Temecula. ALLEGIANCE The salute to the Flag was led by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Supervisor Bob Buster re,qardinq Homeless Shelters Commenting on the humane and cooperative approach necessary to address this issue, First District County Supervisor Buster provided information with regard to homeless programs, referencing specific issues and statistics; advising that such a program should be included as part of the Housing Element; noting that the County currently spends $5 million on homeless issues but stated that the current programs are not effective and that no specific system is in place; and requesting City assistance from a location standpoint and that a Committee be formed to address the homeless issue in the Temecula/Murrieta area. Based on various factors, Ms. Susan Lowe, Deputy Director for Department of Social Services, further reviewed statistics relative to the need for emergency shelters. Mr. Bill Denzmar, County Veteran Services Officer, further elaborated on the need for homeless housing and commented on the need for the County to set realistic goals and the assistance needed from the cities to achieve those goals. Councilman Naggar suggested that the formation of a Committee to address this issue be agendized for a future City Council meeting. Mayor Comerchero expressed appreciation to Supervisor Buster for enlightening the City Council on this important issue. R:\Minutes\032701 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Desirous of improving and upgrading existing parks in the La Serena Homeowners Association, Ms. Nicole Steen and Ms. Miriam Parsan, 3114 Camino Del Este, requested funding assistance from the City. Although the parks of discussion are not Public parks and are, therefore, not maintained by the City, Mayor Comerchero requested that Community Services Director Parker address the matter and noted that the Association may qualify for Community Services Grant Funding. B. Mr. David Rosenthal, 27315 Jefferson Street, representing Southwest Riverside Manufactures Council, informed the City Council that the Public Utilities Commission has voted to raise electricity rates by 40%, noting that letters have been written in opposition to this increase; commented on the impacts this increase will have on the manufactures in the area as well as jobs; and requested that letters be written to the Governor to reflect the City Council's dismay with the approved rate increase. C. Ms. Adrienne McGregor, 34555 Madera de Playa, requested that City staff explore the use of solar units during this energy situation. D. Addressing AB 939 (Waste Reduction 1989), Ms. Charlotte Fox, 32800 Hupa Drive, commended the City on exceeding its waste reduction goal. Ms. Fox, as well, applauded the City on its efforts to preserve open space, public parks, and the development of a master planned Multi-use Trails System in addition to other public works issues; commented on the need for additional education regarding home composting, efficient gardening, and land care techniques as it relates to water conservation measures; advised that the Gardening Friends of Southwest County are assisting in schools and homes with planned gardening classes; and that a Junior Master Gardeners program will be introduced by the Friends in the near future. Supporting the garden classes at schools,. Councilman Naggar relayed his desire of a community garden. E. Commenting on the need for homeless shelters, Mr. Chuck Washington, Solana Way, relayed his support of Supervisor Buster's vision to provide emergency homeless shelters in the Valley and noted that such goals cannot be achieved without the collaborative efforts of many. F. Mr. Mark Mush, 31731 Corte Avalos, applauded the City Clerk for denying the submitted petitions with regard to Wolf Creek and further addressed and questioned communications between Ms. Pamela Miod and Councilman Pratt with regard to a Closed Session item. G. Councilman Naggar noted that each City Council agenda item reflects Closed Session items. H. Ms. Maryann Edwards, 42913 Calle Londe, representing the Theater Foundation, invited the City Councilmembers and the public to An Evening of Arts and Stars, on Friday, March 30, 2001,6:00 P.M. - 9:00 P.M., at Jack's Gallery in Old Town, noting that the event is free and that 25% of all proceeds from the Gallery will benefit the Theater Foundation. I. Mr. Ed Dool, 28464 Old Town Front Street, thanked and commended the City Council and the Old Town merchants on a successful Blue Grass Festival, requesting such functions in Old Town on a quarterly or monthly basis. R:\Minutes\032701 2 J. Echoing Mr. Dool's comments, Ms. Judi Steffen, 28475 - B Old Town Front Street, commented on the successful Blue Grass Festival and as well recommended the scheduling of more such events. K. To ensure that the unfortunate individuals in need are assisted, Mr. Chris Pedersen, 31052 Wellington Circle, relayed his support of Supervisor Buster's vision. With regard to the signing of petitions relative to Wolf Creek, Mr. Pederson commented, in his opinion, on Councilman Stone's inappropriate action by affixing a name, not his own, on a petition and then crossing it out solely for the purpose to view the petition. L. Ms. Michelle Anderson, 43797 Barletta Street, representing Citizens First of Temecula Valley, extended her thanks and appreciation to Mr. Pedersen for his efforts associated with the Wolf Creek referendum; as well extended appreciation to Councilmembers Naggar and Pratt for denying the project; and as well relayed appreciation to the new members of Citizens First of Temecula Valley who volunteered their time and effort during the signature-gathering process. M. With regard to the outcome of the Wolf Creek referendum, Mr. Carl Ross, 43886 Butternut Drive, noted that 5,000 citizens of the City of Temecula have been silenced and that it has eliminated the opportunity to debate issues of this project. N. In response to City Clerk Jones, Mayor Comerchero advised that he had spoken to Mr. Morris and apprised him that it generally is not the City Council's policy to read letters into the record on non-agendized items but noted that his letter would be placed into the record. CITY COUNCILREPORTS A. Having participated in a recent Celebrity luncheon, Councilman Naggar advised that he had raised $1,000 for the Rotary High School scholarship because of generous donations made by local merchants, including the developer of Temecula Village Apartments. Mr. Naggar thanked each business and the developer for the donations. B. Commenting on the proposed route of the transmission lines, Councilman Naggar expressed concern with the route; noted that the submitted maps of the proposed route make it difficult to determine the impact to the City of Temecula; requested that the matter be agendized for the Electrical Needs Subcommittee (Mayor Comerchero/Councilman Naggar) or that a committee be formed to address this issue; stated that he would prefer a route through the Pechanga Indian reservation; and noted that a route through the winery could threaten the City's tourism. Mr. Naggar noted that in addition to the recent 42% increase authorized by the Public Utilities Commission, the Commission had already approved a 15% increase in January and as well approved a 10% increase for next year which should as well be addressed by the Electrical Needs Subcommittee. In light of the City of Murrieta's action to impose campaign spending limits, Councilman Naggar suggested that this matter be agendized for City Council review at the next meeting. For Mayor Comerchero, City Attorney Thorson advised that several years ago, a Political Reform Initiative was passed and the City had adopted a voluntary campaign expenditure limit; that the proposition was challenged and that since then, no policy is in place for the City with regard to spending limitations; and that the City of Murrieta's adopted ordinance will be reviewed. R:\Minutes\032701 3 C. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts confirmed that the City will receive $2.7 million in State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding for the Butterfield Stage Road four-lane arterial extension beltway project. D. Having attended the recent Student of the Month recognition luncheon, Councilman Pratt relayed the students' appreciation of City Council recognition. E. Councilman Pratt encouraged public participation at the Public/Traffic Safety Commission meetings. F. With regard to the electricity crisis, Councilman Stone noted that the situation is a State- wide catastrophe in the making and encouraged the citizens to voice their concerns to Sacramento. In response to Mr. Pederson's comments with regard to Wolf Creek, Councilman Stone noted that the circulated petitions did not emphasize the $18 million provided by the developer for public infrastructure, the $12 million for schools, the 40-acre sports park, the $400,000 for public art, etc. In his opinion, Mr. Stone stated that the individuals signing the petition did not receive accurate information and commented on the negative impacts of the no growth philosophy. Councilman Stone advised and invited the public to a Sports Park Meeting, on Saturday, April 7, 2001, at 9:00 A.M., at City Hall, in the City Council Chambers. G. Mayor Comerchero informed the public that the SR 79 South project should be completed by April 17, 2001. CONSENT CALENDAR Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motionto waivethereading ofthete~ofallordinances andresolutionsincludedinthe agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of January 9, 2001; 2.2 Approve the minutes of the January 16, 2001, RClP Workshop. 3 Resolution Approvinq List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:\Minutes\032701 4 RESOLUTION NO. 01-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Professional Services Aqreement - Diaz Road Extension and Aliqnment Study - Project No. PW00-10 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide professional engineering services for the Alignment Study for the extension of Diaz Road to the City limits and a bridge crossing over Murrieta Creek - Project No. PW00-10 -for an amount not to exceed $167,101.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement; 4.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve amendments not to exceed the contingency amount of 10% of the contract or $16,710.10. 5 SB 332 Beveraqe Container Recyclinq and Litter Abatement Fundinq Request RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING ANY ANNUAL SUBMITFAL OF A FUNDING REQUEST FOR A SB 332 BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND LI'I-FER ABATEMENT GRANT 6 Tract No. 23209 - Subdivision Aqreement (located at the easterly extension of La Serena Way at Butterfield Staqe Road) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the Subdivision Agreement and accept the Performance Bond security to guarantee the performance of the SUBDIVIDER under this agreement. (At staff's request, Item No. 6 was pulled off calendar.) 7 Completion and Acceptance for Overland Drive Overcrossinq at Interstate Route 15 - Proiect No. PW95-11 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Accept the Overland Drive Overcrossing Project at Interstate Route 15 - Project No. PW95-11 as complete; 7.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; R:\Minutes\032701 5 7.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-5 and 7 (Item No. 6 pulled off calendar). The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice voted reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who abstained with regard to Item No. 2.2. At 8:17 P.M., Mayor Comerchero called a recess and then convened as the Community Services District and the Redevelopment Agency and reconvened the City Council meeting at 8:30 P.M. COUNCIL BUSINESS 8 Morgan Hill Specific Plan No. 313 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Formally adopt the attached recommended Condition of Approval for the Morgan Hill Specific Plan traffic mitigation measure for presentation to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors; 8.2 Endorse the creation of an Urban Limit Line within the unincorporated territory of Riverside County east of the Morgan Hill Specific Plan and direct staff to prepare a map of said line for approval by the Council and subsequent submittal to the County Board of Supervisors. By way of overheads, Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), clarifying that the City is not recommending approval of Morgan Hill project but is recommending that if the project were approved by the County, conditions be imposed relative to the mitigation of City traffic impacts ($1.5 million) and that the County establish an urban growth boundary to the east of the project site, thereby, preventing the construction of thousands of residential units which are currently proposed for approval by the County and noting that the implementation of urban growth boundaries would be consistent with the City's Management Plan. Mr. Thornhill advised that Supervisor Buster is requesting that the City Council take a formal position on this matter and that the Council's position be forwarded to the County prior to the April 10, 2001, Board of Supervisor's meeting. In response to Councilman Naggar, Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted the following with regard to the Morgan Hill project: · That the current zoning on the property of discussion is agriculture · That urban limit line defines the extent of urban development beyond a particular line; 5- to 10-acre parcels define urban and rural · That Morgan Hill is a County project, not a City project That the southerly extension of Butter'field Stage Road will bisect the property and will ultimately intersect with the southerly extension of Anza Road R:\Minutes\032701 6 · That the density decreases in the City have made an impact on the Level of Service · That Staff's recommendation is consistent with the direction given by the City Council Reiterating that this is not a City project, Mayor Pro Tem Robeds commented on the City's intent to impose specific conditions on a County project. Councilman Pratt suggested that legal action against the County be explored and commented on the cumulative traffic impacts this project will have on the City. Reiterating that staff had followed City Council direction as it relates to this project, Councilman Stone noted that in the past, the City has never had the opportunity to impose a condition on a County project. In response to Mayor Comerchero, Public Works Director Hughes stated that he would anticipate the intersections at Bedford Court and La Paz Road, with Wolf Creek and Morgan Hill, to operate at Level of Service D or better at peak hours for at least the next 10 years, noting that beyond that time frame, it would be difficult to estimate. Public Input With the development of Wolf Creek and Morgan Hill, Mr. Ed Dool, 28464 Old Town Front Street, noted that an additional 8,000 daily trips will be added to SR 79; relayed his support of SMART growth; and opposed the City's recommendation to the County to approve this project. Mr. Chris Pedersen, 31052 Wellington Circle, stated that the approval of Morgan Hill would be the approval of an upzone; that the requested $1.5 million would not solve the issues of concern; and that the County should not be approving this project until the completion of the Riverside County Integrated Program. Ms. May Lorah, 35555 Monte De Oro, stated that Mr. Lowry has a special interest in the Morgan Hill project and questioned whether Mayor Comerchero and Mayor Pro Tern Roberts should be voting on this project considering they received campaign contributions from three individuals involved with the Morgan Hill project. Because individuals involved with the Morgan Hill project have contributed to Mayor Comerchero's and Mayor Pro Tem Roberts's reelection campaigns, Mr. Carl Ross, 43886 Butternut, noted that them voting on this project would create a sense of impropriety. For Mr. Ross, Councilman Stone clarified that the City Council, this evening, will not be voting on the approval/disapproval of this project, noting that if it were a City project, the City would be voting no on the project but that the issue is whether or not to endorse the imposition of a City condition requesting $1.5 million if the project were approved. Because this project is not within the sphere of influence, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts reiterated that the Morgan Hill project is not a City project and that the developer of this County project is willing to give the City $1.5 million for traffic impacts, Although an individual(s) involved with the Morgan Hill project has contributed to his and Mayor Pro Tern Roberts' reelection campaigns, Mayor Co.merchero c ar f ed that the City is requesting that the project developer be required to pay the City $1.5 million. R:\Minutes\032701 7 Mr. Bob Canfield, 31041 Wellington Circle, stated that the residents of the City of Temecula would be willing to pay the $1.5 million versus the approval of this project. City Council discussion Noting that if it were a City project, he would vote no on the project because it would not comply with the City's Growth Management Plan, Councilman Stone reiterated that the issue before the City Council, this evening, is if the County were to approve the project, it be approved with a condition whereby the City would receive $1.5 million to mitigate project impacts. By way of overheads, Councilman Naggar referenced the adopted 1993 Traffic Circulation Element as well as the 1999 traffic study, noting that the $1.5 million would not make a difference when specific corridors along SR 79 are functioning at a Level of Service F. Commenting on the agreed-upon urban limit line, as per Supervisor Buster, Mayor Pro Tern Roberts noted that the City Council subcommittee negotiated, with City Council support, the matter, questioning why the support has changed. Not favoring upzones, Councilman Pratt noted that the City should pursue legal action. Echoing comments made by Councilman Stone, Mayor Comerchero reiterated that the issue, this evening, is if the County were to approve this project, it be approved with a condition whereby the City would receive $1.5 million to mitigate traffic impacts. Concurring with Mr. Stone, Mr. Comerchero noted that if this project were in the City, he would not be in support of it. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve staff recommendation and relayed the City Council's opposition to the County approving this project but if it were approved by the County, a condition be imposed requiring the developer to pay $1.5 million to the City of Temecu~a for pubtic infrastructure prior to the issuance of any building permit. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Naggar and Councilman Pratt who voted n._~o. 9 Rules of Order for Conduct of City Council Meetinqs (At the request of Councilman Naggar) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Provide direction to staff whether to amend Resolution No. 94-79 regarding rules of order for conduct at City Council Meetings. City Clerk Jones referenced the staff report (of record). Viewing three minutes as an unrealistic time limit to properly address an issue, Councilman Naggar stated that with such a time restriction, the people of this City are not properly represented by the City Council. In his opinion, Mr. Naggar noted that this rule is being imposed in order to silence him. Mr. Naggar addressed comments made by Mayor Comerchero and Mayor Pro Tem Roberts in the newspapers regarding this issue. At 9:18 P.M., Mayor Comerchero called a recess and reconvened the City Council meeting at 9:24 P.M. Wishing to further address this particular item, Cou.ncilman Naggar offered the following motion: R:\Minutes\032701 8 MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to extend his time by an additional three minutes. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Mayor Comerchero advised that, as Mayor of this City Council, it would be his responsibility to enforce Resolution No. 94-79, noting that the resolution may be revised but until such time, the resolution is in effect. Councilman Naggar reiterated his concern with comments made by Mayor Comerchero and Mayor Pro Tern Roberts in the newspapers regarding this issue and requested that the time restriction of three minutes be eliminated. Although having been restricted himself by this rule, Councilman Stone spoke in support of it, noting that it has required him to receive more information from staff and ask more questions regarding issues prior to a City Council meeting. Mr. Stone relayed his opposition to the continual discussion of same issues and, thereby, directing staff to research issues which may not have received majority direction from the City Council; that such action wastes staff time and as well confuses staff which, in turn, will confuse the public doing business with the City of Temecula; and that there are other important issues which need to be addressed by the City. Mr. Stone as well noted that the time restriction would limit the lateness of City Council meetings. Providing background information as to initial adoption of this resolution, Mayor Pro Tern Roberts commented on a similar resolution from the City of Murrieta, limiting debate time to five minutes and suggested that the City's time be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Public input Mr. Chris Pedersen, 31052 Wellington Circle, commented on the meaninglessness of such a time restriction; stated that this rule hasn't been enforced in the past; and noted that it inhibits public participation. Ms. May Lorah, 35555 Monte De Crc, stated that, in her opinion, the poweriul majority of this City Council has displayed a pattern of silencing and that limiting the City Councilmembers to three minutes limits proper public representation. Noting that in three minutes he is unable to communicate his point of view on a matter, Councilman Naggar stated that this matter has nothing to do with being prepared or not being prepared for a City Council meeting, the issue is that the three-minute rule hinders public participation. Commenting on an incident whereby the City Council gave direction to a subcommittee but when the matter was discussed on public session, certain City Councilmembers spoke in opposition of the original direction, Mr. Stone reiterated his support of the three-minute rule in order to ensure that allotted time will be appropriately used and as well be in the best interest of the City. Mayor Pro Tern Roberts reiterated that increasing the time limit to five minutes could correspond with the City of Murrieta's policy. Mayor Comerchero relayed his support of Mayor Pro Tem Roberts' recommendation to increase the time limit to five minutes, noting that business meetings must be concise and controlled in order to be effective and that the City Councilmembers must take measures to ensure proper preparation for upcoming City Council meetings. R:\Minutes\032701 9 MOTION: Mayor Comerchero moved to amend Section 2 B. 1 and 2 of Resolution No. 94-79 by increasing the time limit from three minutes to five minutes. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and the following voice vote reflected denial of the motion: AYES: Comerchero, Roberts NOES: Naggar, Stone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Pratt MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to uphold the'three-minute time limit as per Resolution No. 94-79. The motion was seconded by Mayor Comerchero and roll call vote reflected approval of the motion as follows: AYES: Comerchero, Roberts, Stone NOES: Naggar, Pratt 10 Public/Traffic Safety Commission Meetinq Schedule Revision RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve modification of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting schedule to one regular meeting per month. 10.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE MEETING SCHEDULE OF THE PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION 10.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 01-05 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION NO. 2.40.100 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO MONTHLY COMPENSATION FOR CITY COMMISSIONERS Public Works Director Hughes reviewed the staff report (of record), confirming that the Public/Traffic Safety Commission concurs with staff's recommendation. In response to Councilman Stone, Public/Traffic Safety Chairwoman Edwards reiterated that the Commission concurs with staff's recommendation to amend the Commission meeting schedule to one meeting a month and advised that if a special meeting were necessary, it could be scheduled at any time. Councilman Pratt commended the Commission on a job well done. R:\Minutes\032701 10 MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve 10.1 and 10.2 of the staff recommendation, including the adoption of Resolution No. 01-23. The motion was seconded by Mayor Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by title only Ordinance No. 01-05. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to introduce and read by title only Ordinance No. 01-05 (10.3). The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No comment. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that there were no reportable actions under the Brown Act for Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT At 9:53 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, April 10, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. '~ Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: [SEAL] R:\Minutes\032701 11