HomeMy WebLinkAbout060920 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,
please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City
to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II].
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 9, 2020 - 7:00 PM
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING
This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of
California Executive Order N 29 20, dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID 19 pandemic. The
live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at
temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N 29 20, the public may only view the meeting
on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this Council meeting,
please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the City Clerk. Email
comments must be submitted to the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Email comments on
matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls the item for Public
Comments. Email comments on agenda items must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor closes
public comments on the agenda item. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would
otherwise govern speaker comments at the Council meeting. Electronic comments on agenda items for
this Council meeting may only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media
(Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.
Reading of Public Comments: The City Clerk shall read all email comments, provided that the reading
shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Council may provide, consistent with the
time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. The email comments submitted shall become part of the
record of the Council meeting.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor James Stewart
INVOCATION: TBD
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart
Page 1
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the City Council on items that
appear on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three
minutes. For all Public Hearing or Business items on the agenda, each speaker is limited to five minutes.
For this meeting, public comments may be submitted and read into the record pursuant to the important
notice provided at the top of this agenda.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A
total, not to exceed, ten minutes will be devoted to these reports.
CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one
roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the City Council request
specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
1. Waive Reading of Standard Ordinances and Resolutions
Recommendation
Attachments
That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all standard
ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda except as specifically
required by the Government Code.
Agenda Report
2. Approve Action Minutes of May 21 and May 26, 2020
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the action minutes of May 21 and May 26,
2020.
Attachments: Action Minutes - 5/21/20
Action Minutes - 5/26/20
3. Approve List of Demands
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS
SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Attachments: Agenda Report
RPsnlntinn
List of Demands
Page 2
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
4.
5.
6.
Adopt Ordinance 2020-06 Amending Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone of the
Temecula Municipal Code Long Range Project No. LR20-0279) (Second Reading)
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO.2020-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21 REGARDING THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE
DETERMINATION THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS
EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER
CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
Attachments: Agenda Report
(lydinnnoP
Adopt Resolution Reaffirming and Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency Related to
the COVID-19 Virus Pandemic
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REAFFIRMING AND PROCLAIMING THE
EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO THE
COVID-19 VIRUS PANDEMIC AND ISSUING CERTAIN ORDERS
FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY AFFAIRS DURING THE LOCAL
EMERGENCY
Attachments: Agenda Report
Resolution
Adopt Resolutions Regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the following resolutions regarding the
November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING
OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020, FOR THE ELECTION OF
CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE
Page 3
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL
LAW CITIES
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER
3, 2020 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE
HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE
ELECTIONS CODE
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR
ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS
SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL
RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES IN THE EVENT OF
A TIE VOTE AT ANY MUNICIPAL ELECTION
Attachments: Agenda Report
Resolution - Calling Election
Resolution - Consolidating Election
Resolution - Candidate Statements
Resolution - Tie Procedures
7. Receive and File the 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report
Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the 2019 General Plan Annual
Progress Report (GPAPR).
Attachments: Agenda Report
2019 General Plan Annual Report
2019 Housing Annual Report Summary
April 28, 2020 Staff Report
Page 4
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND/OR THE
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
Page 5
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: President Zak Schwank
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart
CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Board of Directors on items
that appear on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to
three minutes. For all Public Hearing or Business items on the agenda, each speaker is limited to five
minutes. For this meeting, public comments may be submitted and read into the record pursuant to the
important notice provided at the top of this agenda.
CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one
roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the Temecula Community
Services District request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
8. Approve Action Minutes of MU 26, 2020
Recommendation
Attachments
That the Board of Directors approve the action minutes of May 26, 2020.
Action Minutes
CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT
CSD BOARD OF DIRECTOR REPORTS
CSD ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District will be held on Tuesday, June
23, 2020, at 5:30 p.m., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., at the
Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.
Page 6
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - NONE
TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY - NONE
TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY - NONE
RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL / COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before or during a public hearing in
support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) in the manner prescribed in the important
notice at the top of this agenda. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing.
9. Approve Update to the 2017-22 Citizen Participation Plan and Substantial Amendment to the
2019-20 Community Development Block Grant Annual Action Plan
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt resolutions entitled:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
PLAN SETTING THE CITY'S POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK PROGRAM (CDBG) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN,
ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING, ANNUAL ACTION PLANS,
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS, SUBSTANTIAL
AMENDMENTS, AND DISASTER RECOVERY AND
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO
THE 2019-20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
Attachments: Agenda Report
Resolution - Citizen Participation Plan
Exhibit A - Citizen Participation Plan
Resolution - Substantial Amendment
Exhibit A - Substantial Amendment
Notice of Public Hearing
Page 7
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
10. Approve Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program - (CIP) and Adopt Fiscal Year
2020-21 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community
Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency (SARDA
Recommendation
That the City Council/Board of Directors adopt the following resolutions
entitled:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-25 AND ADOPTING THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2020-21
RESOLUTION NO. CSD
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL
OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES
IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY
OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT
SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. SARDA
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FISCAL YEARS 2021-25, ADOPTING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21,
ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING
BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN
APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL
OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES
IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY
OF CITY MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT
AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER
Page 8
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED
POSITIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
Attachments: Agenda Report
Exhibit A - Summary of Budget Adjustments
Exhibit A - CIP Budget Adjustments
Transmittal Message
Resolution - Cites
Resolution - TCSD AOB
Resolution - Cites
Resolution - SARDA
Resolution - Schedule of Authorized Positions
Attachment - Salary Schedule
Attachment - Schedule of Authorized Positions
Resolution - Appropriations Limit Resolution
Attachment - GANN Limit
BUSINESS
11. Provide General Direction to Staff on a Proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail Program
in (lld Tn-,vn
Recommendation: That the City Council provide general direction to staff on whether to
proceed with a proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail Program in
Old Town.
Attachments: Agenda Report
COMMISSION REPORTS
PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
Page 9
City Council Agenda June 9, 2020
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, June 23, 2020, at 5:30 p.m., for a
Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., at the Council Chambers located at
41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
The full agenda packet (including staff reports, public closed session information, and any supplemental material
available after the original posting of the agenda), distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any
item on the agenda, will be available for public viewing online at temeculaca.gov at least 72 hours prior to the
meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda, please contact the City Clerk's Department at
(951) 694 6444.
Page 10
Item No. 1
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Waive Reading of Standard Ordinances and Resolutions
PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all standard
ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda except as specifically required by the
Government Code.
BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula is a general law city formed under the laws of
the State of California. With respect to adoption of ordinances and resolutions, the City adheres to
the requirements set forth in the Government Code. Unless otherwise required, the full reading of
the text of standard ordinances and resolutions is waived.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: None
Item No. 2
ACTION MINUTES
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
BUDGET WORKSHOP
CONFERENCE CENTER
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 21, 2020 - 9:30 AM
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING
This meeting was conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of
California Executive Order N-29-20, dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The
live stream of the meeting may be viewed online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In
accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the meeting online and not in the
Council Chamber.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at the meeting, please
submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the City Clerk at
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Email comments on matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to
the time the Mayor calls the item for Public Comments. Email comments on agenda items must be
submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls public comments on the agenda item. All email comments
shall be subject to the same rules as would otherwise govern speaker comments at the Council meeting.
Electronic comments on agenda items for the meeting may only be submitted via email. Comments via
text and/or social media will not be accepted.
Reading of Public Comments: The City Clerk shall read all email comments, provided that the reading
shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Council may provide, consistent with the
time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. The email comments submitted shall become part of the
record of the Council meeting.
CALL TO ORDER at 9:30 AM: Mayor James Stewart
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals submitted an electronic comment on agendized item:
• Habib Isaac (1) • Lee Rosu (1)
BUSINESS
Review Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Fiscal Year 2020-21
CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community
Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency
SARDA
Recommendation: That the City Council/Board of Directors review and discuss the
Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and
Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budgets for the City of
Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the
Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency (SARDA).
Workshop with discussion and general direction only; no action taken.
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:45 AM, the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 9, 2020, at 5:30 PM
for Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main
Street, Temecula, California.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
ACTION MINUTES
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 26, 2020 - 7:00 PM
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING
This meeting was conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of
California Executive Order N 29 20, dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID 19 pandemic. The
live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at
temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N 29 20, the public may only view the meeting
on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this Council meeting,
please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the City Clerk. Email
comments must be submitted to the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Email comments on
matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls the item for Public
Comments. Email comments on agenda items must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor closes
public comments on the agenda item. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would
otherwise govern speaker comments at the Council meeting. Electronic comments on agenda items for
this Council meeting may only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media
(Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.
Reading of Public Comments: The City Clerk shall read all email comments, provided that the reading
shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Council may provide, consistent with the
time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. The email comments submitted shall become part of the
record of the Council meeting.
CALL TO ORDER at 7:00 PM: Mayor James Stewart
INVOCATION: Aaron Adams
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals submitted an electronic comment on non-agendized items:
• Anonymous • Louis Todd
• Tanis June Earle 0 Natalie Morgan
The following individuals submitted an electronic comment on agendized items:
• Brandon Jantz (20)
• Ira Robinson (20)
• Bruce and Marjorie Drayton (20)
• Ed Dool (20)
• Kimberly Savage (20)
• Richard Bivin (20)
• Kim Daly (20)
• Jane Lauhon (20)
• Brenda Hamilton (20)
• Toni Reyes (20)
• Lisa Maloney (20)
• Doug Ferrin (20)
• Sandra Vaniman (20)
• John Guterrez (20)
• Kathy Bowman (20)
• Charles Colburn (20)
• Tori Manning (20)
• Rob Crisell (20)
• Deborah Noonan (20)
• Jennifer Palmer (20)
• Jill Erickson (20)
• Eileen Rosenow (20)
• Lori Bermudez (20)
• Rachel Pena (20)
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
• Kathleen Bowen (20)
• Ann and Dennis Johnson (20)
• Michael Richards (20)
• Chastity Cervantez (20)
Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar.
Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Edwards, Second by Schwank. The vote reflected
unanimous approval.
1. Waive Reading of Standard Ordinances and Resolutions
Recommendation: That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all standard
ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda except as specifically
required by the Government Code.
2. Approve Action Minutes of April 28, May 6 and May 12, 2020
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the action minutes of April 28, May 6 and
May 12, 2020.
3. Approve List of Demands
Recommendation:
That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS
SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
4. Approve City Treasurer's Report as of March 31, 2020
Recommendation: That the City Council approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of
March 31, 2020.
5. Adopt Ordinance 2020-04 Amending Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code Pertaining to
the Accessory Dwelling Units (Second Reading)
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO.2020-04
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO DELETE CERTAIN SUBSECTIONS OF
SECTION 17.06.050 PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS, ESTABLISHING A NEW CHAPTER 17.23 PERTAINING TO
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, AMENDING TABLE 17.24.040
REGARDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND FINDING THE
ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
6. Adopt Ordinance 2020-05 Amending Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code to Conform
with the Density Bonus Ordinance Law Under the California Government Code (Long Range
Project Number LR19-1597) (Second Reading)
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE REGULATIONS TO CONFORM
WITH DENSITY BONUS LAW (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 65915) AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE TO BE
EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT
7. Extend Terms of Appointment for Planning Commissioner Lanae Turley-Trejo and Old Town
Local Review Board Members Annette Brown and Pew
Recommendation: That the City Council extend the terms of appointment for Planning
Commissioner Lanae Turley-Trejo and Old Town Local Review Board
Members Annette Brown and Peg Moore to October 10, 2020.
8. Set Public Hearing to Approve Solid Waste and Recycling Rates for Commercial Customers
for Fiscal Year 2020-21
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-27
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOLID WASTE AND
3
9.
10.
11.
12.
RECYCLING RATES FOR COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
Approve Resolution Regarding the Return of Funds to the US Department of Housing and
Urban Development
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-28
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REGARDING THE RETURN OF FUNDS TO THE US
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Approve Loan Agreement with Las Haciendas Housing Associates, LP for a 77 Unit
Affordable Housing Project
Recommendation: That the City Council approve a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE HOUSING
SUCCESSOR TO THE FORMER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (AND, WITH RESPECT TO A LOAN OF CITY FEES,
ALSO IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE CITY) APPROVING A LOAN
AGREEMENT WITH LAS HACIENDAS HOUSING ASSOCIATES,
L.P. FOR THE "LAS HACIENDAS" 77 UNIT LOW INCOME
AFFORDABLE MULTI -FAMILY (APARTMENT) PROJECT AT
28715 LAS HACIENDAS STREET AND 28772 CALLE CORTEZ,
AND THE TAKING OF RELATED ACTIONS, AND MAKING A
FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15182
Approve Resolution to Amend the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-30
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
Approve Tract Maps and Subdivision Improvement and Monumentation Agreements for
Sommers Bend and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Related Documents
Recommendation: That the City Council:
4
1. Approve Tract Map 37341-11, 37341-12, 37341-13, 37341-14,
37341-15 and 37341-16 in conformance with the Conditions of
Approval;
2. Approve the Subdivision Improvement and Monumentation
Agreements with the Developer;
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute the agreements on behalf of
the City.
RECESS:
At 7:25 PM, the City Council recessed and convened as the Temecula Community Services District
Meeting and Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:30 PM, the City Council
resumed with the remainder of the City Council Agenda.
RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
17. Approve Amendment to the Old Town Specific Plan to Allow Four -Story Hotels Within the
Downtown Core District and to Add Language to the Specific Plan to Clarify the Intended Use
of a Minor Exception for Building Height
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt resolutions entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO THE OLD
TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (SCH NO.2009071049)
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO THE OLD
TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-5) (LONG RANGE PROJECT NO.
LR20-0209)
Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Edwards, Second by Schwank. The vote
reflected unanimous approval.
18. Introduce Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone of the
Temecula Municipal Code Long Range Project No. LR20-0279)
Recommendation: That the City Council introduce and read by title only an ordinance
entitled:
5
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21 REGARDING
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING
THE DETERMINATION THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS
EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER
CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Edwards, Second by Rahn. The vote
reflected unanimous approval.
19. Adopt California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Transportation Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT)Analysis Guidelines
Recommendation:
That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA TO ADOPT THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT ("CEQA") TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE MILES
TRAVELED ("VMT") ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR PURPOSES
OF ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS UNDER CEQA,
AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA
(LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR18-1506)
Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Schwank, Second by Edwards. The vote
reflected unanimous approval.
BUSINESS
20. Receive Update to Community Recovery and Reopening Plan and Related Efforts and Provide
General Direction Regarding the Same
Recommendation: That the City Council receive the update to the Community Recovery
and Reopening Plan and related efforts and provide general direction
regarding the same.
Receive and file only.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
21. City Council Travel/Conference Report — Receive and file only.
22. Community Development Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only.
23. Fire Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only.
6
24. Police Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only.
25. Public Works Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only.
COMMISSION REPORTS
PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:50 PM, the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 9, 2020, at 5:30 PM for
Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main
Street, Temecula, California.
Adjourned in memory of
Hans Bolowich of CalFire
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
Item No. 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Approve the List of Demands
PREPARED BY: Jada Shafe, Accounting Technician II
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
BACKGROUND: All claims and demands are reported and summarized for review
and approval by the City Council on a routine basis at each City Council meeting. The attached
claims represent the paid claims and demands since the last City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: All claims and demands were paid from appropriated funds or
authorized resources of the City and have been recorded in accordance with the City's policies
and procedures.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution
2. List of Demands
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in
the office of the City Clerk, has been reviewed by the City Manager's Office and that the same are
hereby allowed in the amount of $4,073,465.16
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
05/14/2020 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
05/21/2020 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
05/14/2020 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN:
$ 3,052,261.79
479,732.47
541,470.90
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 6/9/2020 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 4,073,465.16
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
001
GENERAL FUND
$ 2,598,249.92
140
COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT
764.13
165
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
11,300.11
170
MEASURE A FUND
19,855.00
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
169,108.83
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B STREET LIGHTS
406.63
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REFUSE RECYCLING
591.67
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT.
1,575.75
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
8,157.21
210
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND
547,475.77
300
INSURANCE FUND
22,898.34
305
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
1,749.84
320
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
57,907.27
330
CENTRAL SERVICES
6,964.29
340
FACILITIES
18,071.65
472
CFD 01-2 HARVESTONA&B DEBT SERVICE
134.44
473
CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND
134.39
474
AD03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE
134.39
475
CFD03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND
163.44
476
CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND
134.39
477
CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT SERVICE FUND
192.66
478
CFD 16-01 RORIPAUGH PHASE II
134.39
501
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 1 SADDLEWOOD
22.29
502
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 2 WINCHESTER CREEK
185.70
503
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 3 RANCHO HIGHLANDS
595.40
504
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 4 THE VINEYARDS
14.09
505
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 5 SIGNET SERIES
186.49
506
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 6 WOODCREST COUNTRY
107.34
507
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 7 RIDGEVIEW
37.63
508
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 8 VILLAGE GROVE
1,884.83
509
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 9 RANCHO SOLANA
42.88
510
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 10 MARTINIQUE
16.94
511
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 11 MEADOWVIEW
12.53
512
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 12 VINTAGE HILLS
1,141.91
513
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 13 PRESLEY DEVELOP.
724.72
514
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 14 MORRISON HOMES
37.65
515
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 15 BARCLAY ESTATES
14.97
516
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 16 TRADEWINDS
285.98
517
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 17 MONTE VISTA
11.35
518
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 18 TEMEKU HILLS
417.09
519
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 19 CHANTEMAR
411.43
520
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 20 CROWNE HILL
1,438.02
521
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 21 VAIL RANCH
1,874.32
522
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 22 SUTTON PLACE
13.29
523
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 23 PHEASENT RUN
133.89
524
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 24 HARVESTON
1,791.34
525
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 25 SERENA HILLS
171.25
526
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 26 GALLERYTRADITION
68.41
527
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 27 AVONDALE
15.41
528
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 28 WOLF CREEK
43,456.31
529
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 29 GALLERY PORTRAIT
68.58
700
CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-GASB45
10,707.71
3,531,994.26
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
001
GENERAL FUND
$ 314,062.30
140
COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT
661.80
165
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
5,262.32
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
104,524.79
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B STREET LIGHTS
486.88
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REFUSE RECYCLING
1,135.62
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT.
543.75
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
2,497.99
300
INSURANCE FUND
1,029.15
305
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
730.53
320
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
35,399.83
330
CENTRAL SERVICES
2,660.77
340
FACILITIES
7,872.91
472
CFD 01-2 HARVESTONA&B DEBT SERVICE
104.39
473
CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND
104.48
474
AD03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE
104.48
475
CFD03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND
129.76
476
CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND
104.48
477
CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT SERVICE FUND
155.12
478
CFD 16-01 RORIPAUGH PHASE II
104.48
501
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 1 SADDLEWOOD
0.30
502
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 2 WINCHESTER CREI
11.46
503
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 3 RANCHO HIGHLAN
0.23
504
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 4 THE VINEYARDS
2.29
505
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 5 SIGNET SERIES
11.46
506
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 6 WOODCREST COUP
5.75
507
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 7 RIDGEVIEW
11.46
508
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 8 VILLAGE GROVE
230.69
509
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 9 RANCHO SOLANA
0.70
510
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 10 MARTINIQUE
4.58
511
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 11 MEADOWVIEW
1.15
512
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 12 VINTAGE HILLS
212.82
513
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 13 PRESLEY DEVELC
11.46
514
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 14 MORRISON HOME
3.43
515
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 15 BARCLAY ESTATE
3.00
516
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 16 TRADEWINDS
13.54
517
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 17 MONTE VISTA
0.23
518
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 18 TEMEKU HILLS
50.01
519
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 19 CHANTEMAR
26.84
520
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 20 CROWNE HILL
173.58
521
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 21 VAIL RANCH
218.08
522
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 22 SUTTON PLACE
1.61
523
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 23 PHEASENT RUN
3.21
524
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 24 HARVESTON
132.60
525
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 25 SERENA HILLS
22.24
526
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 26 GALLERYTRADIT]
0.46
527
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 27 AVONDALE
3.21
528
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 28 WOLF CREEK
178.19
529
SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 29 GALLERY PORTRJ
1.61
700
CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-GASB45
62,458.88
TOTAL BY FUND:
541,470.90
$ 4,073,465.16
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank: union UNION BANK
Check # Date Vendor
Description
8609 4/9/2020 006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
012085
ISTOCK INT'L INC.
KH IMAGES FOR PROMOTIONAL
FLYERS & WEBSI
010046
TV CONVENTION &VISITORS
KH REGIST: XENIA HOSPITALITY
BUREAU, DBA VISIT TEMECULA
AWARDS: TCS
VALLEY
020249
LAUND3R.COM LLC
KH LAUNDER SVC: SAFETY VEST FOR
STAFF
004822
RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY
KH DIAL RIDE VOUCHERS: SENIOR &
DISABL
015354
FACEBOOK.COM
KH BOOST: AROUND & ABOUT
TEMECULA
000718
NATIONAL RECREATION PARK
KH STAFF TRAINING/CERTIFICATION:
ASSOC
TCSD
002103
CALIF ASSOCIATION PUBLIC
KH AWARD SUBMISSION FEE: TCSD
INFO, DBA: CAPIO
020195
NATIONAL CHARITY LEAGUE
KH REGISTRATION: RECOGNITION
MTG
021805
KLEEN-RITE CORP
KH PROMOTIONAL ITEMS: ROD RUN
008039
PORTOLA PLAZA HOTEL
KH LODGING: PARMA CONF:
CARDENAS
015354
FACEBOOK.COM
KH BOOST: AROUND & ABOUT
TEMECULA
021806
BOSS -PLAY ESCAPE ROOMS
KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSION:
TCSD
006952
PAYPAL
KH VERISIGN PAYFLOW PRO
TRANSACTION
002103
CALIF ASSOCIATION PUBLIC
KH AWARD SUBMISSION FEE: TCSD
INFO, DBA: CAPIO
017443
OPERATING CO.LLC
KH RFRSHMNTS: HOSPITALITY:
MED.CUISINE, DBA: DAPHNE'S
THEATER
CALIFORNIA
000718
NATIONAL RECREATION PARK
KH TRAINING FOR AQUATICS: DAVIS,
ASSOC
M.
000718
NATIONAL RECREATION PARK
KH TRAINING FOR AQUATICS: POST,
ASSOC
K.
021199
THE DROP ZONE
KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSION
020886
NETFLIX.COM
KH MONTHLY CHARGE FOR SVC: CRC
TEEN ROOM
000152
CALIF PARKS AND
KH ADMIN GENERAL MTG:
RECREATION SOC, C P R S
RUSSO/WOOTEN
020535
LUNA GRILL
KH THEATER HOSPITALITY: TCSD
008794
YARD HOUSE USA INC, YARD
KH RFRSHMNTS: CPRS CONF: TCSD
HOUSE
STAFF
021807
ROUND ONE ENTERTAINMENT
KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCUSION:
INC, DBA ROUND 1 BOWLING
TCSD
Amount Paid Check Total
120.00
60.00
35.25
700.00
18.00
314.00
190.00
200.00
3,233.55
672.60
7.00
572.40
194.60
190.00
338.80
270.00
270.00
452.00
8.99
80.00
55.80
567.11
100.00
Page:1
apChkLst
O5/14/2020
12:11:10PM
Final Check List
CITY OF TEMECULA
Page: 2
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
000152
CALIF PARKS AND
KH MEMBERSHIP: LYNTON, L.
145.00
RECREATION SOC, C P R S
021113
DISCOVERY SCIENCE CTR OF
KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSION:
150.00
OC, DBA DISCOVERY CUBE OF
TCSD
OC
000152
CALIF PARKS AND
KH CONF REGIST: CPRS CONF:
102.50
RECREATION SOC, C P R S
LYNTON, L.
010046
TV CONVENTION &VISITORS
KH REGIST: XENIA HOSPITALITY
40.00
BUREAU, DBA VISIT TEMECULA
AWARDS
VALLEY
KH FRAUD CHARGES TO BE REVERSED
200.00
9,287.60
8665
4/30/2020
000194
1 C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN
ICMA-RC RETIREMENT TRUST 457
13,731.25
13,731.25
303355
PAYMENT
8668
4/30/2020
001065
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT PAYMENT
11,844.54
11,844.54
SOLUTION
8669
4/30/2020
019088
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
NATIONWIDE LOAN REPAYMENT
28.51
28.51
SOLUTION
PAYMENT
8738
5/11/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
021453
SACRAMENTO BEE
RO SUBSCRIPTION: ONLINE DIGITAL
12.99
12.99
SUBSCRIP
8739
5/11/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
001060
HYATT
JS LODGING: CPRS CONF: 3/10-3/12
525.48
001060
HYATT
JS PARKING: CPRS CONF: 3/10-3/12
32.00
557.48
8740
5/11/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
002283
EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL
RG LODGING: DEPUTY EXPOSED
157.07
COVID-19
008337
STAPLES BUSINESS CREDIT
RG TONER CARTRIDGE: COVID-19
489.35
020489
GREYHOUND LINES
RG HOMELESS REUNIFICATION PRGM
147.99
021813
RUSHORDERTEES.COM
RG FACE COVERINGS: HOMELESS:
240.00
1,034.41
COVID-19
8742
5/11/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
021342
RING.COM
WW SUBSCRIPTION: OVERLAND
100.00
TRAIL: FIRE
010210
HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC
WW BUILT-IN PROPANE GRILL: FIRE
32.88
DEPT
010210
HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC
WW TOOL BOX: FIRE DEPT
1,195.16
001264
COSTCO TEMECULA 491
WW PAPER SHREDDER: FIRE STA 95
97.86
1,425.90
Paget
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3
O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
8743
5/11/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
021811
BLACKHAWK NETWORK
IG SERVICE AWARDS: HR
021809
CREATIVE COSTUMING &
IG FACE COVERING: ESSENTIAL
DESIGN, INC
WORKERS
021810
IMPULSIVE APPAREL INC
IG FACE COVERING: ESSENTIAL
WORKERS
8745
5/11/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
006714
SHERATON HOTEL
MH LODGING: REFUND: TYLER
CONNECT
006552
PAINTED EARTH
MH EVENT: INFO TECH DEPT
013338
APPLE STORE
MH JOINT VENTURE MEMBERSHIP
RENEWAL
021274
ZOOM.US
MH ADDITIONAL MEMBERS: INFO
TECH
021274
ZOOM.US
MH MONTHLY RENEWAL FEE: INFO
TECH
021798
MALWAREBYTES
MH ANTIVIRUS -LAPTOPS NOT ON CITY
NETWORK
8746
5/14/2020
010349
CALIF DEPT OF CHILD
SUPPORT PAYMENT
SUPPORT
8747
5/14/2020
017429
COBRAADVANTAGE INC, DBA
FSA REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENT
THE ADVANTAGE GROUP
8748
5/14/2020
021301
I C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN
ICMA- 401(A) RETIREMENT PLAN
106474
PAYMENT
8749
5/14/2020
000194
I C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN
ICMA-RC RETIREMENT TRUST 457
303355
PAYMENT
8750
5/14/2020
000444
INSTATAX (EDD)
STATE TAXES PAYMENT
8751
5/14/2020
000283
INSTATAX (IRS)
FEDERAL TAXES PAYMENT
8752
5/14/2020
001065
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT PAYMENT
SOLUTION
8753
5/14/2020
019088
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
NATIONWIDE LOAN REPAYMENT
SOLUTION
PAYMENT
8754
5/14/2020
000389
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
OBRA- PROJECT RETIREMENT
SOLUTION
PAYMENT
8755
5/14/2020
000245
PERS - HEALTH INSUR
PERS HEALTH PAYMENT
PREMIUM
PERS HEALTH PAYMENT
Amount Paid Check Total
55.94
1,000.00
1,107.63 2,163.57
-325.13
399.08
499.00
79.96
786.70
1,543.15
2,982.76
899.07
899.07
19,735.14
19,735.14
1,134.62
1,134.62
14,931.84
14,931.84
27,179.11
27,179.11
90,453.54
90,453.54
13,201.92
13,201.92
28.51
28.51
709.84
709.84
142,443.33
0.00
142,443.33
Page:3
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
Check #
Date
Vendor
8756
5/14/2020
000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES'
RETIREMENT)
8757
5/4/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8758
5/4/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8759
5/4/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8760
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8761
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8762
5/4/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8763
5/4/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8764
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8765
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8766
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8767
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8768
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8769
5/8/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8770
5/8/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8771
5/5/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8772
5/8/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
PERS RETIREMENT PAYMENT
108,939.70
108,939.70
APR 2-41-048-2012 30498 TEM PKWY
77.98
77.98
APR 2-35-403-6337 41375 MCCABE CT
393.21
393.21
APR 2-35-664-9053 29119 MARGARITA
296.12
296.12
RD
APR 2-41-812-6629 42061 MAIN ST
27.96
27.96
APR 2-35-707-0010 33451 S HWY 79
11.79
11.79
APR 2-30-520-4414 32781 TEM PKWY
925.56
925.56
APR 2-25-393-4681 41951 MORAGA RD
708.29
708.29
APR 2-29-953-8249 46497 WOLF CREEK
13.56
13.56
DR
APR 2-29-953-8082 31523 WOLF
14.60
14.60
VALLEY RD
APR 2-29-295-3510 32211 WOLF
969.39
969.39
VALLEY RD
APR 2-29-223-8607 42035 2ND ST
286.24
286.24
APR 2-39-732-3171 41997 MARGARITA
11.05
11.05
RD
APR 2-29-657-2332 45538 REDWOOD
12.21
12.21
RD
APR 2-29-953-8447 31738 WOLF
12.06
12.06
VALLEY RD
APR 2-00-397-5067 40499 CALLE
935.56
935.56
MEDUSA
APR 2-31-404-6020 28771 OLD TOWN
601.13
601.13
FRONT
Page:4
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
Check #
Date
Vendor
8773
5/8/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
8774
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8775
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8776
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8777
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8778
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8779
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8780
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8781
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8782
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8783
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8784
5/7/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8785
5/8/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
8786
5/1/2020
000262
RANCHO CALIF WATER
DISTRICT
8787
5/8/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
8788
5/8/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
8789
5/8/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
2-30-220-8749 45850
N WOLF CREEK
379.38
379.38
DR
APR 129-535-4236-741000
MAIN ST
1,736.58
1,736.58
APR 129-582-9784-3
43230 BUS PARK
195.57
195.57
DR
APR 091-024-9300-5
30875 RANCHO
683.59
683.59
VISTA RD
APR 060-293-3315-7
28922 PUJOL ST
69.01
69.01
APR 133-040-7373-0
43210 BUS PARK
18.59
18.59
DR
APR 196-025-0344-3
42081 MAIN ST
101.51
101.51
APR 021-725-0775-4
41845 6TH ST
102.25
102.25
APR 181-383-8881-6
28314 MERCEDES
109.77
109.77
ST
APR 026-671-2909-8
42051 MAIN ST
88.32
88.32
APR 101-525-0950-0
28816 PUJOL ST
35.75
35.75
APR 028-025-1468-3
41375 MCCABE CT
247.06
247.06
APR 101-525-1560-6
27415
284.64
284.64
ENTERPRISE CIR
VARI MAR WATER 3001042 30600
6,992.47
6,992.47
PAUBA RD
MAY INTERNET SVCS- 32211 WOLF
191.00
191.00
VALLEY RD
MAY INTERNET SVCS- 30755AULD RD
685.54
685.54
MAY INTERNET SVCS- 41000 MAIN ST 3,430.75 3,430.75
Page:5
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6
O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
8791
5/7/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
MAY INTERNET SVCS- 29119
MARGARITA RD
8792
5/6/2020
014486
VERIZON WIRELESS
3/11-4/10 TASK FORCE TABLETS
POLICE
8793
5/7/2020
014486
VERIZON WIRELESS
03/16 - 04/15
CELLULAR/BROADBAN D:CITYW I D
8794
4/9/2020
006887
UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
001085
L N CURTIS AND SONS
WW RESCUE EQUIPMENT: FIRE
010210
HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC
WW BUILT-IN PROPANE GRILL: FIRE
DEPT
8795
5/14/2020
002412
RICHARDS WATSON AND
MAR 2020 LEGAL SERVICES
GERSHON
CREDIT:MAR 2020 LEGAL SERVICES
201441
5/8/2020
012614
DBX INC
REPAIR TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPT:
PW-TRAFFIC
201442
5/14/2020
004802
ADLERHORST INTERNATIONAL
APR K9 TRAINING: DAYKA/BORIS:
LLC
POLICE
201443
5/14/2020
019307
ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE
TRUCK REPAIRS: TRAFFIC DIV
SMOG
201444
5/14/2020
018859
AED SUPERSTORE,
TRAINING EQUIPMENT: AQUATICS
AEDS.COM, AED, OUTLET,
ALLIED MED. PROD.
201445
5/14/2020
003951
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET
201446
5/14/2020
007282
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES
ANTI -FOG SPRAY FOR GOGGLES:
INC
FIRE
BOOKS: LIBRARY
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE
SUMMER DAY CAMP SUPPLIES: CRC
201447
5/14/2020
004240
AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES
PHLEBOTOMY SVCS: TEM SHERIFF
AFN
201448
5/14/2020
000747
AMERICAN PLANNING
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: JONES, ERIC
ASSOCIATION
MBRSHIP RENEWALS:PLNG COMMISSIC
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL:TOMA, SARA
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: RABIDOU, BR/
Amount Paid Check Total
348.49
348.49
444.00
444.00
10,335.51
10,335.51
242.29
1,260.20 1,502.49
70,258.11
-1,284.30 68,973.81
24,673.00 24,673.00
350.00
350.00
451.80
451.80
5,427.71
5,427.71
175.09
498.49 673.58
101.55
16.30
-2.69
-10.78
6.12
561.70 672.20
irlo]P4 rlo]P4i..
470.00
461.00
265.00
265.00 1,461.00
Page.-6
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201449
5/14/2020
018941
AZTEC LANDSCAPING INC
APR MAINT SVCS: PARKS/SCHOOLS
PW
201450
5/14/2020
017867
CAPITOL ENQUIRY
POCKET DIRECTORY OF CA
LEGISLATURE:
201451
5/14/2020
018828
CASC ENGINEERING AND,
WQMP/PLAN CK - PW18-11 PARK &
CONSULTING INC
RIDE
ENG/GIS SVCS:CATCH BASIN DEVICE Al'
201452
5/14/2020
004462
CDW LLC, DBA CDW
COMPUTER LOAN PURCHASES:
GOVERNMENT LLC
OBMANN, B.
201453
5/14/2020
004462
CDW LLC, DBA CDW
MISC SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP:INFO
GOVERNMENT LLC
TECH
201454
5/14/2020
021601
CEMEX CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE MATERIALS: PW STREET
MATERIALS, PACIFIC LLC
MAINT
201455
5/14/2020
005410
COLE, TOM
REIMB: UNIFORM: CODE
ENFORCEMENT
201456
5/14/2020
004405
COMMUNITY HEALTH
EMPLOYEE CHARITY DONATIONS
CHARITIES
PAYMENT
201457
5/14/2020
002945
CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: VARI PARKS
DIST
201458
5/14/2020
011922
CORELOGIC INC, DBA
MAR PROP ID SFTWR: CODE
CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS
ENFORCEMENT
APR PROP ID SFTWR: CODE ENFORCEN
201459
5/14/2020
009831
D R HORTON AMERICA'S
REFUND: ENG DEPOSIT LD14-2627
BUILDER
TRACT MAP
201460
5/14/2020
020648
DG INVESTMENT HOLDINGS 2
PRGS PMT: CITYWIDE SURVEILLANCE
INC, CONVERGINT
PRJT
TECHNOLOGIES
201461
5/14/2020
003945
DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL
PORTABLE RESTROOM: LASERENA
SRVCS
WAY
PORTABLE RESTROOM: LONG CANYON
PORTABLE RESTROOM: RIVERTON PAR
PORTABLE RESTROOM: VAIL RANCH PA
Amount Paid Check Total
9,550.50
9,550.50
22.34
22.34
1,839.50
10,911.50
12,751.00
643.55
643.55
44.24
44.24
647.77
647.77
136.53
136.53
4.00
4.00
163.13
163.13
471.50
499.00
970.50
50,000.00
50,000.00
85,387.76
85,387.76
185.88
145.88
110.88
165.88 608.52
Page:?
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank: union UNION BANK
Check # Date Vendor
(Continued)
Description
Amount Paid Check Total
201462
5/14/2020
004192
DOWNS ENERGY FUEL
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: TRAFFIC
160.74
DIV
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: TCSD
229.97
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: STREET MAI
574.84
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: PW CIP
148.65
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: BLDG INSPE
61.64
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: CODE ENFOI
27.25
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: LAND DEV
64.69
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: PARK MAINT
602.08
FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: FIRE DEPT
52.99
201463
5/14/2020
001056
EXCEL LANDSCAPE INC
IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VAR
888.53
PARKS/MEDIANS
201464
5/14/2020
017432
EYEMED VISION CARE
VISION PLAN PAYMENT
1,729.07
201465
5/14/2020
000165
FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
11/25/19 EXPRESS MAIL SVCS:
137.00
STREET PW
201466
5/14/2020
000165
FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
4/27 EXP MAIL SVCS: CIP
20.76
201467
5/14/2020
001511
FIELDMAN ROLAPP AND
FINANCIAL ADVISORY SVCS: FINANCE
1,189.78
ASSOCIATES
201468
5/14/2020
021708
FORMENTERA, ANDREW
REIMB: CPRS CONF: 3/10-3/13
1,198.23
201469
5/14/2020
002982
FRANCHISE TAX BOARD
KRACH, BREE - CASE# 603016103
168.02
201470
5/14/2020
016184
FUN EXPRESS LLC,
SUMMER DAY CAMP SUPPLIES: CRC
595.58
SUBSIDIARY OF ORIENTALTR
201471
5/14/2020
012066
GEOCON WEST INC
MAR GEOTECH
2,055.00
SVCS: PECH. PKWY, PW 15-14
201472
5/14/2020
021308
GILLIS + PANICHAPAN
ARCHITECTURAL SVCS: FIRE STA 84
1,515.00
ARCHITECTS, INC
PW19-14
201473
5/14/2020
000177
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
MISC OFC SUPPLIES:STA 92 FIRE
164.87
INC
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE
33.44
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: COVID19
228.27
201474
5/14/2020
014173
GOLDSTAR ASPHALT
PAINT & SUPPLIES: CRC
870.00
PRODUCTS, DBA NPG
CORPORATION
201475
5/14/2020
003792
GRAINGER
UNIFORM SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW
677.25
UNIFORM SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW
345.89
1,922.85
888.53
1,729.07
137.00
20.76
1,189.78
1,198.23
168.02
595.58
2,055.00
1,515.00
426.58
870.00
1,023.14
Page:8
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201476
5/14/2020
021821
GUERRA, ELISEO
REFUND: WONDER OF ELVIS 5.1.20
CANCELLED
201477
5/14/2020
012748
HARDY AND HARPER INC
ROAD REPAIR: WINCH ESTER/NICOLAS
RD
SLURRY & STRIPING: WOLF CREEK
201478
5/14/2020
013749
HELIXSTORM INC
VEEAM BACKUP OF OFFICE 365
201479
5/14/2020
010210
HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC
MISC SUPPLIES: CRC
201480
5/14/2020
012883
JACOB'S HOUSE INC
EMPLOYEE CHARITY DONATIONS
PAYMENT
201481
5/14/2020
012285
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY
MISC SUPPLIES: THEATER
201482
5/14/2020
019293
KITTRICH CORPORATION
K9 FOOD: TEMECULA POLICE
201483
5/14/2020
001282
KNORR SYSTEMS INC
POOL SUPPLIES: VARIOUS FACILITIES
PW
201484
5/14/2020
017118
KRACH BREE B, DBA
YOUTH COURTAWARDS: TEMECULA
TEMECULA TROPHY& DES
PD
CREDIT -.TAX WITHHOLDING CASE 60301,
201485
5/14/2020
021581
MARINA LANDSCAPE INC
RECYCLED WTR CONVERSION PROJ:
PW17-29
201486
5/14/2020
021434
MATRIX TELECOM LLC DBA
APR 800 SERVICES: CIVIC CENTER
LINGO
201488
5/14/2020
003076
MET LIFE INSURANCE
DENTAL PAYMENT
COMPANY
201489
5/14/2020
018314
MICHAEL BAKER
MAR DSGN SVC: PARK&RIDE, PW18-11
INTERNATIONAL
201490
5/14/2020
004043
MISSION ELECTRIC SUPPLY
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR
INC
MISC LED LAMPS: PARKS PW
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR
201491
5/14/2020
004040
MORAMARCO ANTHONY J,
ART WORKSHOPS: APR: VIETNAM
DBA BIGFOOT GRAPHICS
ART WORKSHOP: MAY: CUBA
201492
5/14/2020
004490
MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC
CONTROL LINK SVC FEE: PARKS
Amount Paid Check Total
76.00
76.00
19,855.00
40,250.00
60,105.00
6,075.00
6,075.00
95.67
95.67
40.00
40.00
320.54
320.54
90.70
90.70
396.57
396.57
672.08
-168.02
504.06
143, 022.50
143, 022.50
65.45
65.45
11,979.50
11,979.50
3,057.00
3,057.00
358.20
2,990.63
95.12
3,443.95
400.00
400.00
800.00
4,950.00
4,950.00
Page9
apChkLst
O5/14/2020
12:11:10PM
Final Check List
CITY OF TEMECULA
Page: 10
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
201493
5/14/2020
001323
NESTLE WATERS NORTH
4/11-5/10 WTR DLVRY SVC: FOC
123.15
123.15
AMERICA, DBA
READYREFRESH
201494
5/14/2020
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:POLICE
321.79
321.79
201495
5/14/2020
005820
PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES
PREPAID LEGAL SERVICES PAYMENT
217.25
217.25
INC, DBA LEGALSHIELD
201496
5/14/2020
014379
PROFESSIONAL IMAGE
BANNER PROGRAM: CHRIS FALLON
45.00
45.00
ADVERTISING, DBA EXTREME
SIGNSGRAPHICS
201497
5/14/2020
012366
PROJECT TOUCH
HOMELESS PREV PRGM: MORGAN
1,800.00
1,800.00
201498
5/14/2020
014494
R & R CONTROLS, INC
HVAC CTRL SYS UPGRADE: VAR
3,174.00
3,174.00
FACILITIES
201499
5/14/2020
000267
RIVERSIDE CO FIRE
FPARC-TM, 233602, JAN-MAR 19-20, Q3
1,900,641.44
1,900,641.44
DEPARTMENT
201500
5/14/2020
021822
SANTOS, JORGE AND RENEE
REIMB FENCING:BTRFLD STG, PHIII,
8,695.00
8,695.00
PW15-11
201501
5/14/2020
021620
SIEMENS MOBILITY INC
MAR PRGS PMT:STREET LIGHT MAINT
7,094.94
MAR PRGS PMT:STREET LIGHT LED REl
12,060.00
19,154.94
201502
5/14/2020
012652
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA,
MAY GEN USAGE: 0141,0839,2593,9306
604.89
604.89
TELEPHONE COMPANY
201505
5/14/2020
007762
STANDARD INSURANCE
BASIC LIFE INSURANCE PAYMENT
8,956.42
8,956.42
COMPANY
201506
5/14/2020
012723
STANDARD INSURANCE
VOLUNTARY SUPP LIFE INSURANCE
1,433.77
1,433.77
COMPANY
PAYMENT
201507
5/14/2020
017814
STC TRAFFIC INC
MAR TRAF SGNL SYS UPGRADE:HSIP,
11,013.75
11,013.75
PW19-09
201508
5/14/2020
006145
STENO SOLUTIONS
APR TRANSCRIPTION SRVCS: TEM
33.03
33.03
TRANSCRIPTION, SRVCS INC
SHERIFF
201509
5/14/2020
021820
TAMS, MARY
REFUND: TEMEKU HILLS PICNIC
96.00
96.00
RENTAL
201510
5/14/2020
001547
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
UNION MEMBERSHIP DUES PAYMENT
5,103.22
5,103.22
Page:10
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11
05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201511
5/14/2020
019547
TEMECULA HOTEL PARTNERS,
REFUND ENG DEPOSIT LD17-3148
OLD TOWN LLC
201512
5/14/2020
020911
T-MOBILE USA, INC.
2707185 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20
2707196 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20
2707202 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20
2707237 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20
201513
5/14/2020
021739
TRIPLE R SPORTS GROUP
REFUND: SOCCER FIELD RENTAL
201514
5/14/2020
021019
US NATIONAL CORP
PAINTING SRVCS:THE MERC
PAINTING SRVCS:6TH STREET RESTRO,
PAINTING SRVCS:CHILDREN'S MUSEUM
201515
5/14/2020
021148
WEX BANK
4/7-5/6 FUEL USE: TEM PD
201516
5/14/2020
021024
YANES BLANCAA, DBA DE
FEB LDSCP PLAN CK & INSPECT
GANGE CONSULTING
SRVCS:PLNG
Amount Paid Check Total
22,000.00
22,000.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
200.00
1,543.00
1,543.00
11,341.00
3,956.10
37,567.31
52,864.41
1,178.95
1,178.95
4,512.50
4,512.50
Grand total for UNION BANK: 3,052,261.79
Page:11
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 12
O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA
132 checks in this report.
Grand Total All Checks: 3,052,261.79
Page:12
apChkLst
05/21/2020
12:06:34PM
Final Check List
CITY OF TEMECULA
Page: 1
Bank:
union UNION BANK
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
8790
5/8/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
APR INTERNET SVCS- 41973 6TH ST
685.54
685.54
8796
5/15/2020
000262
RANCHO CALIF WATER
VARIOUS APR WATER 3004755 41000
21,714.60
21,714.60
DISTRICT
MAIN ST
8797
5/11/2020
018858
FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC
MAY INTERNET SVCS- THEATRE
150.98
150.98
8798
5/11/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-31-936-3511 46488 PECHANGA
23.06
23.06
PKWY
8799
5/11/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-29-657-2563 42902
91.75
91.75
BUTTERFIELD STG
8800
5/11/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-27-560-0625 32380
552.41
552.41
DEERHOLLOW WAY
8801
5/11/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-40-380-2424 40750
82.14
82.14
BUTTERFIELD STG
8802
5/12/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-10-331-2153 28816 PUJOL ST
510.85
510.85
8803
5/12/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-29-458-7548 32000 RANCHO CAL
167.38
167.38
RD
8804
5/12/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-27-805-3194 42051 MAIN ST
1,700.42
1,700.42
8805
5/12/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-36-531-7916 44205 MAIN ST
70.39
70.39
8806
5/12/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-20-798-3248 42081 MAIN ST
708.72
708.72
8807
5/11/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
APR 098-255-9828-8 29119 MARGARITA
58.18
58.18
RD
8808
5/11/2020
001212
SO CALIF GAS COMPANY
APR 117-188-6393-6 32131 S LOOP RD
153.45
153.45
8809
5/15/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-25-350-5119 45602 REDHAWK
15.77
15.77
PKWY
8810
5/15/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-29-479-2981 31454 TEM PKWY
111.85
111.85
8811
5/15/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-31-031-2590 28301 RANCHO CAL
14.07
14.07
Page:1
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2
05/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
8812
5/15/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-36-122-7820 31777 DE PORTOLA
RD
8813
5/15/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-41-394-3267 46899 REDHAWK
PKWY
8814
5/15/2020
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
APR 2-28-629-0507 30600 PAUBA RD
8815
5/15/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
MAY INTERNET SVCS- 40820
WINCHESTER RD
8816
5/18/2020
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
MAY INTERNET SVCS- 41000 MAIN ST
8817
5/15/2020
018858
FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC
MAY INTERNET SVCS- EOC
201517
5/21/2020
001517
AETNA BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
JUN EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PRGM:
LLC, DBAAETNA RESOURCES
HR
201518
5/21/2020
003552
AFLAC PREMIUM HOLDING,
AFLAC ACCIDENT INDEMNITY
C/O BNB BANK LOCKBOX
PAYMENT
201519
5/21/2020
016450
AIR EXCHANGE INC
PLYMOVENT MAIN - STA 73
201520
5/21/2020
021710
ALIVE SOLUTIONS INC
STAFF TRAINING: IN-SERVICE
LEADER: ONLIN
201521
5/21/2020
003951
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET
201522
5/21/2020
007282
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: FIRE: BC
INC
201523
5/21/2020
004240
AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES
JUN STAND BY FEE: POLICE
AFN
201524
5/21/2020
021670
ANLIND OF TEMECULA INC,
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM
TEMECULA HARLEY-DAVIDSON
SHERIFF
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SF
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SF
MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SF
Amount Paid Check Total
12.42
12.42
101.18
101.18
3,429.00
3,429.00
5.30
5.30
1,138.86
1,138.86
148.35
148.35
822.80
822.80
4,009.72
4,009.72
323.46
323.46
300.00
300.00
767.88
767.88
30.79
30.79
1,300.00
1,300.00
852.58
144.90
960.06
569.76
2,527.30
Paget
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3
O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank: union UNION BANK
Check # Date Vendor
201525 5/21/2020 013950 AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO
201526
5/21/2020
004623
AQUASOURCE INC
201527
5/21/2020
018101
BARN STAGE COMPANY INC
(Continued)
Description
MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: OTSF
& MALL
MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: JRC
MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: MPSC
MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: INFO TI
MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: PW
MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: CIVIC C
POOL SUPPLIES: VARIOUS FACILITIES
REFUND:19/20 SEC DEP CABARET @
THE MERC
201528 5/21/2020
014284 BLAKELYS TRUCK SERVICE,
VEHICLE/EQUIP REPAIRS:PW STREET
AKA DONALD W BLAKELY
MAINT
VEHICLE/EQUIP REPAIRS:PW STREET IV
201529 5/21/2020
015834 BOYER WAYNE E, DBA
UNIFORMS: MOTORS: POLICE
MOTOPORT USA
201530 5/21/2020
000647 CALIF DEPT OF CONSUMER
LICENSE RENEWAL: ABAD, NINO
AFFAIRS
201531 5/21/2020
004248 CALIF DEPT OF
APR FINGERPRINTING SRVCS: TEM
JUSTICE-ACCTING
SHERIFF
201532 5/21/2020
004462 CDW LLC, DBA CDW
RACK ENCLOSURE:CRC PD
GOVERNMENT LLC
SUBSTATION
201533 5/21/2020
016446 CHRISTIAN STITCHERY INC,
STAFF SHIRTS:SUMMER DAY CAMP
DBA SO CAL IMPRESSIONS
STAFF UNIFORMS: AQUATICS
201534 5/21/2020
017429 COBRAADVANTAGE INC, DBA
APR FSA& COBRAADMIN: HR
THE ADVANTAGE GROUP
APR FSA & COBRAADMIN: HR
201535 5/21/2020
021230 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR
DISTR, DBA CALIF ELECTRIC
SUPPLY
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR
201536 5/21/2020
004329 COSTCO TEMECULA491
MISC SUPPLIES: HIGH HOPES PRGM
MISC SUPPLIES:HUMAN SRVCS PRGM
MISC SUPPLIES:HUMAN SRVCS PRGM
201537 5/21/2020
010650 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING &
VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS: JRC
HVAC INC
POLE REPLACEMENT: PBSP
201538 5/21/2020
001233 DANS FEED AND SEED INC
MISC SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT
Amount Paid Check Total
56.57
28.28
34.75
28.28
28.28
183.71
1,688.89
500.00
919.03
1,457.94
694.91
115.00
595.00
927.47
117.12
3,585.71
823.00
-240.80
249.96
171.28
286.23
982.21
1,817.53
10.14
13,170.00
2,900.00
13.08
359.87
1,688.89
500.00
2,376.97
694.91
115.00
595.00
927.47
3,702.83
582.20
707.47
2,809.88
16,070.00
13.08
Page:3
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4
05/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201539
5/21/2020
012600
DAVID EVANS AND
APR DSGN SVCS: PW17-29 WTR
ASSOCIATES INC
CONVERSION
FEB ENG SVCS-SANTA GERTRUDIS CRk
201540
5/21/2020
002990
DAVID TURCH AND
MAY FEDERAL LOBBYING SVCS: CITY
ASSOCIATES
MGR
201541
5/21/2020
003945
DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL
PORTABLE RESTROOM & SINK
SRVCS
RENTAL:PD
201542
5/21/2020
018098
ELITE CLAIMS MANAGEMENT
JUN '20 3RD PARTY CLAIM
INC
ADMIN:WRKRS COM
201543
5/21/2020
011292
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
APR PREP OF SEIR HARVESTON GPA
ASSOC
& SPA
201544
5/21/2020
019016
FLEETCREW INC, DBA
DIESEL ENGINE FILTER CLEANING:
FLEETCREW
PW STREET
DIESEL ENGINE FILTER CLEANING: PW
201545
5/21/2020
002982
FRANCHISE TAX BOARD
KRACH, BREE - CASE# 603016103
201546
5/21/2020
021365
GEORGE HILLS COMPANY INC
APR CLAIM ADJUSTER SVCS: HR
201547
5/21/2020
021308
GILLIS + PANICHAPAN
ARCHITECTURAL SVCS: CRC PW19-07
ARCHITECTS, INC
201548
5/21/2020
000177
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
OFFICE SUPPLIES: INFO TECH
INC
ANTI -BACTERIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES:(
COVID-19 SUPPLIES: PW
COVID-19 SUPPLIES: CITY MGR
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PW
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PW
MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PW
201549
5/21/2020
009608
GOLDEN VALLEY MUSIC
REFUND: 19/20 SEC DEP CLASSICS @
SOCIETY, DBA CA CHAMBER
THE
ORCHESTRA
201550
5/21/2020
021246
GREERS CONTRACTING AND,
BOARDWALK ENHANCEMENT:
CONCRETE INC
PW17-16
201551
5/21/2020
001013
HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS &
SALES TAX & RECOVERY SVCS: 2ND
ASSOC
OTR
201552
5/21/2020
010210
HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC
COVID-19 SUPPLIES: PW
MISC TOOLS: CIVIC CTR: PW
Amount Paid Check Total
567.37
971.08
1,538.45
5,500.00
5,500.00
109.95
109.95
1,250.00
1,250.00
5,676.00
5,676.00
459.95
459.95
919.90
10.60
10.60
3,908.00
3,908.00
3,900.00
3,900.00
59.76
59.76
59.76
59.76
114.17
36.33
59.76
449.30
500.00
500.00
56,249.79 56,249.79
14,535.89 14,535.89
324.08
646.80 970.88
Page:4
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5
05/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201553
5/21/2020
009135
IMPACT MARKETING & DESIGN
PROMO ITEMS:VOLUNTEER
INC
APPRECIATION
201554
5/21/2020
019903
IMS INFRASTRUCTURE MGMT,
SIDEWALK MGMNT SVCS:PUBLIC
SERVICES LLC
WORKS
201555
5/21/2020
006914
INNOVATIVE DOCUMENT
APR COPIER MAINT/USAGE/REPAIR:
SOLUTIONS
CITYWIDE
201556
5/21/2020
013286
INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY INC
MAY ENTERPRISE 911 SVC: IT
201557
5/21/2020
012285
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY
MISC SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR
201558
5/21/2020
015358
KELLY PAPER COMPANY INC
MISC PAPER SUPPLIES: CENTRAL
SVCS
MISC PAPER SUPPLIES: CENTRAL SVCS
MISC PAPER SUPPLIES: CENTRAL SVCS
201559
5/21/2020
017118
KRACH BREE B, DBA
CREDIT:TAX WITHHOLDING CASE
TEMECULA TROPHY & DES
603016103
NAMEPLATE - STA 95
201560
5/21/2020
014778
LENNAR HOMES
REFUND: LD1 5-4493 ARBOR VISTA
201561
5/21/2020
003726
LIFE ASSIST INC
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SUPPLIES:
MEDIC
INFRARED NON -CONTACT THERMOMET
201562
5/21/2020
021826
LOPEZ, MAXIMO
REIMB: DMV CLASS B PERMIT FEE
201563
5/21/2020
021370
MARK THOMAS AND COMPANY
DSGN & ENVIRO SVCS: CONG
INC
RELIEF,PW19-02
201564
5/21/2020
019489
MARTIN, CHRISTINA
REFUND: YOUTH MUSICAL THEATER
"LION
201565
5/21/2020
004043
MISSION ELECTRIC SUPPLY
MISC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: PW
INC
PARKS
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: PARKS PW
201566
5/21/2020
019019
MUSIC CONNECTION LLC
REFUND: 19/20 SEC DEP SPEAKEASY
@ THE
201567
5/21/2020
018966
MUSICOLOGY LLC
REFUND: MERC RENTAL SECURITY
DEPOSIT
201568
5/21/2020
001323
NESTLE WATERS NORTH
WTR DLVRY SVC: TVE2
AMERICA, DBA
READYREFRESH
Amount Paid Check Total
854.38
854.38
20,000.00
20,000.00
3,042.84
3,042.84
300.00
300.00
676.81
676.81
768.70
105.43
152.03
1,026.16
-10.60
42.41
31.81
50,000.00
50,000.00
840.59
2,701.35
3,541.94
82.00
82.00
90,886.31
90,886.31
160.00
160.00
768.21
200.04
968.25
500.00
500.00
250.00
250.00
435.22
435.22
Page:5
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6
O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201569
5/21/2020
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW CIP
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW STREET
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW STREET
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW CIP
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW CIP
201570
5/21/2020
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW PARKS
MAINT
201571
5/21/2020
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:BLDG &
SAFETY
201572
5/21/2020
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE
CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:FIRE PREV
201573
5/21/2020
010338
POOL & ELECTRICAL
VARIOUS SUPPLIES: AQUATIC
PRODUCTS INC
FACILITIES
201574
5/21/2020
020181
RANCHO COMMUNITY
FY19/20 COMMUNITY SERVICE
REFORM CHURCH
FUNDING
201575
5/21/2020
020429
REMOTE SATELLITE SYSTEMS
APR'20 SAT PH AIRTIME/JUN FEE:EOC
INT'L
201576
5/21/2020
003591
RENES COMMERCIAL
CLEAN-UP WEED ABATEMENT:CITY
MANAGEMENT
ROW
201577
5/21/2020
001365
RIVERSIDE, COUNTY OF,
RENEW PERMIT:TES POOL
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DEPT
201578
5/21/2020
017446
ROSE AGAIN FOUNDATION
FY19/20 COMMUNITY SERVICE
FUNDING
201579
5/21/2020
000277
SANDS WORLDWIDE INC
SUPPLIES:SKATE PARK
REC SUPPLIES:SUMMER DAY CAMP
201580
5/21/2020
004274
SAFE AND SECURE
LOCKSMITH SERVICES: SNACK BAR
LOCKSMITH SRVC
201581
5/21/2020
021824
SAFEGUARD BY FONTIS
TR-100 PROOF OF SERVICE
FORMS:POLICE
201582
5/21/2020
000278
SAN DIEGO UNION -TRIBUNE
APR PUBLIC NTCS:CITY
CLERK/PLNG/PW
201583
5/21/2020
009980
SANBORN GWYNETH A, CO
REFUND:19/20 SEC DEP COUNTRY
TEMECULA MUSIC ACADEMY
LIVE!
Amount Paid Check Total
998.80
238.62
138.46
119.31
39.16
1,534.35
159.95
159.95
42.69
42.69
39.16
39.16
555.10
555.10
4,784.00
4,784.00
280.00
280.00
1,774.00
1,774.00
406.00
406.00
1,500.00
1,500.00
192.79
1,279.72
1,472.51
38.06
38.06
261.00
261.00
1,415.59
1,415.59
500.00
500.00
Page6
apChkLst
05/21/2020
12:06:34PM
Final Check List
CITY OF TEMECULA
Page: 7
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
201584
5/21/2020
017699
SARNOWSKI SHAWNA M
BUDGET PHOTOS 2020:FINANCE
500.00
500.00
PRESTON
201585
5/21/2020
021825
SELF, BENJAMIN
REIMB:RCRD FEES/1ST TIME
75.00
75.00
HOMEBUYER PRGM
201586
5/21/2020
009213
SHERRY BERRY MUSIC
REFUND: 19/20 SEC DEP JAZZ @ THE
500.00
500.00
MERC
201587
5/21/2020
013695
SHRED -IT US JV LLC, DBA:
APR DOC COLLECTION/SHRED
126.81
126.81
SHRED -IT USA LLC
SRVCS:CITY FACS
201588
5/21/2020
009746
SIGNS BY TOMORROW
SIGN PSTNG:PARK & RIDE ACCESS,
427.50
PW18-11
SIGN POSTING SRVCS PA19-1524:PLNG
427.50
SIGN POSTING SRVCS 1281/0449:PLNG
314.89
SIGN POSTING SRVCS LR20-0209:PLNG
742.39
1,912.28
201589
5/21/2020
013482
SILVERMAN ENTERPRISES
DEPOSIT/SEC SRVCS:RRSP 4TH OF
5,839.00
INC, DBA BAS SECURITY
JULY'20
4/27-5/17 SECURITY SRVCS:PUMP TRAC
3,129.00
8,968.00
201590
5/21/2020
000645
SMART AND FINAL INC
MISC SUPPLIES:HUMAN SERVICES
716.37
716.37
PRGM
201591
5/21/2020
020545
SOCIAL WORK ACTION GROUP
APR HOMELESS OUTREACH
11,332.60
11,332.60
SERVICES
201592
5/21/2020
002503
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY,
FY19/20 AQMD FEE:TVE2
137.63
137.63
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
201593
5/21/2020
000519
SOUTH COUNTY PEST
PEST CONTROL SRVCS:CROWN HILL
94.00
CONTROL INC
PARK
APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:PBSP
70.00
MAY PEST CONTROL SRVCS:FIRE STN £
80.00
APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:CITY FACS
1,019.00
APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:DUCK PON
49.00
APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:SPLASH PA
49.00
MAY PEST CONTROL SRVCS:FIRE STN E
80.00
PEST CONTROL SRVCS:TEM PARK & RI[
94.00
PEST CONTROL SRVCS:SAINT CROIX
94.00
1,629.00
201594
5/21/2020
002015
STAR WAY SYSTEMS
4/20-27 SOUND SYS REPAIR:OLD
4,415.50
4,415.50
CORPORATION, DBA SO CALIF
TOWN
SOUND
201595
5/21/2020
002366
STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET
CARPET CLEANING: CIVIC CENTER
250.00
CLEANING
CARPET CLEANING: TCC
125.00
CARPET CLEANING: LIBRARY
500.00
875.00
Page:7
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8
O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201596
5/21/2020
003840
STRONGS PAINTING
SAND & REFINISH BENCHES:
THEATER
201597
5/21/2020
019714
TAYLOR'S APPLIANCE
KITCHEN EQUIPMENT - STA 73
201598
5/21/2020
020985
TEAMWORK PROMOTIONAL,
CRIME PREV PROMO SUPPLIES:TEM
ADVERTISING INC
SHERIFF
201599
5/21/2020
005970
TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYERS
REFUND: 19/20 SEASON SEC DEPOSIT
201600
5/21/2020
021418
TEMECULA VALLEY, DANCE
REFUND: REHEARSAL ROOM RENTAL
CONNECTION
SEC
201601
5/21/2020
003941
TEMECULA WINNELSON
PLUMBING SUPPLIES: VARIOUS
COMPANY
PARKS
201602
5/21/2020
016311
TIERCE, NICHOLAS
GRAPHIC DESIGN SRVCS: THEATER
201603
5/21/2020
021580
TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
MAY STATE LEGIS. CONSULT/GRANT
INC
WRITING
201604
5/21/2020
010046
TV CONVENTION &VISITORS
MAR'20 BUS. IMPRV DISTRICT
BUREAU, DBA VISIT TEMECULA
ASMNTS
VALLEY
201605
5/21/2020
012549
UPODIUM, AKA JOHN
VEHICLE MAINT SUPPLIES: STA 73
FONTEYN
VEHICLE MAINT SUPPLIES: STA 73
201606
5/21/2020
020963
UPTOWN TEMECULAAUTO
FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:PW
SPA LLC
PARKS
FEB VEHICLE DETAILING SRVCS:BLDG F
FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:PW Cl
FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:PW Sl
FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:TCSD
201607
5/21/2020
014848
VALUTEC CARD SOLUTIONS
APR TICKETING SRVCS: THEATER
LLC
201608
5/21/2020
001881
WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS
SUPPLIES: AQUATICS PRGM
INC
201609
5/21/2020
001342
WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC
SURGICAL MASKS: EOC
201610
5/21/2020
020670
WEBB MUNICIPAL FINANCE
ANN'L LEVY ASSESSMENT
LLC
ANALYSIS:PROP 218
ANN'L LEVY ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS:PR
Amount Paid Check Total
750.00
750.00
12,722.66
12,722.66
1,878.03
1,878.03
500.00
500.00
500.00
500.00
15.91
15.91
3,720.00
3,720.00
6,000.00
6,000.00
52,934.64
52,934.64
157.39
75.07 232.46
16.00
16.00
4.00
4.00
4.00 44.00
111.91 111.91
553.68 553.68
489.38 489.38
2,500.00
2,000.00 4,500.00
Page:8
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9
O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
201611
5/21/2020
008668
WES FLOWERS
SUNSHINE FUND
SUNSHINE FUND
201612
5/21/2020
003730
WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC
4/1-15 TREE MAINT:VAR. SLOPES
2/28 TREE MAINT:OLD TOWN FRONT STf
201613
5/21/2020
000339
WEST PUBLISHING
APR CLEAR SUBSCRIPTION: TEM
CORPORATION,
SHERIFF
DBA:THOMSON REUTERS
Amount Paid Check Total
61.43
73.40
1,302.00
509.20
893.00
201614 5/21/2020 000341 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES INC APR TRAF ENG SRVC:RDHWK 4,843.50
PKWY/V. RANCH
Grand total for UNION BANK:
134.83
1,811.20
893.00
4,843.50
479,732.47
Page9
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10
O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA
121 checks in this report.
Grand Total All Checks: 479,732.47
Page:10
Item No. 4
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance 2020-06 Amending Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay
Zone of the Temecula Municipal Code (Long Range Project No. LR20-0279)
(Second Reading)
PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21
REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY
ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE
ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTION 15061(B)(3)
BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula is a general law city formed under the laws of
the State of California. With respect to adoption of ordinances and resolutions, the City adheres to
the requirements set forth in the Government Code. With the exception of urgency ordinances,
Government Code Section 36934 requires two readings of standard ordinances more than five days
apart. Ordinances must be read in full at the time of introduction or passage unless a motion
waiving the reading is adopted by a majority of the City Council present.
Ordinance No. 2020-06 was first introduced at the regularly scheduled meeting of May 26, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER
17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION
THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM
FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby
find, determine, and declare that:
A. The Planning Commission considered this Ordinance, including the environmental
analysis, on April 22, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, as prescribed by law, at which time
the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support of or
opposition to this matter.
B. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration
of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2020-09, recommending
approval of the Ordinance by the City Council.
C. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the Ordinance, including the
environmental analysis, on May 26, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, as prescribed by law,
at which time the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in
support or opposition to this matter.
D. Following the public hearing, the City Council considered the entire record of
information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula in
approving the proposed Municipal Code amendment in Long Range Planning Project Number
LR20-0279 hereby makes the following findings:
A. The State Legislature has declared that the lack of housing, including providing for
a variety of housing types for all income levels and special needs groups, is a critical problem that
threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California.
B. Government Code Section 65583 requires that the City's Housing Element address
governmental constraints to the development of housing, including providing for a variety of
housing types for all income levels. The City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the City's
2014-2021 Housing Element on January 28, 2014. The City's Housing Element identified the
need to amend the City's Municipal Code to establish an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone to
encourage the development of affordable housing in the City. On September 25, 2018, the City
Council adopted an ordinance establishing the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone.
C. Staff has now determined that the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance
should be amended to clarify (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the
Pechanga tribe before the Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit,
and (2) that affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units,
and must be dispersed throughout the development project. These revisions are necessary to not
only protect the cultural resources in the area, but also to ensure that affordable housing is actually
constructed by project proponents that seek to develop projects using the overlay zone.
D. The proposed amendments to the affordable housing overlay zone ordinance are in
conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of elements of the General Plan.
The Ordinance implements the following policies contained in the City's Housing Element:
Policy 1. 1: Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient
to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City;
2. Policy 1.2 Encourage residential development that provides a range of
housing types in terms of cost, density, and type, and presents the
opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by
balancing jobs and housing types;
3. Policy 2.1 Promote a variety of housing opportunities that
accommodate the needs of all income levels of the population, and provide
opportunities to meet Temecula's fair share of extremely low-, very low-,
low-, and moderate -income housing;
4. Policy 2.2 Support innovative public, private, and nonprofit efforts in
the development of affordable housing, particularly for special needs
groups;
5. Policy 3.1 Expedite processing procedures and fees for new
construction or rehabilitation of housing; and
6. Policy 5.2: Support efforts to ensure that all income segments of the
community have unrestricted access to appropriate housing.
Furthermore, the Ordinance implements the following goals and policies contained in the City's
General Plan Land Use Element:
7. Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial,
recreational, public and open space land uses.
8. Policy 1.6: Encourage flexible zoning techniques in appropriate locations
to encourage mixed use development, preserve natural features, achieve
innovative site design, achieve a range of transition of densities, provide
open space and recreation facilities, and/or provide necessary amenities and
facilities.
E. The proposed amendments to the Municipal Code are consistent with the General
Plan and all applicable provisions contained therein. Residential development approved pursuant
to Chapter 17.21 complies with the requirements included in the City's General Plan Housing
Element.
Section 3. Environmental Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby
makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval
of the proposed Ordinance:
A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
Sections 21000, et seq. ("CEQA")), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), the proposed Ordinance falls within the scope of
the environmental analysis conducted for the City's 2014 — 2021 Housing Element and the Uptown
Temecula Specific Plan.
B. On January 28, 2014, a Negative Declaration was adopted for the approval of the
2014 — 2021 Housing Element, which analyzed the potential impacts and determined that less than
significant impacts would result from the adoption of the 2014 — 2021 Housing Element. In 2019,
the City adopted the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone which was described in the City's Housing
Element. On November 17, 2015, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2013061012)
was certified in connection with the approval of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. The
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance applied the affordable housing overlay zone to
certain parcels located in the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area.
C. The proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance do
not increase the number of properties that are located within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone,
or change the zoning designation of any of the properties within this overlay zone. Instead, the
ordinance merely clarifies that (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the
Pechanga tribe before the Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit,
(2) that affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units, and
(3) that the affordable units must be dispersed throughout the development project. As such, the
environmental impacts for the Project have been evaluated by the previously adopted Negative
Declaration for the Housing Element, and the EIR for the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan, and no
further environmental review is necessary. None of the circumstances in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162 exist to require any additional environmental review and no further documentation
is necessary.
D. In addition, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a significant effect on
the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15061(b)(3). Staff is hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption.
Section 4. Subsection A of Section 17.21.040 (Compliance with Laws) of Chapter
17.21 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all other provisions of Section
17.21.040 remaining unchanged:
3
"A. The applicant shall enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the
Pechanga Tribe, and provide a copy of this agreement to the City before the Director
approves the Administrative Review Application. This Agreement shall address the
following:
Treatment and disposition of cultural resources;
2. The designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional
Pechanga Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing
activities;
3. Project grading and development scheduling;
4. Terms of compensation for the Pechange Tribal monitors;
5. Treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and
human remains discovered onsite;
6. Pechanga Tribal monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading in order to
evaluate the significance of any potential resources discovered on the
property, and to make recommendations as to treatment;
7. The applicant's agreement to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources,
including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to
the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition; and
8. The applicant's agreement that all Pechanga Tribal sacred sites are to be
avoided and preserved."
Section 5. Subsection D of Section 17.21.060 (Regulations and Development
Standards.) of Chapter 17.21 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District) of Title 17 (Zoning)
of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all other provisions
of Section 17.21.060 remaining unchanged:
"D. At least 20 percent of the residential units of each building developed pursuant to
this Chapter 17.21 shall be reserved for households earning no greater than 80 percent of
area median income adjusted for family size appropriate to the unit. The units shall be sold
or rented at an affordable housing cost or affordable rent, as those terms are defined in
Sections 50052.5 and 50053 of the California Health and Safety Code. If the units are
rental units, the affordable units shall be deed -restricted for a period of not less than fifty-
five (55) years. If the units are for -sale units, the units shall be sold in accordance with
California Government Code Section 65915.
For any project that is developed pursuant to this Chapter 17.21, the affordable units must
be constructed concurrently with or prior to the construction of any market rate units. In
addition, the affordable units must be integrated with the market rate units so that there is
a mix of affordable and market rate units, if any, in each building of the development
project."
Section 6. Sections 4 and 5 of this Ordinance shall not apply to any project that has
submitted an application that has been deemed complete by the City prior to April 22, 2020.
Section 7. If any section or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, or contravened by reason of any
preemptive legislation, the remaining sections and/or provisions of this Ordinance shall remain
valid. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each
section or provision thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more section(s) or provision(s)
may be declared invalid or unconstitutional or contravened via legislation.
Section 8. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and
posted in the manner required by law.
Section 9. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. 2020-06 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the
City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of May, 2020, and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held
on the 9th day of June, 2020, the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
Item No. 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Reaffirming and Proclaiming the Existence of a Local
Emergency Related to the COVID-19 Virus Pandemic
PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REAFFIRMING AND PROCLAIMING THE
EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO THE
COVID-19 VIRUS PANDEMIC AND ISSUING CERTAIN
ORDERS FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY AFFAIRS DURING
THE LOCAL EMERGENCY
BACKGROUND: In December 2019, an outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel
coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan City, Hubei
Province, China, and has spread outside of China, impacting more than 75 countries, including the
United States. Since the Center for Disease Control and Prevention first confirmed the existence
and potential spread of COVID-19, there has been significant escalation. On March 4, 2020, the
Governor of the State of California proclaimed a state of emergency due to the spread of COVID-
19. On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak to be a
pandemic. On March 13, 2020, the President of the United States made an emergency
determination under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act in
response to COVID-19. On March 16, 2020, the Riverside County Public Health Officer issued an
order cancelling and prohibiting all gatherings in which ten or more people are expected to be
present, subject to certain limited exceptions. On March 17, 2020, the City Manager of the City of
Temecula issued a Declaration of Local Emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic pursuant
to Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.56.050. On March 24, 2020 and April 28, 2020, the City
Council proclaimed the existence of a local emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Government Code § 8630 and Temecula Municipal Code Chapter 2.56 provide that the City
Council of the City of Temecula may proclaim the existence of a local emergency as defined by
Government Code § 8558, subdivision (c). COVID-19 has created conditions that are or likely to
be beyond the control of local resources and require the combined forces of other political
subdivisions to combat. The mobilization of local resources, ability to coordinate interagency
response, accelerate procurement of vital supplies, use mutual aid, and allow for future
reimbursement by the state and federal governments will be critical to successfully responding to
COVID-19.
The conditions under which the City Council declared its March 24, 2020 and April 28, 2020 local
emergency continue to exist. It is therefore recommended that the City Council adopt the attached
resolution reaffirming and proclaiming the existence of a local emergency due to the COVID-19
pandemic. The City Council will continue to review this local emergency proclamation every sixty
(60) days pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c), and/or sooner as the Council determines
(i.e., 30 days, etc.), and will terminate the emergency proclamation when the conditions warrant.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REAFFIRMING AND PROCLAIMING
THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING
TO THE COVID-19 VIRUS PANDEMIC AND ISSUING
CERTAIN ORDERS FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY
AFFAIRS DURING THE LOCAL EMERGENCY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council Finds, determines and declares that:
(a) Government Code § 8630 and Temecula Municipal Code Chapter 2.56
provide that the City Council of the City of Temecula may proclaim the existence of a local
emergency as defined by Government Code § 8558, subdivision (c).
(b) In December 2019, an outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel
coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan City, Hubei
Province, China, and has spread outside of China, impacting countries throughout the world,
including the United States.
(c) Since the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC")
confirmed the first possible case of community spread of COVID-19 in the United States on
February 26, 2020, there has been a significant and continued escalation of United States domestic
cases and deaths from COVID-19.
(d) On March 4, 2020, Gavin Newsom, Governor of the State of California,
proclaimed a state of emergency to exist in California due to the spread of COVID-19.
(e) On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization declared the COVID-
19 outbreak to be a pandemic.
(f) On March 13, 2020, President Trump determined that the ongoing
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant an emergency determination under section 501(b) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207.
(g) Governor Newsom has issued several Executive Orders making certain
findings and issuing emergency orders to deal with COVID-19 pandemic. These Executive Orders
are listed and updated continuously at https://www. og v.ca.gov/category/executive-orders/. More
Executive Orders are expected.
(h) The California Department of Public Health reports a significant number of
COVID-19 cases and deaths in the state. The number of cases and deaths are reported and updated
at hgps://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/cid/dcdc/pages/immunization/ncov20l9.aspx.
(i) The Riverside County Public Health Officer has issued numerous Health
Orders making certain findings and issuing emergency orders to deal with COVID-19 pandemic,
including cancelling and prohibiting all gatherings and requiring all person to wear mask when
outside of their homes. The Riverside County Health Officer's Orders are listed and updated
continuously at https://www.riveoph.ora/coronavirus. More Health Orders are expected.
0) The Governor's Executive Orders and Riverside County Health Officer's
Health Orders to close non -essential businesses and prohibit gatherings has created economic
hardship and dislocation for persons and businesses and will reduce tax revenues to the City
necessary for providing essential City services.
(k) On March 17, 2020, the City Manager of the City of Temecula issued a
Declaration of Local Emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic pursuant to Temecula
Municipal Code Section 2.56.050.
(1) On March 24, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-17
entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Proclaiming the Existence of
a Local Emergency Relating to the Covid-19 Virus Pandemic and Confirming the City Manager's
Declaration of Local Emergency on March 17, 2020." On April 28, 2020, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2020-20 entitled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula
Reaffirming and Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency Relating to the Covid-19 Virus
Pandemic and Issuing Certain Orders for the Conduct of City Affairs During the Local
Emergency."
(m) Due to the expanding list of countries with widespread transmission of
COVID-19, increasing travel alerts and warnings for countries experiencing sustained or
uncontrolled community transmission issued by the CDC, the escalation of United States domestic
cases of and deaths from COVID-19, the identification of COVID-19 cases in California and
Riverside County, COVID-19, and the severity and magnitude of the COVID-19 pandemic, has
created conditions that are or likely to be beyond the control of local resources and require the
combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat.
(n) The mobilization of local resources, ability to coordinate interagency
response, accelerate procurement of vital supplies, use mutual aid, and allow for future
reimbursement by the state and federal governments will be critical to successfully responding to
COVID-19.
(o) The City Council finds that these conditions warrant and necessitate that the
City reaffirm and proclaim the existence of a local emergency.
Section 2. Proclamation of Local Emergency. Based on the findings set forth above,
the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby reaffirms the findings set forth in Resolution Nos.
2020-17 and 2020-20 and further proclaims that a local emergency now exists throughout the City
of Temecula. During the existence of said local emergency the following shall be in effect:
(a) The local emergency powers, functions, and duties of the City Manager and
the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by state law, by ordinances, and
resolutions of this City, and by the approved emergency plans of the City of Temecula.
N
(b) The local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist until its
termination is proclaimed by the City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California.
(c) The City Council shall review this local emergency proclamation at least
every sixty (60) days pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c) and shall terminate the
emergency proclamation at the earliest possible date the conditions warrant.
(d) The City Manager is authorize to transfer funds from the Unreserved Fund
Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts when necessary under this
declaration of an emergency.
(e) Pursuant to the provisions of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.56.050
the City Manager is authorized to enter into agreements on behalf of the City necessary under
this declaration of an emergency.
(f) The City Council determines that for the reasons described in this
Resolution, compliance with the bidding requirements of Chapters 3.28 and 3.30 of Temecula
Municipal Code is not in the best interest of the City and all such bidding requirements are hereby
waived.
(g) The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds without regard to
the amounts thereof, so long as there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account
against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged.
(h) The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into all agreements on
behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency without regard to the amounts thereof, so long as there exists
an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the agreement is to
be charged, including without limitation, consultant agreements, agreements for the purchase of
goods and services, real property leases and license agreements, public works construction and
maintenance agreements, grant agreements, and amendments to real property purchase agreements
and exclusive negotiating agreements.
(i) The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve documents
implementing the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) other than
Environmental Impact Reports.
0) The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve notices of completion,
accept surety bonds, and release surety bonds, in connection with public works projects.
(k) The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, is hereby
authorized to settle personal injury and property damage lawsuits and enter into settlement
agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor
Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency without regard to the amounts thereof, so long
as there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the
agreement is to be charged.
3
(1) The City Manager is authorized to negotiate and implement labor related
policies and staffing changes deemed necessary in order to respond to the Local Emergency.
(m) The City Manager is authorized to sign checks on behalf of the City,
including without limitation, payroll hand checks, and may delegate this authority to the Director
of Finance.
(n) City Manager is authorized to modify on -street and off-street parking
requirements for businesses, including without limitation modifications for food service or other
businesses to accommodate pick-up or delivery services.
Section 3. Ratification of City Manager's Actions. The City Council hereby ratifies
the actions of the City Manager taken pursuant to Resolution Nos. 2020-17 and 2020-20.
Section 4. Further Actions. The City Manager shall:
(a) Forward a copy of this Resolution to the Director of California Governor's
Office of Emergency Services;
(b) Reaffirm the City's request the Governor of California, pursuant to the
Emergency Services Act issue a proclamation declaring an emergency in Riverside County and
waive regulations that may hinder response and recovery efforts;
(c) Reaffirm the City's request that recovery assistance be made available
under the California Disaster Assistance Act; and
(d) Reaffirm the City's request that the State expedite access to State and
Federal resources and any other appropriate federal disaster relief programs.
Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9tn day of June, 2020.
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
James Stewart, Mayor
4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
Item No. 6
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolutions Regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election
PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the following resolutions regarding the
November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE
HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE
HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020, FOR THE
ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE
PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSOLIDATE A
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 WITH THE STATEWIDE
GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE
PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES
FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES
STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN
ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE CONDUCT OF A
SPECIAL RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES IN
THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE AT ANY MUNICIPAL
ELECTION
BACKGROUND: On January 27, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance
No. 04-01 establishing its general municipal election date as the first Tuesday after the first
Monday in even -numbered years allowing for consolidation of its elections with the County of
Riverside pursuant to Election Code Section 10400 et sue. As such, the City will hold its general
municipal election on November 3, 2020 for two officeholder seats, each for a term of four years.
The current terms for Council Members Naggar (District 2) and Stewart (District 4) are expiring.
Pursuant to Elections Code Section 10220, the nomination period for candidates will be July 13,
2020 through August 7, 2020. If an incumbent does not file for candidacy, the nomination period
will be extended by five days for the relevant district pursuant to Election Code Section 10225.
The consolidation process requires cities and counties to take certain procedural actions in
preparation for the conduct of the election. Generally, consolidated cities throughout the State
adopt four standardized resolutions that do the following: (1) call for and give notice of an election
being held in the city [Election Code Section 12001], (2) request the County to consolidate the
election and render related services [Election Code Section 10403], (3) adopt regulations for
candidate statements [Election Code Section 13307], and (4) provide for a runoff election in the
event of a tie vote [Election Code Section 15651].
Given the above, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolutions regarding the
November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election.
FISCAL IMPACT: The anticipated cost of the November 2020 General Municipal
Election for officeholders for Districts 2 and 4 is approximately $70,000 - $100,000 and is
budgeted in the 2020-21 fiscal year. This estimate is based on the cost of the previous district
election held two years ago. The County Registrar of Voters will provide a more accurate cost
estimate closer to the nomination period.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolutions (4)
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE
HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO
BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020, FOR THE
ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY
THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State
of California, a General Municipal Election shall be held on November 3, 2020, for the election of
municipal officers.
Section 2. Pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California relating
to general law cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Temecula, California, on
Tuesday, November 3, 2020, a General Municipal Election for the purpose of electing two (2)
Members of the City Council from Districts 2 and 4, respectively, for the full term of four years.
Section 3. The ballots to be used at the election shall be in the form and content
required by law.
Section 4. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to coordinate with the
County of Riverside Registrar of Voters to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, notices,
printed matter, and all supplies, equipment, and items that may be necessary in order to properly
and lawfully conduct the election.
Section 5. The polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. on the day of
the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of the same
day when the polls shall be closed, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10242, except as provided
in Section 14401 of the State of California Elections Code.
Section 6. In all particulars not recited in this resolution, the General Municipal
Election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding consolidated municipal
elections. The consolidated election shall be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in
Elections Code Section 10418.
Section 7. Notice of the time and place of holding the election is given, and the City
Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in
time, form, and manner as required by law.
Section 8. The City Council authorizes the City Clerk to administer said election and
all reasonable and actual election expenses shall be paid by the City upon presentation of a properly
submitted bill.
Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO
CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO
BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 WITH THE
STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE
DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE
ELECTIONS CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula, California, has called a General
Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the purpose of the election of
two (2) members of the City Council from Districts 2 and 4, respectively.
Section 2. It is desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the
Statewide General Election to be held on the same date and that within the City the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the election be held
in all respects as if there were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used for each
of the two (2) affected Council positions.
Section 3. Pursuant to Sections 10002 and 10403 of the Elections Code of the State of
California, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside is hereby requested to consent and
agree to the consolidation of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the
purpose of the election of two (2) members of the City Council of the City of Temecula currently
held by Council Members Mike Naggar (District 2) and James Stewart (District 4).
Section 4. Except for those services routinely conducted by the City Clerk
as the local elections official, delegation is hereby made to the Riverside County Registrar of
Voters to conduct said election in accordance with all applicable laws and procedures. The
Riverside County Registrar of Voters is hereby authorized, instructed, and directed to canvass the
returns of the General Municipal Election and give such further or additional notice of said
election, in time, form, and manner as required by law.
Section 5. That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the
Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside to take any and all steps necessary for the holding
of the consolidated election.
Section 6. In all particulars not recited in this resolution, the General Municipal
Election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding consolidated municipal
elections. The consolidated election shall be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in
Elections Code Section 10418.
Section 7. The City of Temecula recognizes that additional costs will be incurred by
the County, by reason of this consolidation, and agrees to reimburse the County for such additional
costs.
Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution
with the Board of Supervisors and Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside.
Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR
CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO
CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE
VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 3, 2020
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Pursuant to Section 13307 of the Elections
Code of the State of California, each candidate for City Council to be voted for at an Election to
be held in the City of Temecula on November 3, 2020, may prepare a candidate's statement on an
appropriate form provided by the City Clerk. The statement may include the name, age, and
occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more than 200 words of the candidate's
education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself. The statement shall not
include party affiliation of the candidate, nor membership or activity in partisan political
organizations. The statement shall be filed in typewritten form in the office of the City Clerk at the
time the candidate's nomination papers are filed. Except as provided in Elections Code
Section 13309, the statement may be withdrawn, but not changed, during the period for filing
nomination papers and until 5:00 p.m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination
period.
Section 2. FOREIGN LANGUAGE POLICY.
A. Pursuant to the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, candidate
statements will be translated into all languages required by the County of Riverside. The County
is required to translate candidate's statements into Spanish.
B. The County will print and mail sample ballots and candidate statements to all voters
in English and Spanish. The County will make sample ballots and candidates statements in the
required languages available at all polling places, on the County's website and in the election
official's office.
Section 3. PAYMENT.
A. Translations:
1. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of translating the candidates
statement into any required foreign language as specified in (a) and/or (b) of
Section 2 above pursuant to federal and/or state law.
2. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of translating the candidate's
statement into any foreign language that is not required as specified in (a) and/or
(b) of Section 2 above, pursuant to federal and/or state law, but is requested as
an option by the candidate.
B. Printing:
1. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's
statement in English in the main voter pamphlet.
2. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's
statement in a foreign language required in (A) of Section 2 above, in the main
voter pamphlet.
3. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's
statement in a foreign language requested by the candidate per (B) of Section 2
above, in the main voter pamphlet.
4. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's
statement in a foreign language required in (A) of Section 2 above, in the
facsimile voter pamphlet.
C. The City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling, translating, and
mailing the candidate's statements filed pursuant to this section, including costs incurred as a result
of complying with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended), and require each candidate filing
a statement to pay in advance to the local agency his or her estimated pro rata share as a condition
of having his or her statement included in the voters' pamphlet. In the event the estimated payment
is required, the estimate is just an approximation of the actual cost that varies from one election to
another election and may be significantly more or less than the estimate, depending on the actual
number of candidates filing statements. Accordingly, the City Clerk is not bound by the estimate
and may, on a pro rata basis, bill the candidate for additional actual expense or refund any excess
paid depending on the final actual cost. In the event of underpayment, the City Clerk may require
the candidate to pay the balance of the cost incurred. In the event of overpayment, the City Clerk
shall prorate the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess amount paid within
30 days of the election.
Section 4. MISCELLANEOUS. All translations shall be provided by professionally -
certified translators. Candidate statements shall be prepared and formatted in accordance with
Elections Code Section 13307(b) and bold type, underlining, capitalized words, italics, and bullets
shall be prohibited. Occupational designations shall be consistent with recommendations and
standards set forth by the California Secretary of State.
Section 5. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. No candidate will be permitted to include
additional materials in the sample ballot package.
Section 6. COPY OF RESOLUTION. The City Clerk shall provide each candidate
or the candidate's representative a copy of this resolution at the time nominating petitions are
issued.
Section 7. APPLICATION. This resolution shall apply only to the election to be held
on November 3, 2020, and shall then be repealed.
Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE CONDUCT OF A
SPECIAL RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES
IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE AT ANY MUNICIPAL
ELECTION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State
of California, a General Municipal Election shall be held on November 3, 2020, for the election of
municipal officers in the City.
Section 2. Pursuant to Section 15651(b) of the Elections Code of the State of
California, if any two or more persons receive an equal and the highest number of votes for an
office to be voted for within the City, there shall be held within the City a special runoff election
to resolve the tie vote. A special runoff election shall be called and held on a Tuesday not less than
40 nor more than 125 days after the administrative or judicial certification of the election which
resulted in a tie vote.
Section 3. This resolution shall apply only to the election to be held on November 3,
2020, and shall then be repealed.
Section 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
Item No. 7
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Receive and File the 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report
PREPARED BY: Brandon Rabidou, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the 2019 General Plan Annual
Progress Report (GPAPR)
BACKGROUND: State law (Government Code Section 65300) requires each local
jurisdiction to adopt a comprehensive general plan that guides the physical development of a
community. Government Code Section 65400 requires a General Plan Annual Progress Report
(GPAPR). The purpose of the GPAPR is to update the community, City Council, and the
Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) on General Plan implementation progress.
This report is also used as an aid to identify prospective changes, or updates that may be needed
for the General Plan.
The City's last comprehensive General Plan update was completed in 2005. In 2013, the City
updated the Housing Element of the General Plan in compliance with the Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (RHNA) 5th Cycle. Since 2005, the City has amended the General Plan on several
occasions to implement required Housing Element programs, and update the General Plan land
use plan with updated policies (i.e. changing commercial zoning to residential, increasing
residential density, etc.).
Since 2005, the State of California has passed legislation and updated policies that require updates
to the General Plan. Some notable updates include the upcoming July 1, 2020, transition to
Vehicles Miles Travelled (VMT) for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance,
the Housing Element's 6th Cycle RHNA update (currently underway), and Environmental Justice
requirements. As the City embarks on a comprehensive update, the City is strategically sequencing
these various updates to be efficient from a cost and technical perspective. The GPAPR documents
the current General Plan's compliance, and provides a draft roadmap for updating the General
Plan.
Once received and filed by the City Council, staff will forward the 2019 GPAPR to OPR and the
California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The filing will also
include the 2019 Housing Annual Report as an attachment. The 2019 Housing Annual Report was
approved by the City Council on April 28, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report
2. 2019 Housing Annual Report Summary
3. April 28, 2020 Housing Annual Report Staff Report
CITY OF TEMECULA
General Plan Annual
Progress Report
Reporting Period
2019
City Council Acceptance Date
TBD
General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 1 /1 Z
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION......................................................................
GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS ..................................................
COMPLIANCE WITH OPR GENERAL PLAN GUIDELINES
HOUSING ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT ...........................
..3
..5
..8
13
General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 2112
INTRODUCTION
The City of Temecula was incorporated in 1989 as a General Law City. Since
incorporation, the City of Temecula has placed a high value on an excellent quality of
life for the community. The vision, goals, and policies identified in City's General Plan
reflect those values and the desire for an excellent quality of life. This General Plan
Annual Progress Report (GPAPR) documents the City's progress on implementing the
General Plan for calendar year 2019 while also forecasting anticipated changes and
detailing compliance with statutory requirements.
While the Temecula General Plan was last comprehensively updated in 2005, the
General Plan is a living document that is often updated to reflect policy changes and
statutory requirements. Since 2005, the City of Temecula has approved approximately
ten General Plan Amendments', an updated Housing Element, and various Municipal
Code amendments to advance the vision, goals, and policies of the General Plan.
Several of these approved General Plan Amendments have increased the capacity and
the ability of the market to generate additional housing (including adding additional
density). While these updates have kept the General Plan current, the City recognizes
there is a need to update the General Plan in a more comprehensive manner.
The City of Temecula is currently developing a plan to comprehensively update the
General Plan. The lingering side effects of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, significant
housing legislation changes (ADUs, Density Bonus, Affordable Housing, etc.), other
state legislative changes (cannabis, vendor carts, etc.) and CEQA changes, such as
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), have slowed the City's comprehensive update. As the
City updates the Housing Element, and adopts VMT, the City is in a position where a
comprehensive update makes sense from a technical and cost-effective standpoint. A
kick-off for the General Plan update was originally targeted for late 2020; this is being
revaluated due to the COVID-19 crisis. Active public engagement is a core component
of a General Plan update and the City is evaluating on how to best proceed with this
outreach given the pandemic. Even through these challenging times, the City is
applying for General Plan update grants, allocating funding, and preparing to take on
a comprehensive update.
The City anticipates a four phase general plan update. The first phase is currently
underway and incorporates an updated Housing Element, VMT, and as well as other
public safety requirements. Phase two will incorporate an update to the City's Quality
of Life Master Plan and the adoption of a Complete Streets policy which will set the
foundation for the General Plan's vision, goals, and policies.
' City of Temecula General Plan Use Map - Revision Table
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 3/1 2
Phase three will incorporate detailed SWOC analysis and fiscal land use studies. Phase four will comprehensively update
the General Plan as well as the EIR for the General Plan. The below graphic is a DRAFT plan for the different phases of
the General Plan update. The contents, schedule, and sequence may change based on recommendations from the City's
consultant.
General
Plan Update
Process
& Timeline
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
(IN PROGRESS)
(JAN. 1 2020 - DEC. 31 2020)
(JAN.
1 2021 — MAR. 31 2021)
(APR. 1, 2021 — JULY 1, 2023)
HOUSING ELEMENT
QLMP 2030 UPDATE
BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE
FONN]6TIONFORTHEGENERAL PLAN
141
_
SWOC ANALYSIS
I, B, PULITICAL CHALLENGES
o GENERALgACTIOPNLAN UPDATE
VEHICLE MITES )
TRAVELLED SB743
--.� VIS'ONFORTHEGENERALPLAN
r.......................... I
1 Bl LIVABLE CITY i
O
STAFF ASSIGNMENT$
$UBCOMMITEE$
GPAC (ADVISORY COMT.)
LAND -USE STUDY
HEIR
ECONOMIC
� ;B2 ECONOMIC PROSPERITY �
1 93 SAFE & PREPARED COMMUNITY
®FISCAL
6-9 MONTHS (OVERLAPS W! PHASE 2)
PUBLIC SAFETY
LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (LHMP)-SB379
DISASTER PLANNING -AB747
1 #4 SUSTAINABLE CITY
1FSTRANSPORTATION,MOBILITY&CONNECTIVITYL
-Afi ACCWNTABLE&RESPO NSIBLE CITY GCVr. �
LYAG. RDGTE$-$699
COMPLETE STREETS
QLMP CORE VALUES BECOME
GENERAL PLAN
#1 HEALTHY & LIVABLE
#2 EGON_ PROSPERITY #3 SAFE & PREPARED
44 SUSTAINABLE CITY
45 TRANSP. MOBILITY &
#6 ACCOUNTABLE &
CITY
COMMUNITY
CONNECTIVITY
RESPONSIBLE CITY GOVT
LAND USE
ECON.DEV. PUBLIC SAFETY
CONSERVATION
CIRCULATION
GROWTH MGT. + PUBLIC
HOUSING
NOISE
OPEN SPACE
COMPLETE STREETS (ATP)
FACILITIES
COMMUNITY DESIGN
AIR QUALITY (CLIMATE
ENV. JUSTICE
ACTION PLAN)
Figure 1 DRAFT General Plan Update Process & Timeline
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 4/1 2
GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS
Project Progress
The City continues to implement the Temecula General Plan. The below projects
demonstrate General Plan progress and provide specific excerpts of goals, policies, and
implementation programs that are complementary to the projects. This list is not meant
to be exhaustive or all inclusive.
VINE CREEK (PA18-0081) - A three story multi -family affordable housing complex
consisting of 60 affordable housing units (15 reserved for those with special needs).
The Vine Creek project furthers access to affordable housing, while also continuing
the City's strong revitalization of Old Town Temecula (a form -based, mixed use
Specific Plan). This project also navigated environmental issues that face projects
located near sensitive habitat, in this case, a creek. To help the project "pencil", the
City provided funding, land fee deferrals, density bonus concessions and
development flexibility (parking reductions, etc.).
Status: Project Approved.
1. Housing Element - Goal 2: Provide affordable housing for all economic
Cn
segments of Temecula. This project supports Policy 2.1, Policy 2.2, Policy 2.4,
Q
and Policy 2.5. Goal 5: Provide equal housing opportunities for all residents
E
in Temecula. This project supports Policy 5.2 and 5.3.
M
x
w
Ln
2. Land Use - A viable, high -quality Old Town Temecula area that enhances the
L
City economically, preserves historical structures, and provides civic, cultural,
oshopping,
and meeting and gathering places for tourists and residents. This
project supports Policy 7.1, and 7.4.
CL
3. Open Space/Conservation - Goal 3: Conservation of important biological
y
habitats and protection of plant, and animal species of concern, wildlife
a
movement corridors, and general biodiversity. This project supports Policy
3.1-3.7.
General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 5/1 2
RORIPAUGH RANCH PARK AND RIDE (PA18-0131) -A 2.2-acre Park and Ride (56
space) and trailhead facility.
The Roripaugh Ranch Park and Ride facility is a multi -use facility. First, the facility
serves as a Park and Ride facility that mitigates traffic to facilitate the development of
additional housing within the City. Second, the project enables public access to a trail
system for walking, hiking, biking, and equestrians.
Status: Project Approved.
1. Housing Element - Goal 1: Provide a diversity of housing opportunities that
satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future
a�
residents of Temecula. This project supports Policy 1.5 and 1.6.
Q
E
X
2. Circulation - Implementation Program C-18: Develop and promote park and
LU
ride and Transit Oasis facilities within the City. Encourage preferred parking
U)
U)
for ride sharing and low emissions vehicles. Goal 1: Strive to maintain a Level
of Service "D" or better at intersections within the City during peak hours and
0
Level of Service "C" or better during non -peak hours. This project supports
Policy 1.2. Goal 5: Safe and efficient alternatives to motorized travel
a_
throughout the City. This project supports Policy 5.6.
L
3. Air Quality - Goal 3: Enhance mobility to minimize air pollutant emissions. This
0
project supports Policy 3.1, 3.3, and 3.4. It also supports implementation
program AQ-14 (required by the General Plan EIR).
General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 6/12
Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendments for Age Qualified Development (PA19-
0408) - A Specific Plan Amendment to the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan to update
the standards for certain Planning Areas.
The Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan allows for the development of 2,015 residential
units. During the development process, the applicant requested an amendment to
have reduced setbacks for age qualified units. This amendment allows for the
reduction in setbacks from 20 feet to 10 feet in some areas, while allowing further
reductions from 15 feet to 10 feet in others. The City accommodated this request to
support the applicant's desire to build age qualified housing.
Status: Project Approved.
1. Housing Element - Goal 5: Provide equal housing opportunity for all residents
in Temecula. This project supports Policy 5.2 and 5.3.
E
a�
rZ2. Land Use - Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial,
> industrial, recreational, public, and open space land uses. This project
Q supports Policy 1.2, and Policy 1.6.
c
n
Lexus Dealership (PA19-1 164/1 165) A Development Plan & Conditional Use Permit
to allow for the construction of a Lexus car dealership.
The proposed Lexus project continues to enhance the City's ability to maintain a
high level of services and high quality of life. The project will contribute to more jobs
within the local economy as the City looks to address the jobs -housing imbalance.
Status: Project Approved
1. Economic Development - Goal 1: Goal 3: A sound economic base providing
a fiscal foundation for the City, quality community facilities, and high service
W
levels. This project supports Policy 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3. This also supports
Implementation Program ED-3, as the City utilized an attraction program to
incentivize this business.
Q
2. Land Use - Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial,
industrial, recreational, public, and open space land uses. This project
supports Policy 1.1, and 1.5.
c
aD
0
General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 7/1 2
COMPLIANCE WITH OPR GENERAL PLAN GUIDELINES
The City of Temecula comprehensively updated the Temecula General Plan in April 2005. Since that time, the state has
adopted new required elements through direct statue or indirect means (such as making elements required for future
funding/grant opportunities). The below table provides a glance at the City's compliance with OPR's General Plan
Guidelines by labeling elements as compliant, in compliance under old guidelines, or out of compliance.
Status Legend
Compliant
State Elements
Circulation
Conservation
Housing
Land Use
In compliance under old guidelines, updates needed or may be • Out of compliance
needed.
Elements Status Notes
Circulation
Open Space
Conservation
Housing
Land Use
Pursuantto Senate Bill ("SB") 743, the City will adopt VMTthresholds
in 20202 to meet the State mandated July 1, 2020 deadline. Future
General Plan updates will incorporate additional "Complete Street"
requirements. The City has also started interregional efforts to
address circulation issues on the 1-15 corridor' that are outside the
City's regular area of responsibilities. 1-15 congestion continues to
be a major concern in the region and the City will continue to
advocate for transportation solutions.
The City will update the Conversation Element to address any
possible deficiencies. The City is a participant in the Western
Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP)
as well the San Diego Regional Water Control Board's MS4 permit.
The City is currently updating the Housing Element (61" Cycle).
While the land -use element is up to date with older guidelines,
changes will be needed as a part of the Housing Element update to
2 https://temeculaca.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=773092&GUID=DE32B7D6-2659-4CF7-8OB5-3ABA034AD5CO
s https://temeculaca.gov/1228/Move-1-15-Through-Temecula-Valley-Reg-Ta
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 8/1 2
Noise
Open Space
Safety
Noise
Open Space
Conservation
Public Safety
ensure adequate housing is in areas where infrastructure can
support it. The City also has incorporated form -based Specific Plans
that include mixed -land uses and increased density in Old Town
Temecula and Uptown Temecula.
The City is compliant with Noise element requirements.
The City is a participant in the Western Riverside County Multi -
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP) as well the San Diego
Regional Water Control Board's MS4 permit.
A future update will need to incorporate the latest changes that
including revised Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, climate change,
and resiliency planning.
The City of Temecula elected to include this optional element, as it
Not required
Air Quality
is not required by statue. A future update will be necessary to
\�
\�
ensure the latest data is incorporated into the General Plan. GHG
analysis will be required.
This optional element, while compliant, may warrant updating to
Not required Community Design
reflect substantial changes in the community's population since
2005.
The City has achieved or is on -track to achieve many of the
economic goals outlined in the General Plan. This includes
Economic
developing the SR-79 south corridor, further development of Old
Not required
Development
0
Town Temecula, the expansion of lodging along the freeway, and
the recycling of old commercial centers (Uptown Temecula Specific
Plan). Updates may be needed to reflect progress on these goals
and the City may need to adopt new goals.
The City's optional Growth Management/Public Facilities element
Growth
ensures that equitable, sustainable, and efficient growth occurs
Not required Management
within the City. This includes addressing level of service issues
Public Facilities
related to service providers (water, sewer, trash, etc.), public safety,
and physical facilities.
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 9/1 2
Compliance with Other OPR Guidelines
Environmental Justice
According to the below map generated by CalEPA, the City of Temecula does not contain any SB 535 Disadvantaged
Communities. The City does contain AB 1550 Low-income Communities. As the City updates the General Plan, the City
will comply updated Environmental Justice requirements.
SB 535
I;anla r03a TEMECUL
VALLEY
_egend
5B 535 Disadvantaged
Communities
AB 1550 Low-income
Communities
5B 535 Disadvantaged
Communities and AB 1550 Low-
incomB Cammunities
AB 1550 Low-income
Communities within a 1/2 mile of
a 313 535 Disadvantaged
Community
Temecula
Y
f
P changa
County of Riverside; Bureau of Land Management,
. i
y4
r
Figure 2: h=s://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc%apandtrade/auctionproceeds/communityinvestments.htm
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 1 0/1 3
Military Lands and Facilities
According to the California Military Land Use Compatibility Analyst (CMLUCA) map (available on the next page), the City
of Temecula does not contain any military installations, training routes, or special air space. Additionally, the City is not
located within 1,000 feet of any military installations. Even so, the City recognized Marine Corps Base Pendleton in the
current General Plan, with a focus on the former San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONG S)4. The City has also
engaged with the San Diego Regional Military Working Group (with SANDAG) and other SANDAG border liaisons to
address the critical infrastructure needs along the 1-15 corridor. During recent studies, the City identified a significant
number of military personnel who travel from Temecula and other adjacent cities to various bases within San Diego
ounty.
California Military Land Use Compatibility Analyst
`' "i": RF B.iScS
Murriela ` \\� MiYtary 13ra11Ltles
AIR FORCE ■
ARMY ■
Te COAST GUARD
MARINE CORPS N
NAVY ■
'� FLIC-HT P.3T35
Ill in California
Ill Instrument Route ■
brook ■
SR -Slow Route
VR- Visual Route ■
No Training Routes Id AiR SPACE
No Millary Installations d
No Special ltir
SUA in Califwre
Esri, HERE, Garl (c) GpenStreetMapj6l_
Cnpyright0201I StateofCalifornia Mort
Figure 3: http://Cmluca.gis.ca.govl
4 httl2s://temeculaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/288/Public-Safety-PDF?bidld=
General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 11 /13
Consultation with Native American Tribes
The City of Temecula consults with local tribes on a regular basis in compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements. This
is tracked by using the City's enterprise permitting system. In addition to regular consultation, the City holds quarterly
meetings with one tribe to collaborate on upcoming projects. Finally, the City continues to work with our local tribal
partners to achieve goals, policies, and plans identified in the General Plan. In a recent instance, the Pechanga Band of
Luiseno Indians contributed $14.5 million dollars to a General Plan (Circulation Element) identified interchange
improvements.
s httl2s://temeculaca.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/129
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg.12113
HOUSING ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT
Please see Attachment A for the City's Housing Annual Progress Report.
General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg.13/13
Jurisdiction Temecula
Reporting Year 2019 (Jan. 1 - Dec. 31)
Building Permits Issued by Affordability Summary
Income Level
Current Year
Very Low
Deed Restricted
0
Non -Deed Restricted
0
Low
Deed Restricted
0
Non -Deed Restricted
0
Moderate
Deed Restricted
0
Non -Deed Restricted
31
Above Moderate
123
Total Units
154
Note: Units serving extremely low-income households are included in the very low-
income permitted units totals
Housing Applications Summary
Total Housing Applications Submitted:
0
Number of Proposed Units in All Applications Received:
0
Total Housing Units Approved:
0
Total Housing Units Disapproved:
0
Use of SIB 35 Streamlining Provisions
Number of Applications for Streamlining
0
Number of Streamlining Applications Approved
0
Total Developments Approved with Streamlining
0
Total Units Constructed with Streamlining
0
Units Constructed - SIB 35 Streamlining
Permits
Income
Rental
Ownership
Total
Very Low
0
0
0
Low
0
0
0
Moderate
0
0
0
Above Moderate
0
0
0
Total
0
0
0
Cells in grey contain auto -calculation formulas
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
DATE: April 28, 2020
SUBJECT: Receive and File Update on the Housing Element Annual Progress Report to the
Department of Housing and Community Development
PREPARED BY: Dale West, Associate Planer II
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file an update on the Housing
Element Annual Progress Report to California Department of Housing and Community
Development for the reporting period of January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019.
BACKGROUND:
The City has an adopted and certified a Housing Element for the period of 2014 to 2021 and
pursuant to Government Code Section 65400, the City is required to prepare an Annual Progress
Report (APR). The APR includes information on the jurisdiction's progress in addressing the
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), including the number of housing units permitted by
income level, number of units entitled, and the status of programs identified within the Housing
Element. The APR must be considered by the City Council at a public meeting prior to submitting
it to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the
Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) by April 1 of each year.
The table below briefly summarizes the City's housing activities in 2019.
Residential Dwelling Units Production in 2019
Category
Units
Status
Applications Submitted
379
Under Review by Community Development
Completed Entitlement
60
Building Permit Ready
Building Permits
123
Permits Finaled/Certificate of Occupancy
The applications submitted consists of Solana Assisted Living (105 units), Arrive @ Rancho
Highlands Apartments (270 dwelling units, which includes 55 affordable housing units), and four
Accessory Dwelling Units for a total of 379 proposed dwelling units.
The completed entitlements consisted of Vine Creek Apartment with 60 affordable housing
dwelling units.
The 123 building permits issued are for Nicolas Heights (19 single family dwelling units), Tri
Pointe Cassis (18 single family dwelling units), Indigo Place (two single family dwelling units),
Temecula Village Apartments (82 units), one Accessory Dwelling Unit, and one single-family
custom home.
As required by law, the attached 2019 Housing Element Annual Progress Report was submitted to
HCD on April 1, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The 2017 Legislative Housing Package increased the importance of the Housing Element Annual
Progress Reports that are due to HCD and OPR April 1 each year. Consequences for failing to
complete and submit the Annual Report may include court sanctions and losing local control over
affordable multifamily housing development entitlements to a new streamlined approval process.
ATTACHMENT: 2019 Housing Annual Report Summary
Item No. 8
ACTION MINUTES
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 26, 2020
CALL TO ORDER at 7:25 PM: President Schwank
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Stewart, Schwank
CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar.
Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Stewart, Second by Edwards. The vote reflected
unanimous approval.
13. Approve Action Minutes of April 28, 2020
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the action minutes of April 28,
2020.
14. Set Public Hearing to Approve Temecula Community Services District Proposed Rates and
Charges for Fiscal Year 2020-21
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT
WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED RATES AND CHARGES FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR
A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
15. Terminate Easement for Maintenance of Landscaping on Property Within Tract 21764 and
Service Level C, Zone 7
Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA TERMINATING THE EASEMENT FOR
MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING ON PROPERTY WITHIN
TRACT 21764 AND TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT, SERVICE LEVEL "C", ZONE 7
CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT
CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
CSD ADJOURNMENT
At 7:28 PM, the Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 9, 2020,
at 5:30 PM for a Closed Session, with a regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers,
41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.
Zak Schwank, President
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]
Item No. 9
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Approve Update to the 2017-22 Citizen Participation Plan and Substantial
Amendment to the 2019-20 CDBG Annual Action Plan
PREPARED BY: Lynn Kelly -Lehner, Principal Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt resolutions entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION PLAN SETTING THE CITY'S POLICIES
AND PROCEDURES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROGRAM (CDBG)
FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, ASSESSMENT OF
FAIR HOUSING, ANNUAL ACTION PLANS, ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE REPORTS, SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS,
AND DISASTER RECOVERY AND SUPPLEMENTAL
APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE SUBSTANTIAL
AMENDMENT TO THE 2019-20 COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
BACKGROUND: On July 1, 2012, the City of Temecula became and Entitlement
City through the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program through the
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
On June 28, 2016, the City Council adopted the updated Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth
the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year
Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial
amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds. The Citizen
Participation Plan included policies and procedures for amending Annual Action Plans where
CDBG-funded activities may be added or deleted, and funding for activities may be increased.
On March 27, 2020, the Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES
Act), Public Law 116-136, was signed into law. The CARES Act distributed an additional
allocation of CDBG funds, known as CDBG-CV funds, to entitlement jurisdictions, for the
prevention and response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City anticipates receiving an
$329,152 allocation of CDBG-CV funds for COVID-19 prevention and response and intends to
utilize these funds through the implementation of Temecula Assist, which is outlined in more
detail below.
The funding authorized under the CARES Act allows for certain provisions and flexibilities to
enable grantees to effectively and efficiently utilize the funding to respond to and address the
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. To take advantage of these flexibilities, the City must
submit a waiver to HUD, requesting to utilize these provisions. The City must also amend its
Citizen Participation Plan. The area of biggest flexibility is reducing the noticing period from
thirty days to five days during this time.
Temecula Assist
At the May 21, 2020 City Council Budget Workshop, City Council recommended moving
forward with a half million -dollar small business relief grant program called Temecula Assist.
Primarily funded with CDBG-CV funding, Temecula Assist provides direct relief to business
owners with two different grant opportunities, one funded with CDBG-CV funds, and the other
funded with General Fund.
The goal of the Temecula Assist: Rent Recovery and Job Retention is to assist business owners
in operations during the global pandemic, as well as to create economic opportunities by creating
and retaining jobs held by low- or moderate -income individuals within the City of Temecula.
The application period opened on May 26, 2020 and runs through June 9, 2020. At the close of
the application period, the City will hold a lottery to randomly order all applications and
preliminarily select the businesses that are eligible to obtain grants from the Temecula Assist:
Rent Recovery and Job Retention program.
After the lottery is held, the City will notify businesses via email if they have been preliminarily
selected for the grant. The City will conduct a thorough eligibility review of the application and
request additional, supporting documentation from the business to confirm program eligibility.
During this review, the City will request additional information from each business owner
including demographic and socioeconomic data for Federal program reporting and
documentation.
A Notice of Public Hearing and the commencement of the 5-day public review period was
published in the San Diego Union Tribune on June 4, 2020, informing the public of the proposed
substantial amendment and updated Citizen Participation Plan and inviting comments.
FISCAL IMPACT: The approval of the Substantial Amendment will allow the
expenditure of a supplemental appropriation of $329,152 of federal CDBG-CV funds.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution — Citizen Participation Plan
Exhibit A — Citizen Participation Plan
2. Resolution — Substantial Amendment
Exhibit A — Substantial Amendment
3. Notice of Public Hearing
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION PLAN SETTING THE CITY'S POLICIES
AND PROCEDURES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROGRAM
(CDBG) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN,
ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING, ANNUAL ACTION
PLANS, ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS,
SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS, AND DISASTER
RECOVERY AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find,
determine, and declare that:
A. The City of Temecula has participated directly within the federal Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as an entitlement jurisdiction for Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds since July 1, 2012;
B. The City of Temecula has prepared all documents, notices, and forms required by
HUD for participation in the CDBG Program by entitlement jurisdictions;
C. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-42 on June 14, 2011 initiating the
City to obtain entitlement community status from HUD, and authorized the Director of
Community Development to prepare and return for City Council approval all documents required
for the designation as an Entitlement City;
D. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-78 on November 1, 2011, approving
the Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen
participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans,
Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct
administration of federal CDBG funds;
E. On June 28, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 16-43 approving the
updated Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen
participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans,
Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct
administration of federal CDBG funds;
F. On March 27, 2020, Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
(CARES Act), Public Law 116-136, was signed into law;
G. The CARES Act distributed an additional allocation of CDBG funds, known as
CDBG-CV funds, to entitlement jurisdictions, for prevention and response to the COVID-19
pandemic;
H. The City anticipates receiving an $329,152 allocation of CDBG-CV funds for
COVID-19 prevention and response;
I. Pursuant to the provisions in the CARES Act, the City is updating its Citizen
Participation Plan to outline citizen participation requirements for the development or
amendment of Action Plans for disaster recovery and supplemental appropriations;
J. The proposed Citizens Participation Plan was available for comment between
June 4, 2020 and June 9, 2020;
K. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 2. Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby finds,
determines and declares:
A. Pursuant to Title 24, Housing and Urban Development, of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Subtitle A Office of the Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Part 91 Consolidated Submissions For Community Planning And Development
Programs, Subpart B Citizen Participation and Consultation, Section 91.105 Citizen Participation
Plan; Local Governments (24 CFR Part 91, Section 91.105), each entitlement jurisdiction must
adopt a Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth its CDBG program policies and procedures to
encourage community involvement; and
B. The City Council encourages the participation of all of its residents particularly
low and moderate income persons, non-English speaking persons and persons with special needs
in the development of the City's CDBG program; and
C. The City Council has reviewed and approved the proposed City of Temecula
Citizen Participation Plan.
Section 3. Environmental Findings. The proposed action on the Annual Action
Plan (2016-2017) is exempt from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) pursuant to the
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and specifically 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1)
because the Citizen Participation Plan is a resource identification study and the development of
plans and strategies for the prioritization and funding of proposed programs through CDBG and
the proposed action involves the feasibility and planning studies to determine prioritization and
CDBG funding to begin the development of certain projects. The potential projects discussed in
the proposed actions that might involve physical activity will be reviewed under NEPA or the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of the development of those projects. The
proposed action is also exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and
15378(b)(4).
N
Section 4. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9t' day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
City of Temecula
Citizen Participation Plan
Prepared by:
City of Temecula
Community Development Department
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Adopted May 2016
Revised June 2020
City of Temecula
Citizen Participation Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Temecula receives an annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). As a condition of funding, the City of
Temecula must adopt and follow a Citizen Participation Plan that describes how the City will encourage
public involvement in the development of the City's Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan and
Assessment of Fair Housing.
PURPOSE OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
The City of Temecula recognizes the importance of public participation in both defining and understanding
current housing, community development and fair housing needs, prioritizing resources to address those
needs and reviewing performance. The City's Citizen Participation Plan is designed to encourage
participation by residents and organizations representing people of all ages, genders, economic levels,
races, ethnicities, special needs and protected classes of the development of the Consolidated Plan, Action
Plans and Assessment of Fair Housing as well as to inform them of the CDBG decision -making process.
The City shall actively encourage participation by non -English-speaking residents of the community and
residents of low- and moderate -income neighborhoods and other areas where CDBG funds are proposed
to be used. This Citizen Participation Plan addresses Sections 91.100 and 91.105 of HUD's Consolidated
Plan regulations, as amended on July 16, 2015 and Section 5.158 of HUD's Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing Final Rule. This Citizen Participation Plan shall be effective until amended or superseded. The
HUD requirements for citizen participation do not restrict the responsibility or authority of the City of
Temecula for the development and execution of the Consolidated Plan documents, but rather to facilitate
citizen access to, and engagement with the CDBG program.
GLOSSARY OF RELEVANT TERMS
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Actions that, when taken together, address significant disparities
in housing needs and opportunities, replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced
living patterns, transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity,
and facilitate compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH)/ Analysis of Impediments (Al): An analysis of fair housing data,
an assessment of fair housing issues and contributing factors, and an identification of fair housing priorities
and goals.
City CDBG Webpage: All draft and final Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report, Analysis of Impediments, Assessment of Fair Housing documents,
public hearing, and program workshop schedules and announcements may be accessed on the following
City webpage: http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG
Low- and Moderate -Income Areas (LMA): LMAs are typically areas where 51 % of the residents earn
less than 80% of the County's median income, as determined with HUD -supplied data. However, since
there are few areas of Temecula meeting this criterion, the City is considered an "Exception Community,"
whereby LMAs are those areas where the highest 25% (upper quartile) of block groups with low- and
moderate -income persons. Therefore, an LMA in Temecula would be currently defined as U.S. Census
block group where approximately 35% of the residents are low- or moderate -income persons. From time
to time, HUD will adjust that threshold based on changing demographics. Appendix A provides a map that
2�
shows the eligible low- and moderate -income areas. Examples of CDBG activities that may be undertaken
based on LMA eligibility include:
• Acquisition of land for a LMA neighborhood park or recreation center;
• Construction of a health clinic serving a LMA; and
• Installation or replacement of gutters and sidewalks and other street improvements.
Low and Moderate Limited Clientele Benefit (LMC): LMC activities provide benefits to a group of low -
or moderate -income persons regardless of where they live. LMC activities are eligible if at least 51 % of the
clients are of low or moderate income. There are some groups that are generally presumed by HUD to be
principally of low- to moderate -income such as:
• Abused children;
• Elderly persons (age 62 and older);
• Battered spouses;
• Homeless persons;
• Severely disabled adults (not children);
• Illiterate adults;
• Persons living with AIDS; and
• Migrant farm workers.
Examples of eligible activities include:
• Acquisition of a building for a shelter for the homeless;
• Rehabilitation of a center to train severely disabled persons to live independently;
• Development of a senior center or provision of senior citizen programs;
• Public services activities (i.e., the provision of health or child care services); and
• Removal of architectural barriers to the disabled.
Protected Classes: The Federal protected classes include:
• Disability
• Family status
• National origin
• Race
• Color
• Religion
• Sex
Additional State of California protected classes include:
• Marital status
• Medical condition
• Ancestry
• Source of income
• Age
• Sexual orientation
• Gender identity
• Gender expression
• Genetic information
• Arbitrary discrimination
3 1 P _
Severely Disabled Adults: Adults are classified as having a severe disability, if they: (a) have used a
wheelchair or another special aid for 6 months or longer; (b) were unable to perform one or more functional
activities or needed assistance with an activity of daily living or instrumental activity of daily living; (c) were
prevented from working at a job or doing housework; or (d) had a condition including autism, cerebral
palsy, Alzheimer's disease, senility, or mental retardation. Finally, persons who are under 65 years of age
and who are covered by Medicare or receive Social Security are considered to have a disability (and a
severe disability). Functional activities include seeing, hearing, having one's speech understood, lifting and
carrying, walking up a flight of stairs, and walking. Activities of daily living include getting around inside the
house, getting in and out of bed or a chair, bathing, dressing, eating, and toileting. Instrumental activities
of daily living include going outside the home, keeping track of money or bills, preparing meals, doing light
housework, and using the telephone.
ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING (AFH) or ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS (Al) TO FAIR HOUSING
CHOICE
The AFH or Al is required every five years prior to the preparation of the Consolidated Plan. If HUD
requires an AFH, the City must prepare, adopt, and submit its initial AFH for HUD review no later than 270
calendar days prior to the start of the following program year. AFHs must be submitted 195 days prior to
the start of the following program year, which would be on December 181" every five years. This schedule
will allow the City to consider any fair housing issues when developing the City's Consolidated Plan.
As part of its AFH or Al, the City will consult with agencies that provide assisted housing, health and social
services, including those focusing on services to children, elderly persons, and persons with disabilities,
persons with HIV/AIDS and their families and homeless persons. This will also include consultations with
community -based and regionally -based organizations that represent protected class members and
organizations that enforce fair housing laws. The consultation efforts will include regional government
agencies, Public Housing Authorities and adjoining cities. Agencies including businesses, developers,
nonprofit organizations, philanthropic organizations and faith -based organizations will also be consulted.
These agencies will also be consulted in the preparation of the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans.
A list of these agencies is attached as Appendix B. Other interested agencies are invited to join the
notification list at any time.
When preparing an AFH or Al, the City will provide HUD -provided data and other information to interested
citizens, agencies and organizations in an effort to provide meaningful analyses of local fair housing
conditions and issues. The City will endeavor to provide this information as early in the planning process
as possible, but it is subject to HUD releasing that data to the City. After the consultation process is under
way, one public hearing will be conducted to obtain citizen input at least 30 days prior to publishing the
proposed AFH or Al. The City may choose to conduct this hearing in conjunction with one of the two
required public hearings on the Consolidated Plan.
CONSOLIDATED PLAN
The Consolidated Plan is a HUD prerequisite for the City to receive CDBG funds. The Consolidated Plan
examines housing and community development needs, sets priorities for grant monies and establishes a
strategic plan with specific measurable goals to address priority needs. The City is in its second multi -year
Consolidated Plan covering the program years July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2022. The City Consolidated
Plan only covers the geographic area within the city limits of Temecula. In addition to the Consolidated
Plan, the City will annually conduct public hearings in the preparation of the Annual Action Plan describing
the amount of funds available to the City and the activities to be undertaken with CDBG funds. Each of the
agencies included in Appendix B will be consulted in the development of the Consolidated Plan and notified
of the availability of draft documents including the Consolidated Plan and Action Plans.
4
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
The consolidated planning processes includes many opportunities for citizen participation. These include
surveys, community outreach meetings, City Finance Committee meetings and City Council public
hearings. The City will particularly encourage participation of persons with special needs and/or persons
who are often underrepresented in public process (i.e. low income, non-English speaking persons, and
minorities, persons with disabilities, and persons who are homeless).
The City will make a concerted effort to notify and encourage the participation of citizens, local and regional
institutions, the local Continuum of Care organization addressing homelessness, and public and private
organizations including businesses, developers, nonprofit organizations, philanthropic organizations,
community -based and faith -based organizations, broadband internet service providers, organizations
engaged in narrowing the digital divide, agencies whose primary responsibilities include the management
of flood prone areas, public land or water resources, emergency management agencies, state and local
health service providers, social service providers, fair housing organizations, state and local governments,
public housing agencies, affordable housing developers, businesses, community and faith based
organizations, and other stakeholders in the amendment of the Citizen Participation Plan or the
development of the Al or AFH, Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans through mailings (including
electronic mailings), online postings and public notices in the newspaper.
Language Access Plan: The City has assessed its language needs and identified the need for
translation of notices and other vital documents such as marketing materials and applications for CDBG
assistance in Spanish to provide meaningful access, upon request.
Community Surveys: As part of its Consolidated Plan and AFH/AI process, the City will conduct a
needs survey of residents and stakeholders in the City. The purpose of the survey to obtain a broad
range of community input and perspectives.
Community Meetings: During the preparation of the Consolidated Plan and AFH/AI, at least two
community meetings will be held to gather public input about the housing and community development
needs from citizens and their neighborhoods. During the Action Plan preparation, the City will conduct two
technical assistance workshops on CDBG applications. The community meetings will provide an
opportunity for citizens and interested parties to obtain information about the City's housing and community
development programs and eligibility requirements. The Annual Action Plan community meetings will
provide information to potential applicants that wish to submit funding proposals for their service programs
or neighborhoods. City staff will be available at the meetings to provide technical assistance for developing
funding proposals to address priority needs and meet the goals of the AFH/AI and Consolidated Plan.
At least one community meeting will be held in the early evening to accommodate work schedules and one
community meeting will be held during daylight to accommodate those uncomfortable driving at night.
City Finance Committee: The City has a Finance Committee that meets on an as -needed basis and
performs in an advisory function to City staff and to the City Council concerning financial matters. The
Finance Committee consists of two appointed City Council members. The Committee meets at least once
a year regarding CDBG funding. They will review of all CDBG funding proposals and will direct staff on
which activities should be included in the draft Action Plan. This meeting provides interested residents
and agencies with an opportunity to participate in the funding process and the public is invited to attend.
The meeting generally occurs about 45 days before City Council CDBG public hearing after City staff has
determined the eligibility of all CDBG service applications.
In the event City staff proposes a substantial amendment to any of the CDBG plans, then a Committee
meeting may be scheduled before proposing a substantial amendment at a City Council public hearing.
Typically, the public is notified of any Committee meetings three days prior to the meeting; however, when
CDBG is a topic item on their agenda, there will be a minimum of ten days' advance notice. All applicants
5 1 F_
will be notified by email of the meeting so that they can answer any Committee questions about their
application. A public notice is published in the local newspaper.
Public Hearings: A minimum of two public hearings will be held by the City Council each year. The first
public hearing is usually held in September each year as part of the CAPER review process. This hearing
will be held earlier than September if done in conjunction with the public hearing on the initial Assessment
of Fair Housing to meet HUD's submittal deadline. The citizen process will conclude with a final City Council
public hearing in April or May to adopt the Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Action Plan.
The public will have the opportunity of reviewing the draft Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Action Plan
(and providing input to City Staff) within a 30-day comment period during March and/or April each year.
City staff will incorporate public comments submitted to City staff during the 30-day comment period into
the Consolidated Plan (and/or Action Plan).. Public comments and citizen participation are encouraged
during all public hearings each year.
Notifications and Location of Public Hearings and Meetings: All public hearings will take place at the
City of Temecula Civic Center, Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California, 92590, a
location which is accessible to persons with physical disabilities. Community outreach meetings will also
take place at a City facility where there are available meeting rooms.
All sites selected for public meetings and public hearings are accessible to persons with disabilities. The
City will provide a translator upon request to accommodate non-English speaking persons at public
hearings or community meetings. Persons needing special accommodations, or a translator should make
their request one week before the meeting so the City can assure the special needs are met. These
requests should be made to the Community Development Department at (951) 694-6400.
Unless otherwise stated in this Plan, citizens will be given at least 10 days' advance notice of the City
Council public hearings and community meetings. This will be accomplished through posting a summary
of the documents on the City website(http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG), and at public places including
the City of Temecula Ronald H. Roberts Public Library and City of Temecula Civic Center. Official
notification shall take place through publication of a public notice in a local newspaper of general circulation
(The Press Enterprise or The San Diego Union Tribune). To encourage participation, the City may also
send email notifications or other outreach materials to residents, agencies and advocates, such as those
interested parties and individuals listed on Appendix B. The City will maintain the list and verify the contact
information periodically and, at a minimum, annually. The list will continue to evolve and be administratively
modified each year without a substantial amendment, as stakeholders or potential participants are
identified or dissolved. Organizations or groups and persons interested to be added the list may contact
the City of Temecula Community Development Department at (951) 694-6400.
During the preparation of the Consolidated Plan and AFH/Al, the City may distribute public notices to
residents through property landlords or directly to residents living within existing, designated low income
areas and neighborhoods throughout the City to inform residents about the public hearings as an effort to
increase public participation by underrepresented groups.
Other Requirements: The draft Consolidated Plan will also include the City's policies related to
displacement of low- and moderate -income individuals, reducing poverty, removal of lead -based paint
hazards, preventing and mitigating homelessness and removing barriers to fair housing choice. The City
does not anticipate any displacement of individuals, but the Consolidated Plan will describe how the City
will minimize displacement of persons or, in the unanticipated event of displacement, how the City will
assist any persons who are actually displaced as a result of the use of these funds, specifying the type
and levels of assistance and amount of compensation.
Plan Availability: The proposed Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, AFH/AI, Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) and any substantial amendments to plans will be available
P -
at the City of Temecula Ronald H. Roberts Public Library, the City Hall (in the City Clerk's Office and
Community Development Department) and on the City's website at http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG
during public comment periods. A reasonable number of hard copies will be available to the public and
provided upon request. Citizens or groups that attend any of the community meetings or public hearings
will be notified when the draft documents are available for comment. These materials will also be available
in a form accessible to persons with disabilities, upon request. Comments, questions, or suggested
amendments should be directed to the Community Development Department at 951-694-6400.
The City will consider any comments from individuals or groups received in writing during the process of
drafting the Consolidated Plan and/or annual Action Plan as well as public testimony at hearings or
meetings. A summary of the written and public hearing comments will be included in the final Consolidated
Plan and/or Annual Action Plan, along with the City's response to the comments. Please note however
that copies of the complaints, along with the City's response will still be sent to HUD, if they occur outside
of the Consolidated Planning and/or Annual Action Planning process but may not appear in the
Consolidated Plan.
The City will provide a written response to all written citizen comments and complaints related to the
Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, Amendments, and CAPER within 30 days of receiving the
comments and complaints.
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER): In addition to the required
Plans and Assessment, the City is required to prepare a CAPER, which reports on its performance in
the prior year. Before the City submits a CAPER to HUD, the City will make it available to interested
parties for a comment period of no less than 15 days. Any comments or views of citizens received in
writing, or orally at public hearings in regarding the performance report will be considered prior to submitting
the CAPER. A summary of these comments shall be attached to the performance report.
COMPLAINTS
Residents or other interested parties may submit complaints to the City in relation to administration of the
CDBG programs or plans. Complaints may be made via telephone by calling (951) 694-6400 or in writing
to: Community Development Department/CDBG, City of Temecula, 41000 Main St., Temecula, CA 92590.
The complaining party should state the nature of the complaint, what prior efforts have been made to
resolve the problem and any other pertinent information which would help staff determine a solution. All
complaints will receive careful consideration and a timely, substantive response will be provided within
fifteen (15) days where practicable, but no less than thirty (30) working days.
SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS
Occasionally, situations warrant an amendment to the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans. Minor
amendments may be completed by staff with the approval of the Director of the Community Development
Department. Minor amendments involve any change that does not meet the criteria for a Substantial
Amendment.
A Substantial Amendment to the Consolidated Plan occurs when:
• There is a new goal proposed or the City proposes the deletion of a previously approved Strategic
Plan goal (changes to performance measurement indicators or numeric accomplishment goals
shall not be considered a substantial change).
7 1 F_
• The City may make minor changes to the Consolidated Plan, as needed, so long as the changes
do not constitute a substantial amendment as described above. Changes to numeric
accomplishment goals within an existing strategic plan goal shall not constitute a substantial
amendment. Such changes to the Consolidated Plan will not require public review or a public
hearing.
A Substantial Amendment to the Action Plan occurs when:
• A CDBG activity budget will increase by $50,000 or 25% of the project's original budget;
• There is a significant change in the purpose, scope, location, or beneficiaries of an activity; or
• The City proposes to add or delete an activity, except in the following cases:
o If the activity is on the back up list approved by the City Council in the Annual Action Plan;
o If the activity is being deleted due to delays and would be included in the following year's
Annual Action Plan;
o If there are nonperformance or eligibility issues requiring activity termination;
o If project deletion or funding reductions are due to facility closure or bankruptcy;
o If the agency becomes disqualified or ineligible to receive funding or is unable to produce
sufficient eligible billings in accordance with the provisions of the agreement; or
o If an applicant requests that their activity be terminated.
A Substantial Amendment to the AFH or Al occurs when:
There is a significant revision involving a material change in the AFH or Al pursuant to 24 CFR
5.164(a)(1) or upon HUD's written notification specifying a material change that requires the
revision. A material change is a change in circumstances in thejurisdiction of a program participant
that affects the information on which the AFH or Al is based to the extent that the analysis, the fair
housing contributing factors, or the priorities and goals of the AFH or Al no longer reflect actual
circumstances.
Minor edits to the Citizen Participation Plan, such as updating contact information, updating the map
identifying eligible low- and moderate -income areas or technical details about schedules and publications,
will not constitute a "Substantial Amendment."
Modifications to appendices of any plans are not considered to be a Substantial Amendment.
If there is a rescission of funds by HUD, shifting of funds would not be considered a Substantial
Amendment. If such federal government funding cuts or changes were to happen, the City would be
required to follow its plan of action as outlined in the Consolidated Plan and/or the Annual Action Plan;
however, any HUD -directed change would normally not be considered a Substantial Amendment.
Citizen Participation for Substantial Amendments: In the event of a Substantial Amendment to the
Consolidated Plan or Action Plan, the City will conduct at least one public hearing. This hearing will be
held after a comment period of no less than 30 days, where the proposed, substantially amended
Consolidated Plan/Action Plan will be made available to interested parties. Citizens will be informed of the
substantial amendment by public notice prior to the public review and comment period. The newspaper
advertisement shall summarize the Substantial Amendment and inform the public of the date, time and
location of the public hearing.
The substantially amended sections of the Consolidated Plan will be available for review at the City during
the full public comment period. In addition, the amended sections will be on the City's website,
http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG, for the full duration of the public comment period.
8 I
CDBG DISASTER RECOVERY (CDBG-DR) AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
In the event of a federally -declared major disaster or emergency for which the City is to receive and
administer HUD disaster recovery assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act or supplemental assistance under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic
Security Act (CARES) or other supplemental appropriations, either directly from HUD or through the State
of California, the following citizen participation requirements shall apply to the development of Action Plans
and Substantial Amendments to Action Plans for disaster recovery and supplemental appropriations:
1. Before the City adopts the Action Plan for a disaster recovery grant or supplemental appropriation
or any substantial amendment to a disaster recovery grant or supplemental appropriation Action
Plan, the City will publish the proposed plan or amendment on the City website. For disaster
recovery assistance, the City will cross-reference with any additional disaster recovery websites
established to provide information to the public concerning assistance that may be available.
2. The City and/or subrecipients will notify affected citizens through USPS and/or electronic mailings,
press releases, public service announcements, public notice(s), and/or through social media, or as
otherwise required by HUD.
3. The City will ensure that all citizens have equal access to information about the programs, including
persons with disabilities and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons. Program information will
be made available in the appropriate languages for the City.
4. Subsequent to publication of the Action Plan or substantial amendment, the City will provide a
reasonable opportunity for receiving comments as prescribed by the Federal Register Notice
governing administration of the disaster recovery assistance or as otherwise permitted by HUD for
supplemental appropriations.
5. The City will receive comments via USPS mail to Lynn Kelly -Lehner, Principal Management
Analyst, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590, or via email at lynn.lehner@temeculaca.gov.
6. In the Action Plan, the City will specify criteria for determining what changes in the City's plan
constitute a substantial amendment to the plan. At a minimum, the following modifications will
constitute a substantial amendment: a change in program benefit or eligibility criteria; the addition
or deletion of an activity; or the allocation or reallocation of a monetary threshold of more than
$750,000.
7. For disaster recovery assistance, a public website shall be established and publicized specifically
for the disaster. Initially, the City's CDBG website may be used at: https://temeculaca.gov/CDBG.
The website shall contain the Action Plan (including all amendments); each Quarterly Performance
Report (QPR); procurement policies and procedures; executed contracts; status of services or
goods currently being procured by the City (e.g., phase of the procurement, requirements for
proposals, etc.).
8. The City will consider all written comments regarding the Action Plan or any substantial
amendment. A summary of the comments and the City's response to each comment will be
provided to HUD or the State with the Action Plan or substantial amendment.
9. The City will provide a timely written response to every citizen complaint. The response will be
provided within 15 working days of the receipt of the complaint, to the extent practicable.
10. The City will notify HUD when it makes any plan amendment that is not substantial. HUD or the
State will be notified at least five business days before the amendment becomes effective or in
accordance with HUD or State requirements.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND URGENT NEED WAIVERS
When authorized by HUD via waiver or statute to respond to an exigent or emergency situation, the City
of Temecula may modify its Citizen Participation Plan approach to conform with the flexibilities granted by
HUD. These exceptions may be applied to all documents referenced in this Citizen Participation Plan,
including the Citizen Participation Plan, Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report, Analysis of Impediments/ Assessment of Fair Housing, and any
amendments to these documents. Such modifications may include:
P -
1. Reduced public review period,
2. Modified placement of notices and documents for public review,
3. Modified structure of public hearings, or
4. Alternative requirements, as identified and allowed by HUD.
ANTI -DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION
The City's Anti -displacement and Relocation Plan describes how the City will assist persons who must be
temporarily relocated or permanently displaced due to the use of HUD CPD funds. This plan takes effect
whenever the City funds projects that involve the following:
• Property acquisition; and
• Potential displacement of people from their homes and the need to relocate people (either
permanently or temporarily); and
• The demolition or conversion of low- and moderate -income dwelling units.
1. Background
Two Acts apply whenever any of the above issues are present: the Uniform Relocation Assistance and
Real Property Policies Act of 1970 (URA) and Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974. Each of these acts places different obligations on the City.
The URA governs the processes and procedures which the City and the Finance Department must follow
to minimize the burden placed on low- and moderate -income tenants, property owners, and business
owners who must move (either temporarily or permanently) as the result of a project funded in whole or in
part by the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs. The URA applies to:
• Displacement that results from acquisition, demolition, or rehabilitation for HUD -assisted projects
carried out by public agencies, nonprofit organizations, private developers, or others;
• Real property acquisition for HUD -assisted projects (whether publicly or privately undertaken);
• Creation of a permanent easement or right of way for HUD -assisted projects (whether publicly or
privately undertaken); and
• Work on private property during the construction of a HUD -assisted project even if the activity is
temporary.
2. What is Displacement?
Displacement occurs when a person moves as a direct result of federally assisted acquisition, demolition,
conversion, or rehabilitation activities, because they are:
• Required to move; or
• Not offered a decent, safe, sanitary and affordable unit in the project; or
• Treated "unreasonably" as part of a permanent or temporary move.
A person may also be considered displaced if the necessary notices are not given or provided in a timely
manner and the person moves for any reason.
3. What is a Displaced Person?
The term displaced person means any person that moves from real property or moves his or her personal
property from real property permanently as a direct result of one or more of the following activities:
• Acquisition of, written notice of intent to acquire, or initiation of negotiations to acquire such real
property, in whole or in part, for a project; and
• Rehabilitation or demolition of such real property for a project; and
• Rehabilitation, demolition, or acquisition (or written notice of intent) of all or a part of other real
property on which the person conducts a business or farm operation, for a project.
The City offers advisory and financial assistance to eligible tenants (or homeowners) who meet the above
definition.
4. Persons Not Eligible for Assistance
A person is not eligible for relocation assistance under the provisions of the URA if any of the following
occurs:
• The person was evicted for serious or repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the lease
or occupancy agreement, violation of applicable Federal, State, or local law, or other good cause.
However, if the person was evicted only to avoid the application of URA, then that person is
considered displaced and is eligible for assistance;
• The person has no legal right to occupy the property under State or local law;
• The City determines that the person occupied the property to obtain relocation assistance and the
HUD Field Office concurs in that determination;
• The person is a tenant -occupant that moved into the property after a certain date, specified in the
applicable program regulation, and, before leasing and occupying the property, the City or its
subgrantee provided the tenant -occupant written notice of the application for assistance, the
project's impact on the person, and the fact that they would not qualify as a "displaced person"
because of the project;
• The person is a tenant -occupant of a substandard dwelling that is acquired or a tenant -occupant of
a dwelling unit to which emergency repairs are undertaken and the HUD field office concurs that:
o Such repairs or acquisition will benefit the tenant;
o Bringing the unit up to a safe, decent, and sanitary condition is not feasible;
o The tenant's new rent and average estimated monthly utility costs will not exceed the
greater of: the old rent/utility costs or 30 percent of gross household income; and
o The project will not impose any unreasonable change in the character or use of the property.
• The person is an owner -occupant of the property who moves because of an arm's length
acquisition;
• The City or its subgrantee notifies the person that they will not displace them for the project; and
• The person retains the right of use and occupancy of the real property for life following the
acquisition.
The City determines that the person is not displaced as a direct result of the acquisition, rehabilitation, or
demolition for the project and the HUD field office concurs in the determination.
5. Minimizing Displacement
The City will take reasonable steps to minimize displacement occurring as a result of its CDBG, HOME
and ESG activities. This means that the City will:
• Consider if displacement will occur as part of funding decisions and project feasibility
determinations;
• Assure, whenever possible that occupants of buildings to be rehabilitated are offered an
opportunity to return;
• Plan substantial rehabilitation projects in "stages" to minimize displacement; and
• Meet all HUD notification requirements so that affected persons do not move because they
have not been informed about project plans and their rights.
6. Anti -Displacement Policy
11 1 F _
The City seeks to minimize, to the greatest extent feasible, the displacement, whether permanently or
temporarily, of persons (families, individuals, businesses, nonprofit organizations, or farms) from projects
funded with CDBG, HOME or ESG involving single- or multi -family rehabilitation, acquisition, commercial
rehabilitation, demolition, economic development, or capital improvement activities.
Projects that the City deems beneficial but that may cause displacement may be recommended and
approved for funding only if the City or its subgrantee demonstrates that such displacement is necessary
and vital to the project and that they take efforts to reduce the number of persons displaced. Further, they
must clearly demonstrate that the goals and anticipated accomplishments of a project outweigh the
adverse effects of displacement imposed on persons who must relocate.
7. Displacement Assistance
Consistent with the goals and objectives of the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs, the City will take all
reasonable steps necessary to minimize displacement of persons, even temporarily. If displacement
occurs, the City will provide relocation assistance to all persons directly, involuntarily, and permanently
displaced according to HUD regulations.
If the City temporarily displaces a low- or moderate -income household, that household becomes eligible
for certain relocation payments. The assistance applies to those persons residing in the residence at the
time the application is processed and is based on the following procedures:
• If the structure and its occupants are determined eligible for temporary relocation assistance, the
owner -occupants and tenants are eligible for the actual reasonable cost (based on fair market rent) of
temporary lodging facilities until the structure is determined habitable by the City's Building Official;
• The City must approve housing and the Lessor and Lessee must sign a rent agreement before move -
in. Housing must be comparable functionally to the displacement dwelling and decent, safe, and
sanitary. This does not mean that the housing must be in comparable size. The term "functionally
equivalent" means that it performs the same function, has the same principal features present, and can
contribute to a comparable style of living. Approved lodging accommodations include apartments and
houses. The City does not reimburse "rental expenses" for living with a friend or family member;
• Either the City will provide the owner -occupants and tenants a direct payment for moving expenses (to
and from temporary housing) and storage costs, or the City will arrange moving and storage of furniture
with a moving company. If the City makes a direct payment, complete documentation and receipts are
necessary to process claims when storage costs exceed the amount assumed by the direct payment;
• Damage deposits, utility hookups, telephone hookups and insurance costs are not eligible for
reimbursement; and
• The City may pay the cost of relocation assistance from Federal funds or funds available from other
sources.
8. One -For -One Replacement Dwelling Units
The City will generally avoid awarding funds for activities resulting in displacement. However, should the
City fund an activity, specific documentation is required to show the replacement of all occupied and vacant
dwelling units demolished or converted to another use. The City will assure that relocation assistance is
provided as described in 24 CFR 570.606(b)(2).
Before obligating or expending funds that will directly result in such demolition or conversion, the City will
make public and submit to the HUD field office the following information in writing:
• A description of the proposed assisted activity;
• The general location on a map and approximate number of dwelling units by size (number of bedrooms)
that will be demolished or converted to a use other than as low- and moderate -income units;
A time schedule for the commencement and completion of the demolition or conversion;
• The general location on a map and approximate number of dwelling units by size (number of bedrooms)
that will be provided as replacement units;
• The source of funding and a time schedule for the provision of replacement dwelling units; or
• The basis for concluding that each replacement dwelling unit will remain a low- and moderate -income
unit for at least ten years from the date of initial occupancy.
Consistent with the goals and objectives of the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs, the City will take all
reasonable steps necessary to minimize displacement of persons from their homes. The City will avoid
funding projects that cause displacement of persons or businesses and will avoid funding any project that
involves the conversion of low- and moderate -income housing to non-residential purposes.
9. Decent, Safe and Sanitary Dwelling
The basic definition is found at 49 CFR 24.2(1). The term decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling means a
dwelling that meets the following standards and any other housing and occupancy codes that are
applicable. It will:
• Be structurally sound, weather tight, and in good repair;
• Contain a safe electrical wiring system adequate for lighting, and other devices;
• Contain a safe heating system capable of sustaining a healthful temperature for the displaced person;
• Be adequate to accommodate the displaced person. There will be a separate, well lit, ventilated
bathroom that provides privacy to the user and contains a toilet, sink, and a bathtub or shower, all in
good working order and properly connected to appropriate sources of water and to a sewage drainage
system. There should be a kitchen area that contains a fully usable sink, properly connected to hot and
cold water and to a sewage drainage system, and adequate space and utility service connections for
a stove and refrigerator;
• Contain unobstructed egress to safe, open space at ground level;
• For a mobility -impaired person, be free of any barriers that would preclude reasonable ingress, egress,
or use of the dwelling by such person. This requirement will be satisfied if the displaced person elects
to relocate to a dwelling that they select, and the displaced person determines that they have
reasonable ingress, egress, and the use of the dwelling; and
• Comply with lead -based paint requirements of 24 CFR Part 35.
REAL PROPERTY POLICIES
The City and its CDBG, subrecipients must follow specific guidelines regarding the acquisition and use of
real property funded in whole or in part with CDBG funds.
1. Use of Real Property
The following standards apply to real property within the recipient's control and acquired or improved, in
whole or in part, using CDBG funds. These standards will apply from the date funds are first spent for the
property until five years after the project is audited and closed.
A recipient may not change the use of any such property (including the beneficiaries of such use) from that
for which the acquisition or improvement was made unless the recipient gives affected citizens reasonable
notice of, and opportunity to comment on, any such proposed change, and either:
• The use of such property qualifies as meeting a national objective and is not a building for the
general conduct of government;
• The requirements in the paragraph below are met;
• If the recipient determines, after consultation with affected citizens, that it is appropriate to
change the use of property to a use that does not qualify under the above paragraph, it may
retain or dispose of the property. The City CDBG, HOME, and ESG programs must be
reimbursed in the amount of the current fair market value of the property less any portion
13
attributable to expenditures of non-federal funds for the acquisition of and improvements to the
property;
If the change of use occurs within five years of the project being audited and closed, income
from the disposition of the real property will be returned to the City CDBG programs; and
Following the reimbursement of the federal program pursuant to the above paragraph of this
section, the property is no longer subject to any federal requirements.
2. Real Property Acquisition
All real property acquisition activities described in this section and funded in whole or in part with CDBG,
HOME, and ESG funds and all real property that must be acquired for an activity assisted with Federal
funds, regardless of the actual funding source for the acquisition, are subject to the URA (as amended).
3. What is Real Property Acquisition?
Real property acquisition is any acquisition by purchase, lease, donation, or otherwise, including the
acquisition of such interests as rights -of -way and permanent easements.
HUD Handbook 1378 and 49 CFR Part 24 currently contains such regulations. These regulations detail a
standard procedure for acquiring property and methods of determining a purchase price and outline other
documents that must be provided to the City before disbursement of funds. These regulations further
require the applicant to provide relocation payments and assistance to any business or residential
occupant of the property whom the acquisition will displace.
4. Eligible Activities
The City or its sub -grantee may acquire real property for a project using CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds
where the proposed use of the acquired property will be an activity that the City can demonstrate as
beneficial to low- and moderate -income persons.
5. Environmental Review Process (24 CFR Part 58)
HUD requires that all real property acquisition projects be reviewed before the commitment of Federal
funds to assess the impact of a project on the environment. The City will undertake this review process.
The applicant should be aware, however, that this review process may delay the date by which CDBG
funds may be available and, in case of serious adverse environmental impacts, may effectively stop a
project.
14 I
Appendix A
City of Temecula
Map of Low- to Moderate -Income Areas
Citv of Temecula
CDBG - LOW AND MODERATE INCOME AREA MAP
2010 CENSUS AREAS As d July 1, 2u14)
LEGEND
-••� CITYBOUNDARY
LOW AND MODERAI t INCOME BLOCK GROUPS
CENSUS TRACK
BLOCK GROUP
15
Appendix B
CDBG and AFH/AI Notification List of
Persons or Organizations
Any person or organization may be added to this list (or deleted) upon request.
Please contact Lynn Kelly -Lehner, Principal Management Analyst
Lynn.Lehner@TemeculaCA.gov or 951-694-6400
Agency
Type
Amcal Housing
Affordable Housing
Assistance League of Temecula
Valley
Youth
Atria Senior Living
Seniors
Autism Society Inland Empire
Persons with Special Needs
Boys and Girls Club of Southwest
County
Youth Services
Bridge Housing
Affordable Housing
Building Industry Association
Builders
California Apartment Association
Inland Empire
Rental Property
Cameron Historical Building
Affordable Housing
Canine Support Teams
Persons with Disabilities
Catholic Charities
Faith based
Circle of Care Ministries
Food Bank
City of Murrieta
Adjacent City
City of Temecula Departments
City government
Coachella Valley Housing Coalition
Affordable Housing
Community Access
Persons with Disabilities
Community Mission of Hope
Homeless provider
16
Comprehensive Autism Center
Persons with Disabilities
County of Riverside Department of
Social Services
Social Services
S
County of Riverside Economic
Local Government
Development Agency
County of Riverside Health
Health Services
Department
County of Riverside Behavioral
Mental Health
Health Department
Court Appointed Special Advocate
Youth Services
of Riverside County
Creekside Senior Apartments
Senior Housing
Desert AIDS
AIDS
Economic Development of
Economic Development
Southwest California
S
Fair Housing Counsel of Riverside
Fair Housing
County, Inc.
C
Front Street Plaza
Affordable Housing
Go Bananas
Persons with Special Needs
GRID Alternatives
Affordable Housing
Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley
Affordable Housing
Heritage Mobile Home Estates
Affordable Housing
Hitzke Consulting
Affordable Housing
Hospice of the Valleys
Healthcare
Housing Authority of the County
Public Housing Authority
of Riverside
Hugs Foster Family Agency
Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Iglesia Bautista del Valle de
Faith Based
Temecula
Inland Regional Center
Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Jamboree Housing
Affordable Housing
Jesus Love Church
Faith Based
17 1 F r-
John Stewart Company
Affordable Housing
Ken Follis
Business Community
League of Women Voters
Community based
Legacy Ridge
Persons with Developmental Disabilities
Love of Christ Fellowship Church
Faith Based
Madera Vista Apartments
Affordable Housing
Margarita Summit Apartments
Affordable Housing
Michelle's Place
Healthcare
Mission Village Apartments
Affordable Housing
Morning Ridge Apartments
Affordable Housing
Mt. San Jacinto College
Education
NAACP
Protected Class
Nu -Way International Christian
Ministries
Faith Based
Oak Tree Apartments
Affordable Housing
Operation School Bell
Youth Services
Our Nicholas Foundation
Persons with Special Needs
Path of Life Ministries
Homeless provider
Pechanga Casino
Employer
Portola Terrace Apartments
Affordable Housing
Project Touch
Homeless Provider
Rancho California Apartments
Affordable Housing
Rancho Community Church
Faith Based
Rancho Creek Apartments
Affordable Housing
18
Rancho Damacitas
Foster Youth
Rancho en Espanol
Faith Based
Rancho West Apartments
Affordable Housing
Renee Jennex Small Family
Affordable Housing
Riverbank Village Apartments
Rental Property
Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center
Domestic Violence
Riverside City and County CoC
Homeless Provider
Riverside County Office on Aging
Senior Services
Riverside County Sheriff's
Department
Public Safety
Riverside County Transit Agency
Transportation
Riverside County Veteran Services
Veterans
Rochelle Sherman Small Family
Group Home
Rose Again Foundation
Foster Youth
SAFE Alternatives for Everyone
Domestic Violence
Safety Research Associates
Special Needs/Senior Housing
Senior Care Referral Specialists
Senior Services
Senior Citizens Service Center
Food Bank
Food Bank
SMURF
Youth Services
Solari Enterprises
Affordable Property Management
Southwest Riverside County
Association of Realtors
Housing
St. Catherine's Catholic Church
Faith Based
State Council on Developmental
Disabilities
Persons with Developmental Disabilities
TEAM Evangelical Assistance
Ministries
Food Bank
19 1 F --
Temecula Convention and Visitors
Business Community
Bureau
Temecula Murrieta Rescue
Homeless provider
Mission
Temecula Reflection Townhouses
Affordable Housing
Temecula Valley Chamber of
Business Community
Commerce
Temecula Valley Historical Society
Historic Preservation
Temecula Valley Hospital
Health Services
Temecula Valley Therapy
Persons with Disabilities
Temecula Valley Unified School
Education
District
Temecula Valley Unified School
District —Adult Transition Program
Education
Temecula Valley Winegrowers
Employer
Association
The Center for Life Change
Addictive Recovery
US Vets Initiative
Veterans
VA Loam Linda Healthcare
Healthcare
Vintage View Apartments
Affordable Housing
Voice of Children
Youth Services
Warehouse at Creekside
Affordable Housing
Apartments
Wells Fargo
Business Community
Western Riverside Council of
Regional Government
Governments
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SUBSTANTIAL
AMENDMENT TO THE 2019-20 COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ANNUAL ACTION
PLAN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does
hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. The City of Temecula has participated directly within the federal Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as an entitlement jurisdiction for Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds since July 1, 2012;
B. The City of Temecula has prepared all documents, notices, and forms required by
HUD for participation in the CDBG Program by entitlement jurisdictions;
C. On June 28, 2016, the City Council adopted the updated Citizen Participation Plan
that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of
its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any
substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds;
D. The Citizen Participation Plan included policies and procedures for amending
Annual Action Plans where CDBG-funded activities may be added or deleted, and funding for
activities may be increased;
E. On March 27, 2020, Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
(CARES Act), Public Law 116-136, was signed into law;
F. The CARES Act distributed an additional allocation of CDBG funds, known as
CDBG-CV funds, to entitlement jurisdictions, for prevention and response to the COVID-19
pandemic;
G. The City anticipates receiving an $329,152 allocation of CDBG-CV funds for
COVID-19 response;
H. On June 9, 2020, the City Council was presented with an updated Citizen
Participation Plan, pursuant to the requirements of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic
Security Act (CARES), Public Law 116-136;
I. It was determined that the changes for activities listed in Exhibit A required a
substantial amendment in accordance with the City's adopted Citizen Participation Plan;
J. The proposed Substantial Amendment was available for comment between June
4, 2020 and June 9, 2020;
K. The Substantial Amendment was presented to the City Council at a public hearing
held on June 9, 2020;
L. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the Substantial Amendment on
June 9, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to
this matter.
M. At the conclusion of the City Council hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the City Council approved the Substantial Amendment, subject to and based upon the
findings set forth hereunder.
N. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council, in approving the Plan hereby finds,
determines and declares that:
A. Pursuant to Title 24, Housing and Urban Development, of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Subtitle A Office of the Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Part 91 Consolidated Submissions For Community Planning And Development
Programs (24 CFR Part 91) each entitlement jurisdiction shall amend its approved Annual
Action plan whenever it makes a change in the purpose, scope, location or beneficiaries of an
activity and if there is an increase by $50,000 or 25% of the activity's original budget..
B. Pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES),
Public Law 116-136, which was signed on March 27, 2020, each entitlement jurisdiction shall
amend its approved Annual Action Plan to demonstrate the proposed plan for a disaster recovery
grant, or supplemental appropriation such as Community Development Block Grant -CV
(CDBG-CV) funding.
Section 3. Environmental Findings. The proposed action on the Substantial
Amendment is exempt from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) pursuant to the
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and specifically 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1)
because the Substantial Amendment is a resource identification study and the development of
plans and strategies for the prioritization and funding of proposed programs through CDBG and
the proposed action involves the feasibility and planning studies to determine prioritization and
CDBG funding to begin the development of certain projects. The potential projects discussed in
the proposed actions that might involve physical activity have been reviewed under NEPA or the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of the development of those projects. The
proposed action is also exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and
15378(b)(4).
Section 4. Approvals.
A. The City Council hereby approves the Substantial Amendment as set forth as
Exhibit A attached hereto, and any and all other documents deemed necessary by HUD to obtain
the CDBG-CV allocation of the federal CDBG funds and authorizes and directs the City
Manager, or his designee, to serve as the Certifying Officer for all environmental review
procedures associated with the various CDBG projects, and Certifying Officer for the purpose of
signing correspondence, agreements, and other required documents.
B. The City Council hereby approves the reprogram of the funds as set forth in
Exhibit A.
Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
Substantial Amendment
Amending 2019-20 Action Plan to Incorporate CDBG-CV Funding
Executive Summary (AP-05)
As authorized by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), enacted on March 27, 2020, the City of
Temecula received a special CDBG allocation (CDBG-CV) of $329,152. The funding authorized under the CARES Act allows for
certain provisions and flexibilities to enable grantees to effectively and efficiently utilize the funding to respond to and address the
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
This substantial amendment incorporates the CARES Act funding into this Action Plan and expands the following Consolidated Plan
goal to specifically target the impact of COVID-19.
• Small business creation and expansion including job creation and retention
HUD authorized an expedited public review and comment period of five (5) days for this amendment to enable the efficient allocation
and use of these resources.
Process Section
Sort
Mode of
Target of
Summary of Response /
Summary of
Summary of
URL
Order
Outreach
Outreach
attendance
Comments
comments not
Received
accepted/ received
6
Newspaper
Minorities
Notice of the 5-day public
Insert any
None
http://tmecula
ca.gov/CDBG
Ad
Persons w/
review and comment period for
comments
Disabilities
the draft 2019-20 Annual Action
received.
Plan was published in the San
Non -English
Diego Union Tribune. The public
Speaking -
notice invited interested residents
Specify
to review the draft document and
other
to provide written comments at
language:
the City of Temecula
Spanish
Community Development
Department, City of Temecula
Non-
City Clerk's Office, or online at
targeted/
the CDBG website. Residents are
broad
invited to a virtual public hearing
community
to provide written comments
before the Temecula City
Council on June 9, 2020 at 7:00
p.m.
7
Public
Non-
Public hearing for the draft 2019-
Insert any
None
Not applicable.
Hearing
targeted/bro
20 Amendment to the Annual
comments
ad
Action Plan to be held before the
received.
community
Temecula City Council on June
9, 2020.
Expected Resources (AP-15)
Program
Source of funds
Use of Funds
CDBG Allocation
Narrative Description
CDBG-CV
Public -Federal
CDBG activities to
$329,152
CARES Act allocation of
address COVID-19
CDBG to address COVID-
19
Annual Goals (AP-20)
Sort
Start
End
Geographic
Needs
Goal Outcome
Goal Name
Category
Funding
Order
Year
Year
Area
Addressed
Indicator
Economic
Create or retain
9
Business Retention
2019
2021
Citywide
jobs
$329,152
33
Development
9
Goal Name
Small business creation and expansion including job creation and retention
Goal
Provide direct relief to energize Temecula's local economic backbone, retain jobs, especially those held by low- and
Description
moderate -income residents, and to stabilize local businesses. Temecula Assist Program has two funding tracks; this
program falls under the Rent Recovery and Job Retention Track. The total funding for the Rent Recovery and Job
Retention Track is $329,152, made available through CDBG funds. The maximum grant request is $10,000 per
business.
Projects (AP-35)
#
Project Name
9
Small Business Creation and Expansion including Job Creation and Retention
8
Project Name
Temecula Assist
Target Area
Citywide
Goals Supported
Job Creation and Retention
Needs Addressed
Improve Neighborhoods, Public Facilities and Infrastructure
Funding
CDBG: $329,152
Description
Provide direct relief to energize Temecula's local economic
backbone, retain jobs, especially those held by low- and
moderate -income residents, and to stabilize local businesses.
Target Date
9/30/2022
Estimate the number
Create or retain at least 33 low- and moderate -income jobs in
and type of families
businesses adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
that will benefit from
the proposed activities
Location Description
Citywide
Planned Activities
Temecula Assist (33 jobs): $329,152
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
AND AVAILABILITY FOR REVIEW OF
DRAFT SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE 2019-2020 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
AND AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Temecula has prepared draft Substantial Amendment No. 2 to the
2019-2020 Annual Action Plan to address an increase in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
funds provided under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). The CARES Act
also requires the City to revise its Citizen Participation Plan. The review period for public review period has been
shortened to five days to address the urgency created by the pandemic. The public review and comment period
begins on June 5, 2020 and runs through June 9, 2020.
PLACE OF HEARING: This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means
consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19
pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at
temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the meeting on
television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber.
DATE OF HEARING: June 9, 2020 TIME OF HEARING: 7:00 p.m.
DRAFT 2019-2020 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT NO.2
The One -Year Action Plan sets forth specific activities to be funded through the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Program. The City proposes the following addition to the activities included in the 2019-2020
Action Plan:
Temecula Assist: To provide direct relief to businesses, retain jobs, especially those held by low- and moderate -
income residents. Funding: $329,152.
The City also proposes to modify its Citizen Participation Plan to shorten citizen review periods so that the City
can quickly address needs created by local disasters, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the City Council shall be filed within the time required by, and
controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action or
proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the City Council,
shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at,
or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this public hearing, please
submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the public hearing by the City Clerk. Email comments must
be submitted to the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Electronic comments for this public hearing may
only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.
Due to the closure of the library and other city buildings and facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the agenda
packet is only viewable on the City's website at https://temeculaca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. For questions
concerning the Substantial Amendment or Citizen Participation Plan, please contact Lynn Kelly -Lehner at (951)
506-5172.
ACCESSIBILITY TO MEETINGS AND DOCUMENTS: It is the objective of the City to comply with Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 and the
ADA Amendment Act of 2008, the Fair Housing Act, and the Architectural Barriers Act in all respects. If you
require public documents in an accessible format, the City will make reasonable efforts to accommodate your
request. If you require a disability -related accommodation to attend or participate in a hearing or meeting,
including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the City Clerk's Office at least 48 hours prior to the meeting
at (951) 694-6444.
Item No. 10
CITY OF TEMECULA / TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT / SARDA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/Board of Directors
FROM: Aaron Adams, City Manager/General Manager/Executive Director
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Approve Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Adopt
Fiscal Year 2020-21 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula,
the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to
the Redevelopment Agency (SARDA)
PREPARED BY: Jennifer Hennessy, Finance Director/Treasurer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council/Board of Directors adopt resolutions entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-25 AND ADOPTING
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-
21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING
CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS,
ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF THE
GENERAL MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT
SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2021-25,
ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21, ADOPTING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND
ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN
APPROPRIATIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING
CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS,
ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY
MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT
AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED
POSITIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
BACKGROUND: At its May 21, 2020 Budget Workshop, the City Council was presented the
Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program and 2019-20 CIP and Annual
Operating Budgets for the City, Temecula Community Services District (TCSD), and the
Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency (SARDA).
At this workshop, the Council recommended bringing forward the Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP and
Proposed Budgets in their entirety. Council provided tacit approval for the City Manager to launch
the Temecula Assist: A Small Business Emergency Relief Grant program utilizing $171,000 of
available General Fund dollars and Council discretionary funds to complement $329,000 in
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG-CV) funding, related to the COVID-19 economic
relief package.
For Council consideration, attached is a list of budgetary changes to amend Fiscal Year 2019-20
and Proposed Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budgets (Exhibit A).
Additionally, the following adjustments to the Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital
Improvement Program are included:
• Ynez Road Improvements — shift out $1,800,000 in DIF-Streets funding from FY2021-22
to FY2024-25, as construction on this project will not occur until all funding is secured.
• Local Roadway Plan — add new project to program grant funding received from
CalTrans ($72,000, plus $18,000 in Measure S funds) to develop a citywide data -driven
traffic safety plan.
• Parks Improvement Program —shift forward $125,000 in Measure S funding from FY2021-
22 to FY2020-21 to allow for park improvements next fiscal year.
The attached Transmittal Letter summarizes the highlights of the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Proposed
Annual Operating Budget and Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program documents.
FISCAL IMPACT: The specific fiscal impacts by fund are noted in the attached
Transmittal Letter and Exhibit A.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit A — Summary of Budget Adjustments
2. Exhibit A — CIP Budget Adjustments
3. Transmittal Letter
4. Resolution - Approving the CIP for Fiscal Years 2021-25 and
Adopting the CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2020-21
5. Resolution - Adopting the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating
Budget
6. Resolution - Adopting the Fiscal Year 2020-21 TCSD
Preliminary Annual Operating Budget
7. Resolution — Approving the budget for SARDA CIP Fiscal Years
2021-25, Adopting the CIP budget for Fiscal Year 2020-21, and
Adopting the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget
8. Resolution - Schedule Of Authorized Positions
9. Salary Schedule
10. Schedule of Authorized Positions
11. Resolution - Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2020-21
12. Gann Limit
EXHIBIT A
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
Summary of Adjustments to the
Proposed FY19-20 and FY20-21 Annual Operating Budget
Adopted
Account Account Description
Proposed Budget
Annual Operating Budget
To align with the Animal Control Adopted Budget, approved by the SCFA Board on May
001.172.999.5454
Animal Shelter Operations
$239,300
$16,218
$255,518
21, 2020
Shift forward funding for the Parks Improvement Program CIP project ($125,000) and
Operating Transfer Out to CIP
allocate funding for the Local Roadway Safety Plan CIP project to supplement CalTrans
002.199.999.5901
(from Measure S)
$4,945,872
$143,000
$5,088,872
Grant ($18,000)
f
Adk
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
YNEZ ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Circulation Project
Project Description: This project includes widening Ynez Road, from Rancho
Vista Road to La Paz Street, to two lanes in each direction, and the
completion of missing segments of curb & gutter, sidewalk, landscaped
medians, street lights and modify the traffic signal at Santiago Road.
Benefit: This project improves traffic circulation by widening an important
arterial road in this part of the City.
Core Value: Transportation Mobility and Connectivity
Project Status: The project will be completed by Fiscal Year2021-22.
Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.265.999.535 / PW17-17
Level: II
City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2021-25
Capital Improvement Program
Project Cost:
Prior Years
Actuals
2020-21
2019-20 Adopted 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25
Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected
Total Project
Cost
Administration
38,129
456,871
495,000
Construction
5,055,000
5,055,000
Construction Engineering
165,000
165,000
Design & Environmental
121,747
490,019 50,000
661,766
MSHCP
165,000 30,000
195,000
Total Expenditures
159,876
1,111,890 5,300,000
6,571,766
Source of Funds:
DIF-Street Improvements
Unspecified
619,451
652,315 1,800,000
3,500,000
3,071,766
3,500,000
Total Funding
619,451
652,315 5,300,000
6,571,766
Future Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Total Operating Costs
Alk
c7"
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Infrastructure Project
Project Description: This project is to develop a Local Roadway Safety Plan
(LRSP) in support of a statewide data -driven traffic safety plan to reduce
traffic accident fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The
preparation of an LRSP creates a framework to systematically identify and
analyze safety problems and recommend safety improvements.
Benefit: The project will provide a prioritized list of improvements and
actions that can demonstrate a defined need and contribute to a proactive
approach for addressing local safety needs.
Core Value: Transportation Mobility and Connectivity
Project Status: This project is estimated to be complete on FY2020-21.
Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.265.999.NEW
Level: I
City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2021-25
Capital Improvement Program
Alk
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
2020-21
Prior Years
2019-20 Adopted 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25
Total Project
Project Cost:
Actuals
Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected
Cost
Administration
5,000
5,000
Design & Environmental
85,000
85,000
Total Expenditures
90,000
90,000
Source of Funds:
Grants
Measure S
72,000
18,000
72,000
18,000
Total Funding
90,000
90,000
Future Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Total Operating Costs
Notes :
1. (1) Grant source: CalTrans Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP)
Alk
c7"
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Parks/Recreation Project
Project Description: This project facilitates rehabilitation and improvement
projects at various City parks The rehabilitation and improvement projects
could include, but are not limited to, parking lot repairs and resurfacing,
landscape medians, raised and cracked concrete sidewalk replacement,
fencing repair and replacement, landscaping and irrigation system efficiency
upgrades, lighting system repairs and efficiency upgrades, on -site drainage
improvements and other similar projects.
Benefit: This project protects the City's vast investment in parks and open
space facilities.
Core Value: Healthy and Livable City
Project Status: A priority list of rehabilitation projects has been developed.
Rehabilitations are completed on an on -going basis.
Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.290.999.130
Level: I
City of Temecula
Fiscal Years 2021-25
Capital Improvement Program
2020-21
Prior Years
2019-20
Adopted
2021-22 2022-23
2023-24 2024-25
Total Project
Project Cost:
Actuals
Adjusted
Budget
Projected Projected
Projected Projected
Cost
Administration
21,400
10,000
10,000
20,000
61,400
Construction
1,684,036
254,565
115,000
115,000
230,000
2,398,601
Total Expenditures
1 1,705,4351
254,565
125,000
125,000 -
250,000
2,460,000
Source of Funds:
D I F-Quimby
250,000
250,000
General Fund
1,003,059
1,003,059
Measure S
400,000
250,000 125,000 125,000 250,000
1,150,000
Reimbursements
56,941
56,941
Total Funding
i 1,710,000
250,000 125,000 125,000 - 250,000
2,460,000
Future Operating & Maintenance Costs:
Total Operating Costs
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
June 9, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
I am pleased to submit the Proposed Annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year 2020-21. This budget
document was developed to serve as the financial plan for the City's programs and policies. It reflects the
resources necessary to meet the goals, programs, and service priorities that the City Council is committed
to providing its citizens.
The Fiscal Year 2020-21 Proposed Annual Operating Budget has been developed after a considerable
review process. Departmental budget submittals were prepared and reviewed by line item in connection
with projected revenues. Detailed performance objectives and accountability measures were developed
consistent with the City's Quality of Life Master Plan. Five-year revenue and expenditure projections were
developed to identify the future impacts of proposed staffing and program changes, as well as the impact
of proposed capital improvement projects. The resulting budget is realistic and balanced, and continues
to provide quality services to the community while effectively utilizing available resources.
Given the unprecedented circumstances brought on by the COVID-19 novel coronavirus pandemic and
the associated stay-at-home orders, the City's revenue sources have been significantly impacted, as you
will read below. As such, a comprehensive review and analysis of all Operating and Capital expenditures
has been completed and the Proposed Annual Operating and Capital Budgets reflect the necessary
reductions to maintain fiscal solvency over the ensuing five-year forecast period. It is anticipated that the
Operating and Capital budget projections will be revisited with the City Council in the October time -frame,
as staff learns more information regarding the true impact of the pandemic.
CITY OF TEMECULA PROFILE
The City of Temecula is a dynamic community comprised of approximately 111,970 citizens. The City
maintains 41 parks on 330 developed acres throughout the community, which provide recreation
opportunities for both the citizens of Temecula, as well as surrounding communities. Police and Fire
protection services are provided through contracts with Riverside County. The Temecula Valley Unified
School District provides 32 schools with 27,979 students at the kindergarten through 12th grade levels
within the City. The City of Temecula prides itself on its community focus and quality of life.
Temecula's residents enjoy one of the finest
lifestyles Southern California has to offer.
Environmental and residential factors create a
beautiful setting that attracts young, well-
educated families to upscale homes that are
relatively inexpensive by Southern California
standards. Geography contributes to the City's
population and retail growth from San Diego and
Orange Counties.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
w Annual Operating Budget
The i",�� o€ 4z4aer,�) .Gail
Temecula's leadership has approached economic growth from a qualitative standpoint, providing the City
with a favorable share of the region's higher paying and high technology career opportunities. The City's
average income levels are higher than the surrounding region, the educational performance of its young
people is above the State average, and Temecula has been recognized as one of Nation's safest cities.
ECONOMIC INDICATORS
The City of Temecula has experienced steady economic growth over the past year, as illustrated by the
indicators discussed below.
• Estimated Population: 111,970down 1.7%from 2019 (Source: State Department of Finance)
• Median Age: 35.5 years old, up 0.2 from 2019 (source: clariras36oReport— to-2-19)
• Number of Households: 36,203, up 0.5% from 2019 (source: claritas36oReport -to-2-19)
• Average Household Income: $128,557, up 10.4%from 2019 (source:claritas36oReport- to-2-19)
• March Median Home Price: $500,000, up 5% from March 2019 (source: Southwest Riverside county
Association of Realtors)
• Number of Jobs: 52,900, down 5.0% from 2019 (source: EDD)
• March Unemployment Rate: Temecula: 4.2% (up from 3% in March 2019),
Riverside County: 5.3%, CA: 5.6%, Nation: 4.4% (source: EDD & BLS)
As the pandemic's impact on the workforce continues, it is anticipated the unemployment rates will
continue to rise over the coming months.
IMPACTS OF STATE/COUNTY LEGISLATION
A number of legislative changes are being considered, which could have profound fiscal impacts on the
City, including:
➢ California State Governor Executive Order N-33-20 (COVID-19)
On March 19, 2020, the California State
COVID-19 Impact to City
Revenue Sources
Governor issued Executive Order N-33-
Mar-Jun'20
FY20-21
20, requiring a statewide Stay -at -Home
Sales Tax
(6,612,629)
(5,686,237)
order as a result of the rapidly spreading
Measure S Tax
(5,279,316)
(346,571)
COVID-19 coronavirus. Subsequent to
TCSD Program Revenue
(824,330)
this order, the Governor authorized
Transient Occupancy Tax
(816,822)
(570,441)
small business taxpayers to take
Gas Tax
(343,516)
(521,795)
advantage of a payment plan for sales
MeasureATax
(250,000)
(428,000)
tax payments, up to $50,000, applicable
Property Tax
(278,528)
(656,098)
to sales and use tax liabilities. The
RMRA Revenue
(137,869)
(322,472)
combination of these two orders, has
Other General Fund Revenue
(108,625)
{248,256}
had a significant impact on several City
revenue sources, as businesses have shut down, hotels have closed and tax -payers are required
to stay at home. The impacts of this global pandemic are still in the early stages, and will have
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
far-reaching economic impacts as time goes on. The ensuing Operating and Capital Budgets
reflect the anticipated revenue reductions and the corresponding expenditure budget reductions
necessary to balance all funds over the five-year forecast period.
➢ State of California Housing Bills
In 2017, 2018 and 2020, the State adopted numerous housing related bills designed to increase
the supply of housing in California, including the number of affordable homes.
While the City is eligible for some of the direct sources of funding to facilitate the production of
housing, including funding from SB 2, the Building Jobs and Homes Act, and other state sources.
It is anticipated that the City will be subject to a number of unfunded mandates as a result of the
passage of any number of the current and proposed housing related bills.
2020-21 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The City Council adopted the Temecula 2030 Quality of Life Master Plan (QLMP) in October 2011. The
QLMP defines the strategic priorities of Temecula's residents, leaders, and partners for the City's next
twenty years. It reflects the vision for the City's future, and commits the City to a performance based
process to accomplish those goals. This plan was developed by engaging residents, businesses, local
institutions and regional partners in an inclusive process.
The QLMP outlines six Core Values:
• Healthy and Livable City
• A Sustainable City
• Economic Prosperity
• Transportation Mobility and Connectivity
• A Safe and Prepared Community
• Accountable and Responsive City Government
In an effort to incorporate the QLMP into the City's budget process, City of Temecula Executive Staff met
at the outset of the budget process to update the Citywide Five -Year Goals based on the Core Values of
the Quality of Life Master Plan. These goals were then used by each Department to develop Short Term
Objectives for completion in the upcoming fiscal year, and are reflected in the Department Information
section of the budget document.
OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The budget document includes the operational objectives for completion in Fiscal Year 2020-21 and the
performance measures for evaluating the completion of those objectives. These objectives were
developed in a collaborative process with City staff in order to identify how each department can
contribute to the overall long term goals of the City. The objectives were then used by the departments
in order to identify and justify their Annual Operating Budget submittals.
The short term objectives are detailed by Department in the Departmental Information section of this
budget document. Each Department section also includes the objectives and performance measures
cross referenced by the City's Long -Term Goals and QLMP Core Value, along with significant
accomplishments, and a detail of the expenditure requests and personnel allocations which will be used
to meet the objectives.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
w a Annual Operating Budget
The HRAV� o€ 4z4aezn .Gansu*
6
GENERAL FUND ANALYSIS
The General Fund Forecast over the coming five years has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19
pandemic, with a decline in tax revenue of nearly $15 million in Fiscal Year 2019-20 alone. It is anticipated
that economic recovery will begin slowly in Fiscal Year 2020-21, as consumer confidence returns. For the
ensuing five-year period, the General Fund is balanced, with its Reserve for Economic Uncertainty fully -
funded in all five years, however a portion of the Secondary Reserve must be utilized to offset the loss in
revenue due to the pandemic.
As illustrated below, in response to the dramatic decline in General Fund Revenues, the usage of
Unassigned Fund Balance and Secondary Reserves are necessary in order to remain fiscally solvent
throughout the ensuing five-year period.
Ending Fund Balance for Fiscal Year
2020-21 is projected to be
$19,550,397. While the target level of
Reserves is 25% of Expenditures, or
$19,393,918 Reserves will fall slightly
short with a total $18,372,434, or
24% of Operating Expenditures. A
total of $377,961 of fund balance is
committed to cover the costs of a
Police Officer position funded by the
Pechanga Tribe, plus $800,000 is
assigned to future Capital
Improvement Projects.
General Fund 5-Year Projections
Fund Balance Trend
35,000,000
30,000
25,000
20,000,
15,000
10,000.
-no
".9
OP
L L L J I
FY12-13 4V73.1b FY1415 f115,16 fV16.11 FV12-18 4V18,19 FV1g 10 4V20,21 FYL122 4'2703 FV2' 24 4'14115
Fund Balance —Funded Reserve O Desired Reserve
General Fund Revenue Highlights
Fiscal Year 2019-20 General Fund Operating Revenue is projected to decrease by 12%, or $8.7 million,
from the prior fiscal year due to the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority of the
reduction is occurring in Sales Tax (18%, or $6.6 million) and Transient Occupancy Tax (19%, or $816,822).
Fiscal Year 2020-21 General Fund Operating Revenue is projected to increase 1.5%, or $971,090 over Fiscal
Year 2019-20, as the economy is expected to begin rebounding in the Fall of 2020. Although revenue
growth is projected, Operating Revenue remains $7.7 million below pre-COVID levels, creating an
increased reliance on Measure S transfers to augment General Fund Revenue. In addition to Measure S
funding 11 additional police officers, and staffing at Fire Station 95, as has occurred in prior years, an
additional $3 million transfer is required to supplement General Fund revenue due to the impact of the
pandemic. To balance the General Fund over the ensuing five-year period and maintain the Reserve for
Economic Uncertainty, an increased level of Measure S transfers to the General Fund will continue until
Sales Tax, and other revenue sources recover from the economic downturn.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
The Fiscal Year 2020-21 General Fund major revenue sources are summarized below:
• Sales Tax ($33,054,736) is projected to increase by 5.4% compared to the prior fiscal year as retail
establishments are allowed to reopen once the pandemic is contained.
• Property Tax ($8,379,137) is projected to decrease by 1.3%, due primarily to the anticipated
decline in home sales activity and supplemental property taxes. Because the City of Temecula
participates in the Teeter program with Riverside County, the City receives the full amount of
property taxes assessed as opposed to paid by the property owner. In the event of late payment,
the County receives all penalties and interest accrued on the delinquent tax payment.
• Franchise Fees ($3,381,908) are projected to increase 2.7% due to anticipated increases in utility
rates charged for electricity, gas, and cable services.
• Transient Occupancy Tax ($3,181,349) is projected to increase by 15.1%, as the hospitality sector
was heavily impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. With an anticipated rebounding of the
economy in the Fall of 2020 combined with the recovery campaign launched by the Temecula
visitors' bureau (Visit Temecula Valley), Transient Occupancy Tax revenue is expected to increase
as tourism and travel is permitted once again.
• Licenses, Permits & Service Charges ($3,913,915)
are projected to decrease by
26.1% due to less
development activity
projected compared to the
prior year, as the Roripaugh
Ranch, Phase II development
(Sommer's Bend) experienced
a high-level of permit activity
in FY2019-20.
• Intergovernmental Revenues
($8,800,736) are projected to
increase by 3.7% due to the
increases expected in Property
Tax In Lieu of Vehicle License Fees which is driven by property value assessments within the City.
• Operating Transfers In ($2,590,599) are projected to decrease by 4.4%. Transfers In represents
funds deposited into Special Revenue Funds that are transferred into the General Fund to cover
eligible expenditures. The Gas Tax Fund is anticipated to transfer $2,418,092 to be spent on street
and road maintenance, which is a decrease of 4.8% as a result of the decline in gasoline sales due
to the stay-at-home orders related to the pandemic. The Supplemental Law Enforcement Services
Fund is anticipated to transfer $172,507 to supplement the Police Department budget.
• Operating Transfers In - Measure S ($8,944,780) will continue to fund 11 Police Officers, staffing
for Fire Station No. 95 plus an additional $3 million to help offset the impact to General Fund
Operating Revenues.
General Fund Expenditure Highlights
To respond to the reductions in General Fund revenues, a thorough review of Departmental Operating
budgets was conducted as part of the Annual Operating Budget. Each Department prioritized their
operational needs and modified their requests accordingly. In addition to Departmental operating
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
reductions, a number of budgetary reduction measures are also reflected in the Fiscal Year 2020-21
Operating Budget, necessary to balance the General Fund, including:
• Deferral of adding Sworn Police officers, to maintain ratio to population growth
• Reduce contributions to the Workers' Compensation Fund, as adequate reserves exist in this fund
to address potential claims
• Eliminate all Departmental training budgets
• Defer hiring of 4 vacant positions
• Reduce additional contributions to Retiree Medical Trust and meet minimum payment level only
• Defer/reduce contributions to Asset Replacement Funds (i.e. Fleet, Technology, Facilities)
The largest expenditure of the General Fund is Public Safety, which has grown from 58% of total
expenditures in the prior fiscal year to 60% in Fiscal Year 2020-21, due to the reductions in the non -safety
departments. In accordance with the Measure S ballot language and City Council appropriation
guidelines, the City has invested heavily in Public Safety over the past several years and continues to hold
Public Safety as its highest priority. A total of $9.1 million, or 38%, of Measure S revenue is dedicated to
Public Safety expenditures for Fiscal Year 2020-21 including the funding of the following:
• Eleven Sworn Police Officers ($3.9 million)
• Fire Station No. 95 Staffing ($1.8 million)
• The operations and maintenance of the Citywide Surveillance Camera system ($260,000)
• An additional $3 million to augment General Fund Operating Revenue necessary to balance the
General Fund and preserve the Reserve for Economic Uncertainty
In addition to the ongoing
Measure S-funded Public Safety
expenditures, the Police
Department will maintain 112
sworn officers and the Fire
Department will provide four
firefighter personnel per engine
at all five Fire Stations.
General Fund Expenditures total 1s%
$77,575,676, which represents a Fire
13%
0.1% increase over the prior
Administrative �
fiscal year, inclusive of 13%
adjustments. The majority of the
increase is reflected in the two Public Safety departments, as noted below:
• Police ($36,239,386) is increasing by 7.8% over the prior year, due to a projected 6% increase
in the contract rates charged by the County to account for increased CalPERS pension costs
and labor increases resulting from union negotiations. The prior fiscal year expenditures
included a $550,000 reduction due to vacancies and a more favorable contract rate than
originally budgeted, creating a higher percentage increase in Fiscal Year 2020-21.
• Fire ($10,223,828) is decreasing by 0.6% due to the deferral of the contribution to the Fleet
Asset Management fund, slightly offset by the 1.5% anticipated increase in the contract rates
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
w Annual Operating Budget
The H��o€sa4aeu) "ii
*6060*7
charged by CalFire and Riverside County. The Total Fire Contract of $18.3 million is reduced
by the Structural Fire Tax Credit of $8.8 million.
• Non -Safety Departments ($29,924,934) which represents a 4.8%, or $1.5 million decrease
from the prior year, due to the necessary budget reduction measures as a result of the COVID-
19 pandemic's impact on General Fund revenues.
• Non -Departmental ($1,187,529) reflects a 29.4% decrease due to the reduction to the
amount deposited into the Retiree Medical Contribution. In prior years, the deposit
exceeded the required amount in order to improve the City's funded -status of this trust fund
and reduce future years' required contributions. For Fiscal Year 2020-21, the trust
contribution will match the required amount, as determined by an independent actuary.
Operating Transfers Out & One -Time Payments
This category of expenditures reflects funds that are transferred to the Debt Service Funds. A total of
$2,077,767 will be transferred to the Debt Service Fund for the annual Civic Center Lease payment, and
$555,808 for the Debt Service on the Margarita Recreation Center renovation.
Fund Balance & Reserves
As noted above, the Ending Fund Balance, as of June 30, 2021 is projected to be $19,550,395, with the
Reserve for Economic Uncertainty fully funded at $15,515,135, which represents 20% of General Fund
Expenditures. The Secondary Reserve will fall slightly below the target of 5% of Operating Expenditures,
with a balance of $2,857,299.
MEASURE S FUND
With the approval of a one -cent transactions and use tax measure in November 2016, the Measure S Fund
was established to account for this new revenue source and enhance budgetary accountability. Fiscal
Year 2020-21 Measure S revenue has also been
negatively impacted by the economic downturn
caused by the global pandemic. It is anticipated
that Measure S Revenue, in Fiscal Year 2019-20
will decline by nearly $5.3 million as a result of the
closures of retail establishments.
As mentioned previously, the General Fund's
reliance on Measure S will increase until Sales Tax
and other General Fund revenues rebound. As
such, the proportion of Measure S revenue
dedicated to maintain Public Safety and General
Services within the General Fund will be higher
than in prior years. Measure S Funds available for
Capital Improvement Program projects has
decreased as a result of the shift of funds to
balance the General Fund.
Measure S - FY20-21 Appropriations
$24,011,244
General
Services
$9,298,488
39%
Asset Mgmt
$500,000
2%
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
Measure S appropriations for Fiscal Year 2020-21 reflect the following:
Public Safety (38%)
The Proposed Budget includes $9,123,884 of Measure S funding dedicated to Public Safety, for the
continued funding of 11 Sworn Police Officers and Fire staffing for Fire Station No. 95 which opened
January 1, 2018. Additionally, Measure S will contribute $3 million to the General Fund to help offset the
reduction in Operating Revenues.
Asset Management/Investment (2%)
As noted in Council's appropriation guidelines for Measure S, ensuring adequate reserves are set -aside
for the future replacement of City -owned assets is critical to the long-term viability of the City's
operations. Over the past four years, a significant level of funding has been deposited in the City's Asset
Replacement Funds. However, due to the economic downturn, it is recommended that these annual
contributions be redirected to fund the operations of the General Fund during the downturn. The
Facilities Replacement Fund, however, has a smaller fund balance and therefore a $500,000 contribution
to this fund is included in the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget.
Capital Improvement Program (21%)
The Proposed Budget includes $5,088,872 of Measure S revenue allocated to fund 15 separate CIP
projects for Fiscal Year 2020.21. The influx on Measure S funding has allowed the City to leverage other
funding sources, such as Development Impact Fees and various Grant funds, to complete projects in a
more timely manner.
Major Projects for FY2020-21 include:
• Cherry Street Extension and Murrieta Creek Low -Flow Crossing - $424,300 to provide funding for
an extension of Cherry Street from Adams Avenue to Diaz Road.
• French Valley Parkway/1-15 Improvements -Phase II - $1,865,640 — to augment the $50 million
Federal INFRA grant to construct this highly anticipated project.
• Mary Phillips Senior Center Enhancement and Renovation - $30,000 to augment $400,000 in
CDBG funding to provide a renovation of the heavily utilized Senior Center.
• Ronald Reagan Sports Park Restroom Expansion and Renovation - $395,000 to complete the
construction of the restroom expansion and snack bar facility.
• Santa Gertrudis Creek Phase II — Margarita Under -Crossing - $382,464 to augment Senate Bill 1
funding for the design and construction of the under -crossing in Santa Gertrudis Creek at
Margarita Road.
• Traffic Signal Installation — Citywide - $375,000 to install or modify traffic signals throughout the
City.
General Services (39%)
The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has historically been funded with voter -approved
Measure C funding and program -related revenue. Measure S funding is used to augment Measure C, in
order to maintain the award -winning programs, activities and events TCSD provides to the citizenry.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
• TCSD Operations contribution - $8,297,243
• Library contribution - $847,181
• Service Level B — Residential Streetlights - $73,168
• Enhanced Custodial Services - $80,896
The Ending Fund Balance within the Measure S Fund is projected to be $4,182,723, which will carry -
forward to the ensuing fiscal year.
MAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Special Revenue Funds are used to account for activities paid for by taxes or other designated revenue
sources that have specific limitations on use according to law. The City has fifteen Special Revenue Funds.
The major Special Revenue funds are highlighted below.
Fund 100 - Gas Tax: Gas Tax revenue is projected to be $2,418,092, which reflects a decrease of 4.6% due
to reduced volumes of gasoline sales over the prior year, as a result of the stay-at-home orders related to
the COVID-19 pandemic. These funds are transferred to the General Fund to support street and road
maintenance.
Fund 102 — Road Maintenance Rehabilitation Account (RMRA): Per the Road Repair and Accountability
Act of 2017 (SB1-Beall), increased gas tax and vehicle registration fees were imposed to fund street and
road projects and other transportation uses Statewide. RMRA revenue is projected to be $1,827,342 for
FY2020-21, to be allocated to the Pavement Rehabilitation Capital Improvement Project.
Fund 103 — Street Maintenance Fund: This fund was established in FY2018-19 to accumulate resources
for the future replacement of streets and roads throughout the City. Funding for FY2020-21 has been
deferred as part of budget reduction efforts in response to the economic downturn caused by the COVID-
19 pandemic.
Fund 105 — NPDES In Lieu Fees Fund: This fund was established in FY2019-20 to account for the collection
of In Lieu fees associated with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Revenue is
received as private development subject to NPDES requirements occur. There is no revenue anticipated
to be received in FY2020-21.
Fund 106 — Jefferson Street In Lieu Fees Fund: This fund was established in FY2019-20 in conjunction
with the adoption of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan New Streets In Lieu Fee. Developers within the
Specific Plan who cannot build new streets will be charged the In Lieu Fee. For FY2020-21, a new hotel
development is anticipated to contribute $222,718 of In Lieu Fees into this fund.
Fund 120 — Development Impact Fees: DIF revenue is projected to be $4,755,870, which reflects an
increase of 20%. DIF revenue varies from year-to-year as it is based on anticipated development projects.
The majority of DIF Revenues are transferred to the CIP to fund capital projects.
Fund 125 — Public, Education & Government (PEG): PEG Fund revenues are received from local cable
operators for the sole purpose of supporting the access facilities within the City. PEG Revenues are
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
projected to be $220,219, which will be spent on various technology equipment used to support the
broadcast of City Council meetings and events. Expenditures for FY2020-21 are suspended, as a budget
reduction measure related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Fund 140 — Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): CDBG revenue is projected to be $559,063,
which reflects the reimbursement for operations and Capital projects expected to be completed during
the fiscal year.
Fund 165—Affordable Housing Fund: The Affordable Housing Fund reflects the housing -related activities
of the former Temecula Redevelopment Agency. Total Revenue for FY2020-21 of $340,100 includes the
State Department of Finance allocation of $250,000 designated for the administration of the wind down
of Redevelopment obligations. The fund received a $1.3 million one-time revenue in FY2019-20 as a result
of the refinancing of an affordable housing development project.
Fund 170 — Measure A: Measure A revenue is projected to be $2,818,800, which reflects a 6.1% decrease
from the prior year, due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This revenue is restricted
for use on local streets and roads, and is programmed to support street and road maintenance.
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Internal Service Funds are used to account for the funding of goods and services provided by one
department to other benefitting departments on a cost -reimbursement basis. Additionally, the City
maintains several Replacement Funds designed to accumulate resources for the future replacement of
City equipment, technology and facilities.
Fund 300 — Insurance: Projected expenses total $1,085,602, which covers the cost of administering the
City's liability and property insurance programs. The projected Fund Balance is $738,524, which exceeds
the desired balance of $450,000.
Fund 305 — Workers' Compensation: Projected expenses total $258,309, which covers the cost of
administering the City's self -insured Workers' Compensation program. The projected Fund Balance is
$1,862,227, which exceeds the desired balance of $1.5 million. As such, and for budget reduction
purposes, Workers' Compensation charges to departments was suspended for FY2020-21.
Fund 310 — Vehicles and Equipment: Projected expenses total $134,000 to replace a utility trailer for
Public Works and a Medic Squad for the Fire Department, as the existing equipment has reached the end
of their useful life. The projected Fund Balance is $3,285,627.
Fund 320 — Information Technology: Projected expenses total $4,448,202, which provides for the
management of the City's computer and telephone systems. The projected Fund Balance is $684,011.
Fund 325 — Technology Replacement: Projected expenses for FY2020-21 have been deferred, as part of
budget reduction measures related to the COVID-19 economic impact. The projected Fund Balance is
$827,755.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
Fund 330 — Support Services: Projected expenses total $376,769, which provides for the management of
the City's central receptionist, printing and mail activities. The projected Fund Balance is $10,008.
Fund 335 — Support Services Replacement: Projected expenses for FY2020-21 have been deferred, as
part of budget reduction measures related to the COVID-19 economic impact. The projected Fund Balance
is $431,315.
Fund 340 — Facilities: Projected expenses total $1,338,520, which provide for the operations and
maintenance of the City's buildings and parking structure. The projected Fund Balance is $576,669.
Fund 350— Facility Replacement: Projected expenses total $315,000, which provide for the replacement
of equipment, systems and fixtures within City -owned facilities. The projected Fund Balance is $691,127.
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (SARDA)
Fund 380 — SARDA: Projected expenses total $5,903,653, which reflects a decrease of $1,626,668, due
mostly to the deferral of the $750,000 contribution to a capital project, and the elimination of an Owner
Participation Agreement payment for property tax increment. Debt Service expenditures are in
accordance with the debt service schedule on the outstanding 2017A and 2017B Redevelopment Agency
Tax Allocation Bonds.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT (TCSD)
The Temecula Community Services District was established as an assessment district to provide a
comprehensive neighborhood and community park system, as well as a complement of recreational and
cultural programs and events.
Combined revenue for TCSD totals $24,888,200, which reflects an increase of 3.3% due primarily to the
contributions from the Measure S Fund to fill the funding gap in the TCSD Operations Fund, as well as an
increase in Service Level D — Refuse/Recycling Fund, due to inflationary rate increases per the franchise
agreement with CR&R. Combined expenditures total $24,940,900, which reflects an increase of 0.8% due
to higher costs in the TCSD Operations Fund as a result of the anticipated re -hiring of laid -off part-
time/seasonal staffing who were
separated from employment in TCSaPerCapitaFunding
March 2020 due to the COVID-19
5zao.00
pandemic. Expenditures in Service $240.00
Level B — Street Lights are projected sloo.ou
to decrease due to the acquisition of s16o.o0
the street light network from $130.00 59
Southern California Edison and the $89.00
subsequent conversion to LED bulbs, $49.00
�
both of which generate significant o.00 FY16-17 FY17-18 FY38-19 FY1B-20 FY20-21
savings. ■Sp -A Tax TCSD Funding
As noted in the adjacent chart, TCSD's Special Tax (Measure C) funds approximately 32% of the District's
Parks and Recreation budget. The remaining 68% comes from Measure S and programmatic revenues.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP)
The City's five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is presented to the City Council under separate
cover. This program provides a five-year plan for capital improvements that is updated annually to ensure
compliance with the program. The impact of capital projects on maintenance and operating costs were
taken into consideration in the development of the operating budget. Circulation, infrastructure, parks,
affordable housing, and other various projects are identified in the CIP budget.
Overall, the Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP includes 84 separate projects with total project costs
estimated at $623,566,187, as outlined in the table below. Revenue from various identified sources for
the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program is projected to be $514,165,560. This amount includes a $50
million INFRA grant to fund the French Valley Parkway Phase II project. The City of Temecula's CIP is a
project planning and delivery document which includes several projects with unidentified funding sources
in the third, fourth, and fifth years of the five-year program, totaling $109,400,627. The City is continually
exploring and applying for federal, state and regional funding opportunities to enable the delivery of these
currently unfunded projects. The five-year CIP is updated annually and newly secured revenues are
programmed toward prioritized projects that may be shown as unfunded at this time.
Type of Project
Number of Projects
Cost of Projects
Circulation
25
$506,852,861
Infrastructure
41
74,580,211
Parks and Recreation
16
25,951,175
SARDA/ Housing
2
16,181,940
TOTAL:4
2020-21 AUTHORIZED STAFFING
Total authorized Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions total 172.95 authorized positions, which reflects a
decrease of 3.5 positions compared to the prior year. Two of the authorized positions were added in
FY2019-20 to assist with public outreach related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
A total of 3 vacant positions are currently on hold, until such time as the City recoups adequate resources
to fund these positions. The affected positions include the following:
• Accounting Support Supervisor (Finance Department)
• Engineering Technician I (Public Works Department)
• Community Services Specialist I (TCSD)
In addition, two positions related to the rehabilitation of the Margarita Recreation Center are unfunded
until the facility is complete and open for operation.
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
w Annual Operating Budget
The H�� o€ 4; u%4aeu) .Gail
6
Total Authorized Positions total 172.95 remains below the peak in 2007-08 by 37.8 positions.
In addition to the Authorized Positions,
the City employs a significant number of
part-time, non-benefitted Project
employees, primarily to assist with the
multitude of programs offered by the
Temecula Community Services District.
For FY2020-21, an estimated 59.5 full-
time equivalent (FTE) will be hired as
seasonal and part-time support.
City of Temecula
Authorized Positions
250.0 210.8
208.8 197.0 197.0 195.0
2000.168.2 171.7 176.5 173.0
160.0 160.0 158.0 158.2 158.2
150.0
100.0
50.0
o� p$ AA ,�o titi �ti ti'' tia ti5 do ,^ ti� ti� do titi
Public Safety personnel is supplied through contracts with Riverside County and CalFire. A total of 112
Sworn Police Officers and 17 Community Service Officers are included in the Police Budget, and a total of
71 Fire personnel are reflected in the Fire Department Budget for FY2020-21.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the City of Temecula has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with the
loss of over $15 million in several major revenue sources. In response to this economic situation, I'm
proud to say that the City's Executive Team has shown great leadership in prioritizing their operational
needs and submitted responsive budgetary reductions necessary to balance all funds over the ensuing
five-year period. While the City will maintain its Reserve for Economic Uncertainty, it will be necessary to
fully expend the General Fund's available fund balance as well as utilize a portion of the City's Secondary
Reserve to remain fiscally solvent during these unprecedented economic times.
I would like to express my appreciation to the City Council for providing the direction and support crucial
to achieving the City's goals. I would also like to recognize the contributions of the City staff for not only
creating a responsive operating budget, but also for their commitment to providing top quality services
to all who live, work and play in Temecula. I would like to give special thanks to: Greg Butler, Assistant
City Manager, Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance; Rudy Graciano, Fiscal Services Manager; Patricia
Hawk, Fiscal Services Manager; and Tina Rivera, Accounting Assistant for their long hours and dedication
to the City and this budget process.
Sincerely,
Aaron Adams
City Manager
41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-25
AND ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Adoption of this Program is categorically exempt from environmental
review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the
State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning
studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or
funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require
consideration of environmental factors. In reviewing this Program and conducting public hearings
on it, the City Council has considered relevant environmental factors. This City Council, as the
lead agency for environmental review, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Guidelines promulgated there under (collectively "CEQA), has reviewed the scope and nature
of this Capital Improvement Program and has concluded that the planning and prioritization
process comprising this activity is not a project pursuant to CEQA because it does not order or
authorize the commencement of any physical or other activity that would directly or indirectly
have a significant effect upon the environment. The Capital Improvement Program merely
establishes a listing of priority and allocates funds for the City to commence the necessary planning
studies, including review pursuant to CEQA, at a future unspecified date. The future planning
studies will be conducted at the earliest possible time so as to ensure thorough review pursuant to
CEQA. Recognizing that the protection of the environment is a key factor in the quality of life
within the City of Temecula and to further the City's strict adherence to both the spirit and letter
of the law as regards to CEQA, this City Council has also considered this Capital Improvement
Program as if it were a Project pursuant to CEQA. Reviewing this Program as a Project, this City
Council concludes the Project would be exempt from review under CEQA, both pursuant to
Section 15061(b)(3) and to the categorical exemption set forth in Section 15262 of CEQA. Section
15061(b)(3) would apply because it can be seen with certainty that this prioritizing and fund
allocation program cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the
environment. No physical activity will occur until all required CEQA review is conducted at the
time the physical improvements prioritized in the Program are undertaken. Section 15262 provides
a categorical exemption to actions that are feasibility or planning studies related to possible future
actions. This Council is aware of and has considered the current and relevant environmental factors
as an integral component of the review of this Program. This Council, as lead agency, hereby
determines and decides that the exemption provided in both Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15262 apply
in the event this is deemed a Project pursuant to CEQA.
Section 2. On June 3, 2020, the Planning Commission found the Capital Improvement
Program consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65401 of
State Planning and Zoning Law.
Section 3. The City Council hereby finds and declares that the requirements of
Government Code Section 65402(a) shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a
larger parcel which was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions,
or abandonments for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for
street purposes, acquisition, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment
projects are of a minor nature.
Section 4. The City Council hereby finds that the acquisition of land necessary for the
City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2021-25 is consistent with the
General Plan.
Section 5. That a certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula, entitled "City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2021-
25" include herein appropriations for Fiscal Year 2020-21, and are hereby adopted. The CIP
appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2019-20 which have not been completed, encumbered, nor
included in the Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP, are hereby carried over for each applicable project to
the Fiscal Year 2020-21. Certain Development Impact Fees from future revenue may be used to
replace the expenditure of current capital reserve funds in the CIP.
Section 6. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditures of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to
sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditure of funds in excess of
$60,000 requires City Council action.
C. The City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts
in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00), if sufficient
appropriated funds are available.
D. The City Manager may authorize transfers up to sixty thousand dollars
($60,000.00) between approved Capital Improvement Program projects.
E. Notwithstanding Section 6.13. above, pursuant to Section 3.32.050 of the
Municipal Code, the City Manager may authorize Public Works contracts
in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditures of
Public Works funds in excess of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) require
City Council action, except that the City Manager may approve change
orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Council in amounts up
to project contingency established by Council.
Section 7. Certification: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 0 day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR
2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING
CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS,
ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF THE
GENERAL MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT
SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL
MANAGER
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Temecula Community Services District
(TCSD) Preliminary Operating Budget is hereby adopted.
Section 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within
departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the General Manager.
C. The Board of Directors must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the
Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts.
D. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the General
Manager shall administer the City personnel system. This General Manager is authorized to fix
and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions
as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the Board of
Directors.
E. The General Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000.00 requires Board
of Directors action.
F. The General Manager may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of $60,000.00
require Board of Directors action, except that the General Manager may approve change orders on
Public Works contracts approved by the Board in amounts up to the project contingency
established by the Board.
G. Pursuant to Section 3.28.130 of the Municipal Code, the General Manager may
authorize purchases of supplies and equipment in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars
($60,000.00). Any purchases of supplies and equipment in excess of $60,000.00 shall be awarded
to the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to formal bid procedures and require City Council action,
except that the General Manager may approve change orders on purchases of supplies and
equipment approved by the Board in amounts up to the contingency established by Board.
H. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and
equipment of an estimated value of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) or less, may be made by
the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260
through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through
3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and
equipment having a total estimated value of $5,000 or less.
I. Appropriations and Revenue Estimates for grant funded programs for Fiscal Year
2019-20 which have not been expended or encumbered, are hereby carried over for the applicable
grant program to the Fiscal Year 2020-21.
Section 3. The Finance Director is authorized to make temporary short term interfund
loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing
differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source.
Section 4. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the District books at June 30, 2020,
are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2020-21.
Section 5. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be
made for or on behalf of the District; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide
for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the Board of Directors of the
Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine,
and order as follows:
A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the
Finance Department.
B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be three thousand dollars
($3,000.00).
C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before
reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by
Finance Director.
Section 6. The Board Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula
Community Services District of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020.
Zak Schwank, President
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of
Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 2020- was duly and
regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the
City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 91h day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: BOARD MEMBERS:
NOES: BOARD MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS:
ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, Secretary
4
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING
CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS,
ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY
MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT
AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula entitled "City of Temecula Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2020-21" is
hereby adopted.
Section 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within
departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the City Manager.
C. The City Council must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the
Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts.
D. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the City
Manager shall administer the City personnel system. The City Manager is authorized to fix and
alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as
needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the City
Council.
E. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000.00 requires City
Council action.
F. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into the following types of
agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services Distract, and the Successor
Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency where the amount of the agreement is sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000.00) or less, there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund
account against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged, and all applicable procedures
for approval of the agreement have been fulfilled: public works construction agreements;
agreements for purchase of supplies or equipment; personal, professional, consultant and
maintenance services agreements; theater, entertainment and talent agreements; and real property
leases, licenses and facility use agreements in which the term is one (1) year or less. All
sponsorship agreements, tax reimbursement agreements, and fee waiver agreements shall be
approved by the City Council.
G. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to
settle personal injury and property damage lawsuits and enter into settlement agreements on
behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency where the amount of the settlement does not exceed twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000.00).
H. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and
equipment of an estimated value of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) or less, may be made by
the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections
3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130
through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of
supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) or
less.
I. Appropriations and Revenue estimates for grant funded programs for FY 2019-20
which have not been expended, encumbered or received, are hereby carried over for the
applicable grant program to the subsequent fiscal year.
J. Appropriations for the transfer of funds to the Capital Improvement Program for
FY 2019-20 which have not been expended are hereby carried over to the subsequent fiscal year.
Section 3. The Director of Finance, in consultation with the City Manager, is
delegated the authority to determine and define the amounts of those components of fund balance
that are classified as "Assigned Fund Balance".
Section 4. The Director of Finance is authorized to make temporary short term
interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash
flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source.
Section 5. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the City books at June 30, 2020, are
hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for FY 2020-21.
Section 6. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must
be made for or on behalf of the City; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to
provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the City Council of
the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows:
A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the
Finance Department.
a
B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be three thousand dollars
($3,000.00).
C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before
reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by
Director of Finance.
Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify adoption of the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9ffi day of June, 2020.
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
James Stewart, Mayor
3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2021-25,
ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21, ADOPTING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET
AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN
APPROPRIATIONS
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Adoption of this Program is categorically exempt from environmental
review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the
State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning
studies for possible future actions, which actions the Board of Directors has not approved, adopted,
or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require
consideration of environmental factors. In reviewing this Program and conducting public hearings
on it, the Board of Directors has considered relevant environmental factors. This Board of
Directors, as the lead agency for environmental review, pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Guidelines promulgated there under (collectively "CEQA), has reviewed the
scope and nature of this Capital Improvement Program and has concluded that the planning and
prioritization process comprising this activity is not a project pursuant to CEQA because it does
not order or authorize the commencement of any physical or other activity that would directly or
indirectly have a significant effect upon the environment. The Capital Improvement Program
merely establishes a listing of priority and allocates funds for the City to commence the necessary
planning studies, including review pursuant to CEQA, at a future unspecified date. The future
planning studies will be conducted at the earliest possible time so as to ensure thorough review
pursuant to CEQA. Recognizing that the protection of the environment is a key factor in the quality
of life within the City of Temecula and to further the City's strict adherence to both the spirit and
letter of the law as regards to CEQA, this Board of Directors has also considered this Capital
Improvement Program as if it were a Project pursuant to CEQA. Reviewing this Program as an
Project, this Board of Directors concludes the Project would be exempt from review under CEQA,
both pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and to the categorical exemption set forth in Section 15262
of CEQA. Section 15061(b)(3) would apply because it can be seen with certainty that this
prioritizing and fund allocation program cannot and does not have the potential to cause a
significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required CEQA
review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Program are
undertaken. Section 15262 provides a categorical exemption to actions that are feasibility or
planning studies related to possible future actions. This Board is aware of and has considered the
current and relevant environmental factors as an integral component of the review of this Program.
This Board, as lead agency, hereby determines and decides that the exemption provided in both
Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15262 apply in the event this is deemed a Project pursuant to CEQA.
Section 2. On June 3, 2020, the Planning Commission found the Capital Improvement
Program consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65401 of
State Planning and Zoning Law.
Section 3. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula
Redevelopment Agency hereby finds and declares that the requirements of Government Code
Section 65402(a) shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a larger parcel which
was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments
for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for street purposes,
acquisition, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment projects are of a minor
nature.
Section 4. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula
Redevelopment Agency hereby finds that the acquisition of land necessary for the City of
Temecula Capital Improvement Program FY 2021-25 is consistent with the General Plan.
Section 5. That a certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula, entitled "City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2021-
25" include herein appropriations for Fiscal Year 2020-21, is hereby adopted. The CIP
appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2019-20 which have not been completed, encumbered, nor
included in the Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP, are hereby carried over for each applicable project to
the Fiscal Year 2020-21.
Section 6. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditures of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to
$60,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000 requires Board of Directors action.
C. The Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts in
amounts up to $60,000, if sufficient appropriated funds are available.
D. The Executive Director may authorize transfers up to $60,000 between approved
Capital Improvement Program projects.
E. Notwithstanding Section 6.13. above, pursuant to Section 3.32.050 of the Municipal
Code, the Executive Director may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to $60,000.
Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of $60,000 require Board of Directors action,
except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved
by the Board in amounts up to project contingency established by Board.
Section 7. That the Fiscal Year 2020-21 SARDA Operating Budget is hereby adopted.
Section 8. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless the Oversight Board of the Successor
Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has adopted a resolution approving the Fiscal
Year 2020-21 SARDA Operating Budget and the State Department of Finance has approved the
expenditure on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS), pursuant to Health and
Safety Code Section 34177.
B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within
departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the Executive Director.
C. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the
Executive Director shall administer the City personnel system. The Executive Director is
authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of
Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations
approved by the Agency Board.
D. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to
$60,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000 requires Agency Board action.
E. The Executive Director may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to
$60,000. Any expenditure of Public Works funds in excess of $60,000 require Agency Member
action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts
approved by the Agency Board in amounts up to the project contingency established by the Agency
Board.
F. Pursuant to Section 3.28.130 of the Municipal Code, the Executive Director may
authorize purchases of supplies and equipment in amounts up to $60,000. Any purchases of
supplies and equipment in excess of $60,000 shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder
pursuant to formal bid procedures and require Agency Board action, except that the Executive
Director may approve change orders on purchases of supplies and equipment approved by the
Agency Board in amounts up to the contingency established by Agency Board.
G. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and
equipment of an estimated value of $60,000 or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the
open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and
without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided,
however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having
a total estimated value of $5,000 or less.
Section 9. The Director of Finance is authorized to make temporary short term
interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash
flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source.
3
Section 10. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the Agency books at June 30, 2020,
are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2020-21.
Section 11. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be
made for or on behalf of the Agency; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide
for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the Board of Directors of the
Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula does hereby
resolve, determine, and order as follows:
A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the
Accounting and Purchasing Department.
B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be $3,000.
C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before
reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by
Finance Director.
Section 12. The Agency Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Successor
Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency this 91h day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Chair
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. SARDA 2020- was duly and regularly
adopted by the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment
Agency at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: BOARD MEMBERS:
NOES: BOARD MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS:
ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, Secretary
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF
AUTHORIZED POSITIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule, attached hereto,
is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 45001 of the California Government Code. Such list is
attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. The Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule shall become
effective July 1, 2020, and may be, thereafter, amended.
Section 3. The City Manager shall implement the attached Schedule of Authorized
Positions and Salary Schedule and has the authority to select and appoint employees and approve
Executive Staff employment agreements in accordance with the City of Temecula's Municipal
Code and personnel policies.
Section 4. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the
City Manager shall administer the City personnel system. This resolution specifically authorizes
the City Manager to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule
of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations
approved by the City Council.
Section 5. All prior resolutions and parts of this resolution in conflict with this Resolution
are hereby rescinded.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9tn day of June, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code f 2.5
SalarySteps W
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5
MCP
7.0
Only
ADMINISTRATIVE
Executive Assistant 4 951-004
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.64
34.49
35.35
36.23
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,830.93
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,971.20
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
Senior Administrative Assistant 4 952-004
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
Administrative Assistant 3 953-003
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
45,988.80
1 47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
1 54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
1 61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
Senior Office Specialist 2 954-002
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.30
29.01
29.74
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,905.33
5,028.40
5,154.93
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,864.00
60,340.80
61,859.20
Office Specialist II 1 955-001
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
Office Specialist 1 1 956-001
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
37,752.00
1 38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
1 44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
1 50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
Office Aide 111 1 957-001
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
Office Aide 11 1 958-001
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.54
20.03
20.53
21.05
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,386.93
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
30,992.00
31,761.60
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,643.20
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
Office Aide 1 959-001
13.17
13.50
13.83
14.18
14.53
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
2,282.80
2,340.00
2,397.20
2,457.87
2,518.53
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
27,393.60
1 28,080.00
1 28,766.40
29,494.40
1 30,222.40
1 30,992.00
31,761.60
1 32,552.00
1 33,363.20
34,195.20
1 35,048.00
1 35,942.40
1 36,836.80
1 37,752.00
38,688.00
ANALYST
Principal Management Analyst 7 901-007
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
Senior Management Analyst 6 902-006
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
Management Analyst 5 903-005
32.82
33.64
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
5,688.80
5,830.93
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
68,265.60
1 69,971.20
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
1 81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
1 91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
Management Assistant 4 904-004
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
Management Aide111 3 905-003
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
Management Aide 11 2 906-002
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
41,662.40
1 42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
1 49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
Management Aide 1 907-001
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
Intern 1 908-001
13.17
13.50
13.83
14.18
14.53
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
2,282.80
2,340.00
2,397.20
2,457.87
2,518.53
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
27,393.60
28,080.00
28,766.40
29,494.40
30,222.40
30,992.00
31,761.60
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
Page 1 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Salary Steps MCP Only
Class Family/Title Level Class Code r 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Director of Community Development 8 300-008
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
88.13
90.33
92.59
11,358.53
11,642:80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
1
14,539.20
14,903.20
15, 275.87
15, 657.20
16,048.93
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
183,310.40
187,886.40
192,587.20
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUILDING & SAFETY
Building Official 7 331-007
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
Field Supervisor- Building 4 330-004
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
Plan Checker 4 308-004
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
87,401.60
1 89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
1 103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
Senior Building Inspector 3 332-003
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
Building Inspector II 2 333-002
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
Building Inspector 1 1 334-001
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
1 66,601.60
1 68,265.60
1 69,992.00
1 71,739.20
1 73,528.00
75,358.40
1 77,251.20
1 79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - CODE ENFORCEMENT
Field Supervisor- Code Enforcement 4 343-004
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
Senior Code Enforcement Officer 3 340-003
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
Code Enforcement Officer 11 2 341-002
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
Code Enforcement Officer 1 1 342-001
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- PLANNING
Planning Manager 7 301-007
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
Principal Planner 6 302-006
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
Senior Planner 5 303-005
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
5S.13
56.51
57.92
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
85,259.20
1 87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
1 101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
1 114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
Associate Planner II 4 304-004
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
Associate Planner 1 3 305-003
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,58S.60
Assistant Planner 2 306-002
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,S98.80
6,763.47
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
Planning Technician 1 307-001
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
57,428.80
1 58,884.80
1 60,340.80
1 61,859.20
1 63,398.40
1 64,979.20
1 66,601.60
1 68,265.60
1 69,992.00
1 71,739.20
1 73,528.00
Page 2 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code =I
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - SERVICES
CommDev Processing Supervisor 4 320-004
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
Senior CommDev Services Technician 3 321-003
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
CommDev Services Technician 11 2 322-002
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
56,035.20
57,428.80
1 58,884.80
1 60,340.80
1 61,859.20
1 63,398.40
64,979.20
1 66,601.60
1 68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
CommDev Services Technician l 1 323-001
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
CITY CLERK
Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk 8 500-009
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
Deputy City Clerk 7 501-007
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
Records Manager 6 510-006
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
1 77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
1 89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
Records Supervisor 4 511-004
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Senior Records Coordinator 3 512-003
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
Records Coordinator 2 513-002
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
Records Technician 1 514-001
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
40,664.00
1 41,662.40
1 42,702.40
1 43,784.00
1 44,865.60
1 45,988.80
1 47,153.60
1 48,318.40
1 49,524.80
1 50,772.80
1 52,041.60
CITY MANAGER
City Manager (per Employment Contract) 8 100-009
118.20
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
20,488.58
245,863.00
Assistant City Manager 8 101-008
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
88.13
90.33
92.59
94.90
97.28
99.71
102.20
104.76
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
15, 275.87
15,657.20
16,048.93
16,449.33
16,861.87
17, 283.07
17,714.67
18,158.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
183,310.40
187,886.40
192,587.20
197,392.00
202,342.40
207,396.80
212,576.00
217,900.80
Deputy City Manager 7 102-007
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
88.13
90.33
92.59
94.90
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
1S,275.87
1S,657.20
16,048.93
16,449.33
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
183,310.40
187,886.40
192,587.20
197,392.00
Assistant to the City Manager 6 103-007
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
7S.99
77.89
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,78S.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
Economic Development Manager 5 120-005
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.1
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,S55.87
9,791.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,147.33
10,810.80
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
Page 3 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Salary Steps W MCP Only
Class Family/ Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
•uu �
Director of Community Services 8 600-008
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
88.13
90.33
92.59
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
15, 275.87
15, 657.20
16,048.93
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
183,310.40
187,886.40
192,587.20
Asst Director of Community Services 7 601-007
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
Community Services Superintendent 6 602-006
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
94,120.00
1 96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
1 111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
1 126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
Community Services Manager 5 603-005
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
Community Services Supervisor II 4 610-004
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
Community Services Supervisor 4 611-004
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
60,340.80
1 61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
1 71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
Community Services Coordinator II 3 612-003
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
59,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Community Services Coordinator 3 613-003
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
Community Services Specialist II 2 614-002
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
47,153.60
1 48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
Community Services Specialist 2 615-002
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
Community Services Assistant 1 616-001
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
Senior Recreation Leader 1 617-001
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
34,195.20
1 35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
1 40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
Recreation Leader 1 618-001
14.53
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
2,518.53
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
30,222.40
30,992.00
31,761.60
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
Recreation Assistant 1 619-001
13.17
13.50
13.83
14.18
14.53
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
2,282.80
2,340.00
2,397.20
2,457.87
2,518.53
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
27,393.60
28,080.00
28,766.40
29,494.40
30,222.40
30,992.00
31,761.60
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
COMMUNITY SERVICES - AQUATICS
Aquatics Supervisor II 4 620-004
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
1,832:67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
Aquatics Supervisor 1 4 621-004
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
Aquatics Coordinator 3 622-003
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
Lead Lifeguard 2 623-002
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
Senior Lifeguard 1 624-001
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
30,992.00
31,761.60
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
Page 4 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53
Salary Steps
3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5
14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85
Lifeguard 1 625-001
2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53
2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67
27,393.60 28,080.00 28,766.40 29,494.40 30,222.40
30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00
Water Safety Instructor 1 626-001
13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53
14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85
2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53
2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67
27,393.60 28,080.00 28,766.40 29,494.40 30,222.40
30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00
COMMUNITY SERVICES - DAY CAMP
Day Camp Director 1 654-001
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
Assistant Day Camp Director 1 655-001
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
COMMUNITY SERVICES - PARK RANGERS
Supervising Park Ranger 4 630-004
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
Park Ranger III 3 631-003
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
Park Ranger II 2 632-002
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
53,331.20
1 54,662.40
1 56,035.20
1 57,428.80
1 58,884.80
1 60,340.80
1 61,859.20
1 63,398.40
1 64,979.20
1 66,601.60
1 68,265.60
Park Ranger 1 1 633-001
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231:07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
1,028:40
5,154.93
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
COMMUNITY SERVICES -THEATER
Theater Technical Coordinator11 3 640-003
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Theater Technical Coordinator l 3 641-003
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
Theater Technical Specialist11 2 642-002
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
47,153.60
1 48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
Theater Technical Specialist l 2 643-002
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
Theater Technical Assistant 1 644-001
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
FINANCE
Director of Finance 8 200-008
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
88.13
90.33
92.59
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14, 539.20
14,903.20
15, 275.87
15, 657.20
16,048.93
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
183,310.40
187,886.40
192,587.20
Assistant Director of Finance 7 201-007
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
Fiscal Services Manager 6 202-006
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
Page 5 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Salary Steps MCP Only
Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
FINANCE -ACCOUNTING
Senior Accountant 4 240-004
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02 43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47 7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60 89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
Accountant II 3 241-003
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07 39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80 6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60 81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
Accountant 1 3 242-003
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23 37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87 6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
69,992.00
1 71,739.20
1 73,528.00
1 75,358.40 77,251.20
1 79,185.60
1 81,161.60
1 83,179.20
1 85,259.20
1 87,401.60
1 89,585.60
1 91,811.20
1 94,120.00
96,470.40
1 98,883.20
FINANCE - ACCOUNTING SUPPORT in
Accounting Support Supervisor 4 250-004
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
Senior Accounting Technician 3 251-003
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
Accounting Technician II 2 252-002
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
57,428.80
1 58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
1 68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
1 77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
Accounting Technician 1 2 253-002
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
Accounting Assistant 1 254-001
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Cashier 1 230-001
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
49,524.80
1 50,772.80
1 52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
1 57,428.80
1 58,884.80
1 60,340.80
61,859.20
1 63,398.40
FINANCE - BUSINESS LICENSE
Business License Supervisor 4 260-004
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
Senior Business License Technician 3 261-003
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
Business License Technician 2 262-002
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Business License Assistant 1 263-001
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
49,524.80
1 50,772.80
1 52,041.60
1 53,331.20
1 54,662.40
56,035.20
1 57,428.80
1 58,884.80
1 60,340.80
61,859.20
1 63,398.40
FINANCE - PAYROLL
Payroll Manager 5 220-005
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
Payroll Administrator 4 222-004
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
Payroll Supervisor 4 221-004
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
Senior Payroll Coordinator 3 223-003
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
1 66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
1 77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
Payroll Coordinator 2 224-002
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
Payroll Technician 1 225-001
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Page 6 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0
2.5 3.0
Salary Steps
3.5
4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0�= 7.5 8.0
FINANCE -PURCHASING
Purchasing Manager 5 203-005
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
Purchasing Supervisor 4 204-004
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
Senior Buyer 3 205-003
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
63,398.40
1 64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
1 75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
Buyer II 2 206-002
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
Buyer 1 2 207.002
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Purchasing Assistant 1 208-001
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
49,524.80
1 50,772.80
1 52,041.60
1 53,331.20
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
57,428.80
1 58,884.80
1 60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
FIRE
Field Supervisor - Fire 4 353-004
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
Senior Fire Inspector 4 350-003
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
49.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
55.51
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,621.73
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
115,460.80
Fire Inspector II 2 351-002
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20I
,475.20
Fire Inspector 1 1 352-001
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,198..0
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,24.3.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94:120.00
96,470.40
HUMAN RESOURCES
Director of HR/Risk Management 8 800-008
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
Asst Director of HR/Risk Management 7 801-007
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
HR Manager 6 802-006
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
91,811.20
1 94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
1 123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
Risk Manager 6 803-006
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
HR Supervisor 4 804-004
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
Senior HR Technician 3 805-003
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
HR Technician II 2 806-002
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
1 61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
1 71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
HR Technician 2 807-002
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
HR Assistant 1 808-001
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
Page 7 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Salary Steps MCP Only
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Director ofIT/Support Services 8 700-008
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
Asst Director of IT/Support Services 7 701-007
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
IT Manager 6 702-006
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
98,883.20
1 101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
1 117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
IT Administrator 5 703-005
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
IT Supervisor 4 704-004
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
Senior IT Specialist 3 705-003
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
73,528.00
1 75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
1 87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
IT Specialist)) 2 706-002
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
IT Specialist) 2 707-002
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
69,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
ITTechnician II 1 708-001
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,029.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20I
,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20I
,528.00
ITTechnician ) 1 709-001
26.28
26.94
27.61
29.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5:283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58:884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
MEDIA/MARKETING
Multimedia Coordinator 3 921-004
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
Multimedia Specialist II 2 922-003
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
Multimedia Specialist I 2 923-002
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.201
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Multimedia Assistant 1 924-001
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
4:336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
1,414.93
5,550.13
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58:884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
PUBLIC WORKS
Director of PW/City Engineer 8 400-008
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
88.13
90.33
92.59
94.90
97.28
99.71
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14903.20
15,275.87
15657.20
16,048.93
16,449.33
16,861.87
17,283.07
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178:838.40
183,310.40
187:886.40
192,587.20
197,392.00
202,342.40
207,396.80
PUBLIC WORKS - CUSTODIAL
Custodian II (Y-Rate) 2 460402
16.51
16.92
17.34
17.78
18.22
18.68
19.14
19.62
20.11
20.61
21.13
2,861.73
2,932.80
3,005.60
3,081.87
3,158.13
3,237.87
3,317.60
3,400.80
3,485.73
3,S72.40
3,662.53
34,340.80
35,193.60
36,067.20
36,982.40
37,897.60
38,854.40
39,811.20
40,809.60
41,828.80
42,868.80
43,950.40
Custodian II 2 460-002
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
Custodian) 1 461-001
14.90
15.27
15.65
16.04
16.44
16.85
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
2,582.67
2,646.80
2,712.67
2,780.27
2,849.60
2,920.67
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
30,992.00
31,761.60
32,552.00
33,363.20
34,195.20
35,048.00
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
Page 8 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
SaIarySt'ejjj1V MCP Only
Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING is
Engineering Manager 7 401-007
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
79.84
81.84
83.88
85.98
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12, 232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
13,838.93
14,185.60
14,539.20
14,903.20
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
166,067.20
170,227.20
174,470.40
178,838.40
Principal Civil Engineer 6 402-006
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
72.33
74.14
75.99
77.89
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
12,537.20
12,850.93
13,171.60
13,500.93
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
150,446.40
154,211.20
158,059.20
162,011.20
Senior Civil Engineer 5 403-005
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
65.53
67.17
68.85
70.57
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
11,358.53
11,642.80
11,934.00
12,232.13
103,875.20
1 106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
1 123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
136,302.40
1 139,713.60
143,208.00
146,785.60
Associate Civil Engineer 4 404-004
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
Associate Engineer II 4 405-004
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
Associate Engineer 1 3 406-003
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
79,185.60
1 81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
1 94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
Assistant Engineer II 2 407-002
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
39.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
Assistant Engineer 1 2 408-002
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,979.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
Engineering Technician 11 1 409-001
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
1 68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
Engineering Technician 1 1 410-001
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.479
35.35
36.23
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS
Construction Manager 4 415-004
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
Supervising PW Inspector 4 420-004
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
Senior PW Inspector (Y-Rate) 3 421-403
32.23
33.03
33.86
34.70
35.57
36.46
37.37
38.31
39.26
40.25
41.25
5,586.53
5,725.20
5,869.07
6,014.67
6,165.47
6,319.73
6,477.47
6,640.40
6,805.07
6,976.67
7,150.00
67,038.40
68,702.40
70,428.80
72,176.00
73,985.60
75,836.80
77,729.60
79,684.80
81,660.80
83,720.00
85,800.00
Senior PW Inspector 3 421-003
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
1 66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
1 77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
PW Inspector II 2 422-002
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
S,832.67
S,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
PW Inspector 1 1 423-001
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,26S.60
PUBLIC WORKS - MAINTENANCE
Maintenance Manager 7 430-007
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,S55.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
Maintenance Superintendent 6 431-006
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
5S.13
56.51
57.92
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
Page 9 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0
Salary Steps
2.5 3.0 3.5
MCP Only
4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
PUBLIC WORKS -LANDSCAPE
Maintenance Supervisor - Landscape 5 443-005
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
Field Supervisor- Landscape 4 444-004
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
Senior Landscape Inspector 3 440-003
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
1 75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
1 87,401.60
Landscape Inspector II 2 441-002
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
Landscape Inspector 1 1 442-001
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS/PARKS
Maintenance Supervisor - Streets/Parks 5 432-005
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
Field Supervisor - Streets/Parks 4 433-004
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,689.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
Lead Maintenance Worker - Streets/Parks 3 434-003
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
54,662.40
1 56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
1 64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
Maintenance Worker II - Streets/Parks 2 435.002
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
Maintenance Worker I - Streets/Parks 1 436-001
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
PUBLIC WORKS - FACILITIES
Maintenance Supervisor - Facilities 5 432-005
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
Field Supervisor - Facilities 4 472-004
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
Lead Maintenance Worker- HVAC 3 484-003
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
64,979.20
1 66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
1 77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
Lead Maintenance Worker- Facilities 3 473-003
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
S,688.80
S,832.67
S,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
Maintenance Worker II - Facilities 2 474-002
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
30.48
31.24
32.02
32.82
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
5,283.20
5,414.93
5,550.13
5,688.80
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
63,398.40
64,979.20
66,601.60
68,265.60
Maintenance Worker I - Facilities 1 475-001
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
S,028.40
5,154.93
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
Page 10 of 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020
Class Family/Title Level Class Code f 2.5
3.0
Salary Steps MCP Only
3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
PUBLIC WORKS -TRAFFIC SIGNALS
Maintenance Supervisor - Signals 5 453-005
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
53.78
55.13
56.51
57.92
59.37
60.85
62.37
63.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
9,321.87
9,555.87
9,795.07
10,039.47
10,290.80
10,547.33
10,810.80
11,081.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
111,862.40
114,670.40
117,540.80
120,473.60
123,489.60
126,568.00
129,729.60
132,974.40
Field Supervisor - Signals 4 454-004
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
48.73
49.94
51.19
52.47
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
8,446.53
8,656.27
8,872.93
9,094.80
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
101,358.40
103,875.20
106,475.20
109,137.60
Senior Signal Technician 3 450-003
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
44.14
45.25
46.38
47.54
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
7,650.93
7,843.33
8,039.20
8,240.27
77,251.20
1 79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
1 91,811.20
94,120.00
96,470.40
98,883.20
Signal Technician II 2 451-002
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
42.02
43.07
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
7,283.47
7,465.47
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
87,401.60
89,585.60
Signal Technician 1 2 452-002
32.02
32.82
33.65
34.49
35.35
36.23
37.14
38.07
39.02
39.99
40.99
5,550.13
5,688.80
5,832.67
5,978.27
6,127.33
6,279.87
6,437.60
6,598.80
6,763.47
6,931.60
7,104.93
66,601.60
68,265.60
69,992.00
71,739.20
73,528.00
75,358.40
77,251.20
79,185.60
81,161.60
83,179.20
85,259.20
SUPPORTS ERVICE5
Support Services Supervisor 4 720-004
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
27.61
28.31
29.01
29.74
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
4,785.73
4,907.07
5,028.40
5,154.93
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
57,428.80
58,884.80
60,340.80
61,859.20
Senior Support Services Technician 3 721-003
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
25.02
25.64
26.28
26.94
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
4,336.80
4,444.27
4,555.20
4,669.60
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
52,041.60
53,331.20
54,662.40
56,035.20
Support Services Technician 2 722-002
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
22.67
23.23
23.81
24.41
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832.40
3,929.47
4,026.53
4,127.07
4,231.07
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
47,153.60
48,318.40
49,524.80
50,772.80
Support Services Assistant 1 723-001
17.28
17.71
18.15
18.60
19.07
19.55
20.03
20.53
21.05
21.57
22.11
2,995.20
3,069.73
3,146.00
3,224.00
3,305.47
3,388.67
3,471.87
3,558.53
3,648.67
3,738.80
3,832:40
35,942.40
36,836.80
37,752.00
38,688.00
39,665.60
40,664.00
41,662.40
42,702.40
43,784.00
44,865.60
45,988.80
Page 11 of 11
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2020
FY2020-21
Number of
Positions
Salary Schedule
Bargaining
Unit*
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
CITY COUNCIL
Councilmember
5.0
600 800
N/A
E
EL City Council Subtotal:
CITY MANAGER
Assistant City Manager
1.0
12,851 18,158
Exec
E
Assistant to the City Manager
1.0
9,556 13,501
MCP
E
City Manager
Executive Assistant
Management Assistant **
Office Aide III
City Manager Subtotal:
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Administrative Assistant (Confidential)
Economic Development Manager
1.0
N/A 20,489
Contract
E
1.0
4,444 6,280
MCP
E
1.0
4,231 5,415
Rep
NE
0.75
5.75
1.0
2,921 3,739
3,832 5,415
Rep
MCP
NE
NE
1.0
7,651 10,811
MCP
E
Management Aide III **
1.0
3,832 4,907
Rep
NE
Management Analyst
Senior Management Analyst
1.0
5,689 8,039
MCP
E
1.0
6,280 8,873
MCP
E
Economic Development Subtotal:
5.0
CITY CLERK
Administrative Assistant
1.0
3,832 4,907
Rep
NE
Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk
1.0
10,547 14,903
Exec
E
Management Aide III
1.0
3,832 4,907
Rep
NE
Records Manager
1.0
5,833 8,240
MCP
E
Records Technician
1.0
3,389 4,337
Rep
NE
City Clerk Subtotal:
5.0
HUMAN RESOURCES
Director of HR/Risk Management
1.0
10,547 14,903
Exec
E
Human Resources Assistant (Confidential)
1.0
4,027 5,689
MCP
NE
Human Resources Technician II (Confidential)
1.0
4,670 6,599
MCP
NE
Senior Management Analyst
1.0
6,280 8,873
MCP
E
Human Resources Subtotal:
4.0
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Management Aide Confidential
1.0
3,146 4,444
MCP
NE
Emergency Management Subtotal:
1.0
FINANCE
Accountant II (Confidential)
Accounting Assistant
Accounting Assistant - Cashier
Accounting Technician 1
1.0
6,127 8,656
MCP
NE
2.0
4,127 5,283
Rep
NE
1.0
4,127 5,283
Rep
NE
1.0
4,555 5,833
Rep
NE
Accounting Technician II
1.0
4,786 6,127
Rep
NE
Business License Technician
1.0
4,555 5,833
Rep
NE
Director of Finance
1.0
11,359 16,049
Exec
E
Fiscal Services Manager
2.0
7,651 10,811
MCP
E
Management Analyst (Limited Term Assignment)
1.0
5,689 8,039
MCP
E
Management Analyst
1.0
5,689 8,039
MCP
E
,Purchasing Manager
1.0
6,438 9,095
MCP
E
Finance Subtotal:
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2020
FY2020-21
Number of
Positions
Salary Schedule
Bargaining
Unit*
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Administrative Assistant
0.5
3,832 4,907
Rep
NE
Assistant Director Information Technology/Support Svcs
1.0
9,095 12,851
MCP
E
Director of Information Technology/Support Svcs
1.0
10,547 14,903
Exec
E
Information Technology Manager
1.0
8,240 11,643
MCP
E
Information Technology Specialist 1
1.0
5,283 6,763
Rep
NE
Information Technology Specialist II
1.0
5,550 7,105
Rep
NE
Information Technology Supervisor
2.0
6,763 8,656
Rep
NE
Information Technology Supervisor (Multimedia Services)
1.0
6,763 8,656
Rep
NE
Information Technology Technician 1
1.0
4,555 5,833
Rep
NE
Senior Information Technology Specialist
2.0
6,127 7,843
Rep
NE
Support Services
Office Specialist II - AM
0.6
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Office Specialist 11- PM
Support Services Supervisor
Support Services Technician
0.6
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
1.0
4,027 5,155
Rep
NE
0.5
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Information Technology Subtotal:
14.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Administrative Assistant
Director of Community Development
Principal Management Analyst
SARDA/CDBG/Service Level D
Assistant Planner
Associate Planner 11
Senior Planner
1.0
3,832 4,907
Rep
NE
1.0
11,359 16,049
Exec
E
1.0
6,932 9,795
MCP
E
0.25
5,283 6,763
Rep
NE
0.5
6,438 8,240
Rep
NE
0.35
7,105 10,039
MCP
E
Planning
Assistant Planner
0.75
5,283 6,763
Rep
NE
Associate Planner 1
2.0
5,833 7,465
Rep
NE
Associate Planner II
1.5
6,438 8,240
Rep
NE
Community Development Technician 1
2.0
4,231 5,415
Rep
NE
Community Development Technician II
2.0
4,670 5,978
Rep
NE
Office Specialist 11
0.5
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Planning Manager
1.0
8,656 12,232
MCP
E
Planning Technician
1.0
4,786 6,127
Rep
NE
Senior Management Analyst
Senior Planner
Building and Safety/Code Enforcement
Building Inspector 1
Building Inspector II
0.1
6,280 8,873
MCP
E
0.65
7,105 10,039
MCP
E
1.0
5,415 6,932
Rep
NE
3.0
5,978 7,651
Rep
NE
Building Official
1.0
9,556 13,501
MCP
E
Code Enforcement Officer II
1.0
4,907 6,280
Rep
NE
Field Supervisor - Code Enforcement
1.0
5,978 7,651
Rep
NE
Office Specialist II
0.5
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Senior Building Inspector
1.0
6,599 8,447
Rep
NE
Senior Code Enforcement Officer
Senior Management Analyst
Senior Office Specialist
1.0
5,415 6,932
Rep
NE
0.9
6,280 8,873
MCP
E
2.0
3,649 4,670
Rep
NE
Community Development Subtotal:
28.0 IN
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2020
FY2020-21
Number of
Positions
Salary Schedule
Bargaining
Unit*
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
PUBLIC WORKS
Administrative Assistant
1.0
3,832 4,907
Rep
NE
Director of Public Works
1.0
12,232 17,283
Exec
E
Principal Management Analyst
1.0
6,932 9,795
MCP
E
CIP Administration
Associate Civil Engineer
2.0
7,651 9,795
Rep
E
Associate Engineer II
3.0
7,283 9,322
Rep
E
Office Specialist II
1.0
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Principal Civil Engineer
1.0
9,556 13,501
MCP
E
Public Works Inspector II
1.0
4,907 6,280
Rep
NE
Senior Civil Engineer
2.0
8,656 12,232
MCP
E
Senior Public Works Inspector (Y-Rate)
1.0
5,587 7,150
Rep
NE
Land Development/NPDES
Associate Civil Engineer
3.0
7,651 9,795
Rep
E
Associate Engineer 1
1.0
6,599 8,447
Rep
E
Associate Engineer II
1.0
7,283 9,322
Rep
E
Office Specialist 11
1.0
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Principal Civil Engineer
1.0
9,556 13,501
MCP
E
Public Works Inspector II
1.0
4,907 6,280
Rep
NE
Senior Public Works Inspector
1.0
5,415 6,932
Rep
NE
Traffic
Assistant Engineer II
1.0
5,978 7,651
Rep
NE
Senior Civil Engineer
1.0
8,656 12,232
MCP
E
Senior Signal Technician
1.0
6,438 8,240
Rep
NE
Signal Technician 1
1.0
5,550 7,105
Rep
NE
Maintenance (Streets, Facilities, Parks)
Custodian I - Facilities
1.0
2,583 3,305
Rep
NE
Custodian II (Y-Rate) - Facilities
1.0
2,862 3,663
Rep
NE
Field Supervisor - Facilities
1.0
5,415 6,932
Rep
NE
Landscape Inspector II
1.0
5,155 6,599
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker - HVAC
1.0
5,415 6,932
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker - Streets
3.0
4,555 5,833
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker- Parks
2.0
4,555 5,833
Rep
NE
Lead Maintenance Worker- Facilities
1.0
4,907 6,280
Rep
NE
Maintenance Manager
1.0
7,843 11,081
MCP
E
Maintenance Supervisor - Streets/Facilities
2.0
6,438 9,095
MCP
E
Maintenance Supervisor - Landscape
1.0
6,932 9,795
MCP
E
Maintenance Worker I - Streets
2.0
3,739 4,786
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker I - Parks
1.0
3,739 4,786
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker I - Facilities
2.0
4,027 5,155
Rep
NE
Maintenance Worker 11 - Streets/Parks
Management Assistant
Office Specialist 11
Senior Landscape Inspector
Senior Office Specialist
Public Works Subtotal:
FIRE
Administrative Assistant
Community Development Technician 1
3.0
4,127 5,283
Rep
NE
1.0
4,231 5,978
Rep
NE
1.0
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
1.0
5,689 7,283
Rep
NE
1.0
1.0
3,649 4,670
3,832 4,907
Rep
Rep
NE
NE
1.0
4,231 5,415
Rep
NE
Community Development Technician 11
1.0
4,670 5,978
Rep
NE
Fire Inspector 1
1.0
6,280 8,039
Rep
NE
Fire Subtotal:
4.0
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
Annual Operating Budget
SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
As of July 1, 2020
FY2020-21
Number of
Positions
Salary Schedule
Bargaining
Unit`
Exempt/Non-
Exempt
Monthly Salary
Minimum Maximum
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Aquatics Supervisor II
1.0
5,415 6,932
Rep
NE
Assistant Director of Community Services
1.0
8,656 12,232
MCP
E
Community Services Assistant
1.0
3,389 4,337
Rep
NE
Community Services Coordinator 1
1.0
4,337 5,550
Rep
NE
Community Services Coordinator II
2.0
4,555 5,833
Rep
NE
Community Services Manager
9.0
7,105 10,039
MCP
E
Community Services Superintendent
1.0
7,843 11,081
MCP
E
Community Services Supervisor 1
3.0
5,028 6,438
Rep
NE
Community Services Supervisor II
2.0
5,283 6,763
Rep
NE
Director of Community Services
1.0
11,359 16,049
Exec
E
Management Aide II
1.0
3,472 4,444
Rep
NE
Management Analyst
1.0
5,689 8,039
MCP
E
Multimedia Coordinator
1.0
5,283 6,763
Rep
NE
Office Specialist 11
1.0
3,305 4,231
Rep
NE
Park Ranger 1
1.0
4,027 5,155
Rep
NE
Park Ranger 11
2.0
4,444 5,689
Rep
NE
Risk Manager
1.0
7,651 10,811
MCP
E
Senior Administrative Assistant
1.0
4,231 5,416
Rep
NE
Senior Management Analyst
1.0
6,280 8,873
MCP
E
Theater Technical Assistant
Theater Technical Coordinator II
1.0
3,389 4,337
Rep
NE
1.0
4,555 51833
1 Rep
NE
Community Services Subtotal:
34.0
Total By Department
Positions
City Council
5.0
City Manager
5.75
Economic Development
5.0
City Clerk
5.0
Human Resources
4.0
Emergency Management
1.0
Finance
13.0
Information Technology
14.2
Community Development
28.0
Public Works
54.0
Fire
4.0
Community Services
Positions:Total of Authorized
34.0
* Bargaining Units:
Rep = Represented
MCP = Management/Confidential
Exec = Executive
" Temporary Positions due to COVID-19
Pandemic include:
(1) Management Assistant (CM), and
(5) Management Aide 111 (ED)
Vacant positions currently on hold due to the COVID-19 pandemic include: (1) Accounting Support Supervisor, (1) Engineering
Technician I, and (1) Community Services Specialist I
Unfunded positions include: (1) Payroll Coordinator (1) Office Specialist I (TCSD), and (1) Community Services Manager (TCSD)
The two TCSD positions are associated with the Margarita Recreation Center and will remain unfunded until the facility has been
rehabilitated and is open for operation.
RESOLUTION NO.2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS
LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Appropriations Limit will be calculated based on the changes in City
population and California per capita personal income.
Section 2. The Appropriations Limit for the City of Temecula for FY 2020-21,
attached hereto, is hereby adopted.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause
a certified resolution to be filed in the office of the City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this 9th day of June 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
City of Temecula
Fiscal Year 2020-21
a
Annual Operating Budget
GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
Article XIIIB of the California State Constitution, more commonly referred to as the Gann Initiative or Gann Limit,
was approved by California voters in November 1979, and placed limits on the amount of proceeds of taxes that
state and local government agencies can receive and spend each year. For cities that incorporated after 1978-
79 (such as the City of Temecula), the voters set the initial appropriations limit at the time of incorporation.
Proposition 111 was approved by California voters in June 1990, which provided new adjustment formulas which
make the appropriations limit more responsive to local growth issues. Each year the City Council must adopt by
resolution the appropriations limit for the following year. Following is the calculation of the City's Gann
Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2020-21:
Fiscal Year 2019-20 Appropriations Limits................................................................... $284,375,703
CityPopulation Growth............................................................................................................0.08%
Per Capita Personal Income Change.........................................................................................3.73%
Fiscal Year 2020-21 Appropriations Limit.......................................................................$295,210,417
Appropriations subject to the limit in the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget total $80,172,527 which is $215,037,890
less than the computed limit. Additional appropriations to the budget funded by non -tax sources such as service
charges, restricted revenues from other agencies, grants or beginning fund balances would be unaffected by the
appropriations limit. However, any supplemental appropriations funded through increased tax sources would
be subject to the appropriations limit and could not exceed the $215,037,890 variance indicated. Further, any
overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $215,037,890 from budget estimates will result in proceeds
from taxes in excess of the City's appropriations limit, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal
years or voter approval of an increase in the City's appropriations limit. Voter approval for an increase in the
City's appropriations limit is not anticipated in the future due to the margin between the limit and tax revenue.
350,000,000
300,000,000
250,000,000
200,000,000
150,000,000
100,000,000
50,000,000
7
GANN Appropriations Limit
0 __W __W
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
2019-20 2020-21
■ Appropriations Subject to Limit Legal Limit
Annual Operating Budget
Item No. 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
DATE: June 9, 2020
SUBJECT: Provide General Direction to Staff on a Proposed Temporary Expanded
Dining/Retail Program in Old Town
PREPARED BY: Brandon Rabidou, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide general direction to staff on whether
to proceed with a proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program in Old Town.
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an unprecedented burden on
local restaurants and retail establishments. Over the past few months, many restaurants located
within the City of Temecula have been operating with limited service (to -go) or no service at all.
A significant portion of retail establishments were limited/closed. Under the current public health
orders, social distancing, reduced occupancy, and other operational restrictions are limiting the
ability of restaurants and retail establishments to service customers as they are allowed to
reopen/expand operations. Analysis from the National Restaurant Association and National Retail
Federation indicates the following:
• Restaurant sales have fallen to the lowest level in 35 yearsl
• Three decades of restaurant jobs were lost in the last two months
• Retail sales have dropped 16.4% in April (nationwide)'
Even amongst these challenging circumstances, the National Restaurant Association's analysis
shows that there is strong consumer demand for restaurants.
As the State of California, and Riverside County Public Health loosen restrictions, the City Council
has directed staff to implement multiple programs (Temecula Revive) that accelerate local
economic activity while maintaining compliance with all State or County mandates. Staff has
developed the Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program to assist businesses during these
challenging times. The Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program consists of two different
avenues for businesses to temporarily expand their businesses.
1 htWs://www.restaurant.orWresearch
2 htWs://www.restaurant.orWresearch
3 https://nrfcom/media-center/press-releases/april-retail-sales-drop-nearly-twice-much-march-during-coronavirus
1. Temporary expansions on private property
2. Temporary expansions within the public right-of-way in Old Town Temecula
Temporary Expansions on Private Property
Temporary expansions on private property would consist of businesses temporarily expanding
their footprint in outdoor areas such as adjacent private parking spaces, private courtyards, or
underutilized private sidewalk/frontage areas. Under the proposed program, applicants would
submit a no fee Temporary Use Permit with a next -day turnaround. The Temporary Use Permit
would ensure that all safety/legal requirements are met. Safety/legal requirements include
maintaining fire access, temporary barriers in parking spaces to protect customers from vehicles,
Americans with Disability Act compliance, and property owner approval. This program would
serve a wide range of restaurant and retail establishments throughout the City but would not
provide adequate relief to restaurants and retail establishments within Old Town Temecula, due to
the urban nature of the district.
Temporary Expansions within the Public Right -of -Way in Old Town Temecula
The unique urban nature of Old Town Temecula requires a different solution than other areas of
the City. Consequently, staff has developed a Temporary Expansion Dining/Retail program within
the public right-of-way for Old Town Temecula. The proposed expansions in Old Town would
allow restaurants/retail to utilize temporary street closures and sidewalks within the public right-
of-way to temporarily expand the footprint of businesses. Under the current proposal, Old Town
Front Street, Fifth Street, and Fourth Street would be temporally closed to vehicular traffic.
Applicants for the program would submit a Special Event Permit at no cost, with a next day
turnaround. The Special Event Permit would include a licensing agreement that would allow the
program to be stopped at the City's discretion. Staff is working with various internal and external
partners to address prospective issues, take appropriate public safety precautions, and help support
our businesses within the Old Town area.
On Friday, May 29, 2020, the City Council Old Town Steering Subcommittee (Naggar/Schwank)
received a presentation from staff regarding the proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail
program. At the conclusion of that meeting the City Council subcommittee directed staff to bring
the Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail proposal to the City Council on June 9, 2020. Staff
received fourteen public comments regarding the proposed program. All comments were
supportive of the Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program.
Staff is looking for general direction from the City Council on whether to proceed with the
program.
CEQA
The proposed Program is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act because it can be
with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption and implementation of the proposed
program may have a significant effect on the environment, because the Program only provides for
temporary uses of already developed urban space. It is therefore not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act review pursuant to Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15061(b)(3) of the
California Code of Regulations. The uses authorized by the proposed program are minor public or
private alterations in the condition of land which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic
trees. Therefore, the proposed program is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act
review pursuant to Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15304(e) of the California Code of Regulations.
FISCAL IMPACT: Existing funds would be adequate to implement and facilitate the
program. Program expenses could be offset by increased retail sales that would otherwise be absent
under the current COVID-19 circumstances.
ATTACHMENTS: None
ELECTRONIC COMMENTS
SUBMITTED FOR THE
RECORD
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:51 AM
To:krissybunny1
Subject:RE: Public concern for city council
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: krissybunny1 <
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:44 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public concern for city council
We have 100's of upset children and parents who just want to finish our little league season. As of now we will
be canceling the season on the 13th if the fields don't open. The children have already had to go thru so much
during this time and LOVE playing this sport. Let them have something! We drive past bars/restaurants that are
packed with people that have no social distance and our kids aren't able to throw a ball from 8 feet apart.
Temecula hasn't been harshly affected by covid and the kids should get to finish the season. The fields are
plenty big for family's to social distance. There is absolutely no reason to not let them play. Please reopen the
fields and let us finish our games and season. Please care a little bit about the kids and not just businesses.
They're affected too
Kristiana Ruiz
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S10, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:52 AM
To:Jessica Ward
Subject:RE: Public Comment - Community Services
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Jessica Ward <
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:34 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment - Community Services
Good afternoon -
I am requesting this comment to be read during the community services portion of the June 9th meeting.
My name is Jessica Ward and I am a long time board member of Temecula Little League. I am reaching out to ask that
the City Council discuss and approve reopening of athletic fields for Youth Sports usage. We are excited to see that
Professional Sports are able to continue on Friday 6/12, though there was no mention of Youth Sports. We have reached
out to the State Essential Services department, and they confirmed that Youth Sports fall within Stage 3, however the
State has failed to provide any guidelines. Today, we also asked Riverside County to approve the usage of athletic fields
for Youth Sports such as baseball, which is an extremely low contact sport. If I can go into a Bar surrounded by people,
our children should be able to play a baseball game in the park. The Skate Park and Pump track are open and being used
daily by a large number of people SAFELY, so we are asking to be given the opportunity to do the same for athletic
fields.
While we understand opening up athletic fields is low on the priority level at this time because there are a ton of
businesses around our City still closed, we didn't want Youth Sports to fall by the wayside as it is an integral part of
children’s lives. We know this will be a great outlet for kids who have been stuck inside for weeks with no ability to fully
practice their athletic hobbies.
Our current plan is to space out players in the dugout and bullpens, hand sanitizer stations in every dugout, wipe down
the balls between each half inning and recommend our players perform temperature checks before each practice/game
. All of these things, while different than normal play, will allow our Coaches/Players/Families to conform to the State
2
health guidelines while participating in something that is good for their mental and physical health.
We appreciate your time and consideration of these requests.
Jessica Ward
Scheduler, Media & Website Manager
Temecula Little League
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:34 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Temecula Police Presence At Temecula Duck Pond on Saturday, May 30
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Eva Smith <
Date: June 1, 2020 at 9:46:47 AM PDT
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak
Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Subject: Temecula Police Presence At Temecula Duck Pond on Saturday, May 30
Good morning City Council members,
I am writing you as a concerned Temecula resident of over 20 years. On Saturday, May 30th we witness an enormous
number of
police presence at the peaceful protest. You can locate multiple videos on Twitter under the hashtag,
#TemeculaProtest. The peaceful protest was organized by High school students in the Temecula area.
Were you aware that there were families at the protest?
Were you aware there were children at the protest?
Were you aware there were moms, dads and kids in strollers at the protest?
The City put a lot of innocent people at risk with the unnecessary show of force. I saw parents clutching their children
in their arms.
I saw teen frozen in fear of what the police was going to do next.
At no point did it become an unlawful assembly. At no point was anyone involved in destruction. The force wasn't just
strong, it
was an overkill. You stopped all the parents in their tracks and everyone started recording in disbelief that that the police
was going to do next.
Why was this amount of police presence was necessary? Where is the civility, compassion, empathy and unity that our
community needs at this time from its leadership? This is not the Temecula that we have grown fond of and love. As a
2
registered voter and active member of my community, I am concerned about the direction the city of Temecula is
headed.
Concerned Temecula Citizen.
Eva Smith
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:35 PM
To:
Subject:RE: request sensitivity training
Thank you for your email Gia. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Gia Rueda <
Date: June 1, 2020 at 9:58:01 AM PDT
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak
Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: request sensitivity training
June 1, 2020
Re: Request Sensitivity Training for Temecula City Employees
To the Temecula City Council:
I used to be that cop that responded, “All lives matter,” but I know better now.
If I told you I battled breast cancer in 2019, and that breast cancer research is important, would
you assert, "No. Pancreatic cancer research is important!"? No, you wouldn’t. When someone is
trying to convey strongly held feelings, we don’t actively try to negate their personal
experiences. And it is the same with our current civil unrest.
On May 30, 2020, at the Temecula Duck Pond, a Riverside County Sheriff’s Deputy was having
a polite discussion with a group of protesters. During this discussion he asserted, “All lives
matter.” I know he meant well, and I understand the intent of his response. The comment is
2
truthful- standing alone. But when it is said in response to “Black lives matter,” the statement is
racially charged and insensitive.
To say Black Lives Matter, does not mean other lives don’t matter. It is a statement that social
injustice is not okay. It is not the time to say, "Well, white people need social justice too." White
people have been on the winning end of social inequality for centuries.
I respectfully request that all Temecula City Employees, but most specifically, deputies and their
supervisors assigned to Temecula Police Department undergo sensitivity training, presumably as
part of their on-going Civil Rights/diversity/inclusion training.
The goal of training would be:
· to understand historically the centuries old struggle fueling the anger behind the Black Lives
Matter movement.
· learn to actively listen, instead of giving a visceral response.
· to understand what White Privilege is not an insult; it's a simple state of being that life will not
be made more difficult simply due to the color of your skin.
· to understand the insulting and counterproductive nature of the flippant retort “All lives
matter.”
· to agree with the speaker, or at minimum to remain respectfully silent when they hear “Black
lives matter.”
I would also recommend that the training include, or to be led by people/person of color, a
community representative, who wants to effect change by working in partnership with the
police. Ms. Denise Y Denson-Hains has volunteered to lead this training.
I used to be that cop that responded, “All lives matter.” But I know better now. I want to share
this truth with you. I can emphatically say, without reservation, without preamble, without
apology, without alteration: BLACK LIVES MATTER.
Our country is on the precipice of change and it's being led by kids like our Temecula youth. I
am hopeful that the City of Temecula can actively listen to the outpouring of frustration from
our community and help escort our city into a new era of equality.
Respectfully submitted,
Gia Rueda
Temecula Resident & Retired Police Sergeant
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:38 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Injustices in America
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Israel Mazariegos <
Date: June 1, 2020 at 10:18:52 PM PDT
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak
Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Injustices in America
Hello City council members,
My name is Israel Mazariegos and I have been a resident of Riverside County for just about four years.
Before that i lived in a small town called Moorpark (Ventura County). As the years have gone by my
interest in politics and social justice has only grown. Though the world is filled with many joys and
immense beauty, it is also filled with pain, unrest, and atrocities we must not shy away from.
I am merely a 23 year old Hispanic-American man. Racial slurs and prejudice towards me have come
few and far between. I am blessed to have grown up in the communities i did, but there are thousands
of others who cannot say the same. The current outcry of the Black Lives Matter movement is one of
many years.
I write this letter to you asking for guidance during this historical time. History is being written whether
you or I get involved. I ask for your help, for a direction i should be going. I live in Murrieta; Lake
Elsinore, Menifee, Hemet, and Temecula are my neighboring cities. What can i become involved in?
Who are local officials i can meet? Who do i discuss these, and future issues with? Where do i
volunteer?
There is a regular meeting every 2nd and 4th Tuesday of every month in the City Council Chambers, is
2
this open to the public? I would love to attend tomorrow! A good phone number to reach me at is (
Protesting is power for the people, yet there is more that can be done. Help me help our community.
Help me help our world.
Sincerely,
Israel Mazariegos
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:36 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Temecula Policing Policies
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Savannah McLaughlin <
Date: June 1, 2020 at 11:16:02 AM PDT
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>,
Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak
Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Zachary Hall <zachary.hall@temeculaca.gov>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Temecula Policing Policies
Dear Mayor Stewart, Council Members, Captain Hall, and Temecula Police Department,
I am a resident of Temecula and I am getting in touch because I am deeply troubled by what I have
seen recently of the treatment of Black Americans by police in police departments nationwide. I
would like to know what kinds of safeguards our town's police department has in place to prevent
police brutality and incidents of racism by police.
Does Temecula PD perform any kind of anti-racism training for officers?
Are Temecula PD officers required to wear body cameras to record their responses to calls on
video?
Does Temecula PD train its officers in de-escalation?
Are new recruits screened in any way to prevent the hiring of racists, for instance by looking at social
media posts?
How does internal affairs investigate and respond to reports of discrimination by officers?
If these safeguards are not in place, and they certainly should be, I would support my local taxes
paying to fund these interventions.
Additional, tangible policy recommendations can be found
here: https://static1.squarespace.com/…/1590859294859/CampaignZer…
2
Thank you for your attention to my concerns. These are very literally matters of life and death. I hope
to hear back from you soon.
Sincerely,
Savannah McLaughlin
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:36 PM
To:saman
Subject:RE: Legislative Action for BLM
Thank you for your email Saman. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: saman <
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:31 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Legislative Action for BLM
To Whom It May Concern,
My name is Saman Arzo and I am a resident of Temecula, California. I am writing to demand the following
legislative changes you can make to eradicate the decimation of Black people at the hands of police officers.
The following is a compilation of background information and implementation strategies for necessary
legislative actions derived from collecting the pleas of Black organizers, activists, and journalists:
1. Redirect Police Funding
Phillip McHarris (doctoral candidate focusing on race) and Thenjiwe McHarris (strategist with the Movement
for Black Lives) explain the problem with current police reform efforts:
“More training or diversity among police officers won’t end police brutality, nor will firing and charging
individual officers. Look at the Minneapolis Police Department, which is held up as a model of progressive
police reform. The department offers procedural justice as well as trainings for implicit bias, mindfulness and
de-escalation. It embraces community policing and officer diversity, bans ‘warrior style’ policing, uses body
cameras, implemented an early intervention system to identify problematic officers, receives training around
mental health crisis intervention, and practices ‘reconciliation’ efforts in communities of color.”
2
Evidently, that was not enough. Instead of heightening the resources that officers have, they advocate
redirecting funds to alternative emergency response programs, which can also be fueled by state-level and local-
level grants. The McHarris’ argument is that we should work towards a reality in which healthcare workers and
emergency response teams should handle substance abuse, domestic violence, homelessness, or mental health
cases, while rapid response social workers provide individuals with the care they need. Community organizers
would be responsible for spearheading responses to the pandemic. “The average police recruit spends 58 hours
learning how to shoot and only 8 hours learning how to de-escalate .” Police officers are not trained nor
necessary in reacting to such crises—specialized responders are.
Most police funding is budgeted and taxed at the local level, with city-level and county-level votes periodically
increasing budgets. In 2017, Oakland allocated the highest share of its general fund to policing nationwide, at
41 percent and $242.5 million. It is crucial to establish state-level and local-level bans on heightening police
funds, while simultaneously redirecting budgets to the aforementioned alternatives.
For-profit policing is a large culprit. Even though Governor Brown’s 2016 bill helped protect Californians from
civil asset forfeitures, this is far from sufficient. As of 2020, 66.25% of forfeiture profits go to police—a C+
rating.
The Black Lives Matter Movement demands “acknowledgment and accountability for the devaluation and
dehumanization of Black life at the hands of the police… We call for a national defunding of police. We
demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.”
The McHarris’ conclusion states, “We need to reimagine public safety in ways that shrink and eventually
abolish police and prisons while prioritizing education, housing, economic security, mental health and
alternatives to conflict and violence.”
A persistent, genuine, and well-thought-out legislative effort to redirect police funds and end for-profit policing
is imperative.
2. Abolish Legislative Police Protections
Murderers who wear a badge have consistently been given a free pass to decimate Black life. BLM “demand[s]
accountability [for] those who are victims of police violence.”
It is vital to ensure that police officers are met with precisely the same consequences as their badgeless
counterparts. Accountability has been denied to Black people for centuries, and it is crucial to impose l egislative
confirmation that accountability is ensured.
Campaign Zero is an organization dedicated to “limiting police interventions, improving community
interactions, and ensuring accountability.”
They propose a solution of independent investigations. Because only 1% of all killings by police lead to an
officer being charged with a crime, “independent investigations and prosecutions of police officers” must be
mandated to eliminate biases. A broken system should not be evaluating itself.
3. Demilitarize the Police
3
Campaign Zero emphasizes that studies show how “more militarized police departments are significantly more
likely to kill civilians.” Unfortunately, “the federal 1033 program transfers military weapons to police
departments.”
Campaign Zero continues that to demilitarize, we must “prohibit cities and counties from using federal funds to
purchase military equipment.”
California is not void of this indictment. In total, 41 MRAPs are in the possession of law enforcement agencies
in California. All in all, California’s quantity of purchasing such outlandish and high-level military technology
is unmatched: “In terms of cash value, California gets more 1033 gear than other states.”
Even though the LAPD has refused to take on more military equipment, they stated that “the department will
replenish and replace” existing equipment. Such measures must be barred in an effort to eventually demilitarize
the police force entirely in the long run.
Police departments should be restricted from using federal grant money to purchase military equipment, using
the SWAT team, or conducting no-knock raids. Over-weaponized departments must reduce their use of weapon
stockpiles, as “agencies should seek to return to the federal government the military equipment that has already
been received” as places like San Jose already have.
The warranting is simple: “Military equipment naturally increases military-style training for said equipment.
That training can increase the other dimensions of militarization,” contributing to the war-like mentality
implicitly enforced by the police, who have no place fighting wars against the most disenfranchised members of
their communities.
I hope that our legislators can take tangible, policy-level initiatives to defend Black lives, something they have
failed to do so up until this point. Please listen to the pleas of the Black entities listed above and countless
others, and help give rise to a future where Black folks do not have to fear for their lives on a daily basis.
Sincerely but not silently,
Saman Arzo
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:39 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Police Training and Discipline
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Allen Kugi <
Date: June 2, 2020 at 2:15:58 PM PDT
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak
Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>, James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn
<matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar
<mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Subject: Police Training and Discipline
I would like to see a message from the mayor and city council members on
the Temecula Government Website explaining police training and police
discipline procedures. In light of what has happened in Minneapolis recently,
as well as evidence of systemic racism nationwide, what improvements can
be made to assure police will do their duty without racial profiling or
discrimination? I don’t want to hear that no changes need to be made
because everything is working just fine in Temecula. I want to know what
new additional training and discipline procedures will be enacted
now. Hopefully, this training will not be needed for most officers, but just to
be safe, it’s time to double-down to root out any conscious or unconscious
racism in our police.
I’m a white retired senior and Temecula homeowner since 1994. I recall an
incident back some ten or more years ago when I called the police to report
a suspicious activity in my Temecula neighborhood. The first thing the
2
police man asked me over the phone was “Is he black?” When I said no, I
was surprised to sense an immediate loss of interest in the seriousness of
my call. I remember at the time thinking, this cop is a racist.
Allen Kugi
Temecula, CA 92592
Sent from
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been mov ed, renamed, or deleted.
Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.Outlook
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:36 PM
To:Amber Sosa
Subject:RE: WE DEMAND JUSTICE NOW
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Amber Sosa <
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:41 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: WE DEMAND JUSTICE NOW
To Whom It May Concern,
My name is Amber Sosa and I am a resident of Temecula, California. I am writing to demand the following
legislative changes you can make to eradicate the decimation of Black people at the hands of police officers.
The following is a compilation of background information and implementation strategies for necessary
legislative actions derived from collecting the pleas of Black organizers, activists, and journalists:
1. Redirect Police Funding
Phillip McHarris (doctoral candidate focusing on race) and Thenjiwe McHarris (strategist with the Movement
for Black Lives) explain the problem with current police reform efforts:
“More training or diversity among police officers won’t end police brutality, nor will firing and charging
individual officers. Look at the Minneapolis Police Department, which is held up as a model of progressive
police reform. The department offers procedural justice as well as trainings for implicit bias, mindfulness and
de-escalation. It embraces community policing and officer diversity, bans ‘warrior style’ policing, uses body
cameras, implemented an early intervention system to identify problematic officers, receives training around
mental health crisis intervention, and practices ‘reconciliation’ efforts in communities of color.”
Evidently, that was not enough. Instead of heightening the resources that officers have, they advocate
redirecting funds to alternative emergency response programs, which can also be fueled by state-level and local-
level grants. The McHarris’ argument is that we should work towards a reality in which healthcare workers and
emergency response teams should handle substance abuse, domestic violence, homelessness, or mental health
cases, while rapid response social workers provide individuals with the care they need. Community organizers
would be responsible for spearheading responses to the pandemic. “The average police recruit spends 58 hours
2
learning how to shoot and only 8 hours learning how to de-escalate .” Police officers are not trained nor
necessary in reacting to such crises—specialized responders are.
Most police funding is budgeted and taxed at the local level, with city-level and county-level votes periodically
increasing budgets. In 2017, Oakland allocated the highest share of its general fund to policing nationwide, at
41 percent and $242.5 million. It is crucial to establish state-level and local-level bans on heightening police
funds, while simultaneously redirecting budgets to the aforementioned alternatives.
For-profit policing is a large culprit. Even though Governor Brown’s 2016 bill helped protect Californians from
civil asset forfeitures, this is far from sufficient. As of 2020, 66.25% of forfeiture profits go to police—a C+
rating.
The Black Lives Matter Movement demands “acknowledgment and accountability for the devaluation and
dehumanization of Black life at the hands of the police… We call for a national defunding of police. We
demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.”
The McHarris’ conclusion states, “We need to reimagine public safety in ways that shrink and eventually
abolish police and prisons while prioritizing education, housing, economic security, mental health and
alternatives to conflict and violence.”
A persistent, genuine, and well-thought-out legislative effort to redirect police funds and end for-profit policing
is imperative.
2. Abolish Legislative Police Protections
Murderers who wear a badge have consistently been given a free pass to decimate Black life. BLM “demand[s]
accountability [for] those who are victims of police violence.”
It is vital to ensure that police officers are met with precisely the same consequences as their badgeless
counterparts. Accountability has been denied to Black people for centuries, and it is crucial to impose legislative
confirmation that accountability is ensured.
Campaign Zero is an organization dedicated to “limiting police interventions, improving community
interactions, and ensuring accountability.”
They propose a solution of independent investigations. Because only 1% of all killings by police lead to an
officer being charged with a crime, “independent investigations and prosecutions of police officers” must be
mandated to eliminate biases. A broken system should not be evaluating itself.
3. Demilitarize the Police
Campaign Zero emphasizes that studies show how “more militarized police departments are significantly more
likely to kill civilians.” Unfortunately, “the federal 1033 program transfers military weapons to police
departments.”
Campaign Zero continues that to demilitarize, we must “prohibit cities and counties from using federal funds to
purchase military equipment.”
California is not void of this indictment. In total, 41 MRAPs are in the possession of law enforcement agencies
in California. All in all, California’s quantity of purchasing such outlandish and high-level military technology
is unmatched: “In terms of cash value, California gets more 1033 gear than other states.”
Even though the LAPD has refused to take on more military equipment, they stated that “the department will
replenish and replace” existing equipment. Such measures must be barred in an effort to eventually demilitarize
the police force entirely in the long run.
Police departments should be restricted from using federal grant money to purchase military equipment, using
the SWAT team, or conducting no-knock raids. Over-weaponized departments must reduce their use of weapon
stockpiles, as “agencies should seek to return to the federal government the military equipment that has already
been received” as places like San Jose already have.
The warranting is simple: “Military equipment naturally increases military-style training for said equipment.
That training can increase the other dimensions of militarization,” contributing to the war-like mentality
implicitly enforced by the police, who have no place fighting wars against the most disenfranchised members of
their communities.
I hope that our legislators can take tangible, policy-level initiatives to defend Black lives, something they have
failed to do so up until this point. Please listen to the pleas of the Black entities listed above and countless
others, and help give rise to a future where Black folks do not have to fear for their lives on a daily basis.
3
Sincerely but not silently,
Amber Sosa
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 4:08 PM
To:
Subject:RE: To the Mayor, Council Members, & Police Chief
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ricky Denham <
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:56 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>;
Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak
Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Zachary Hall <zachary.hall@temeculaca.gov>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: To the Mayor, Council Members, & Police Chief
Dear Mayor Stewart, Council Members, Captain Hall, and Temecula Police Department,
I am a resident of Temecula and I am getting in touch because I am deeply troubled by what I have
seen recently of the treatment of Black Americans by police in police departments nationwide. I
would like to know what kinds of safeguards our town's police department has in place to prevent
police brutality and incidents of racism by police.
Does Temecula PD perform any kind of anti-racism training for officers?
Are Temecula PD officers required to wear body cameras to record their responses to calls on
video?
Does Temecula PD train its officers in de-escalation?
Are new recruits screened in any way to prevent the hiring of racists, for instance by looking at social
media posts?
How does internal affairs investigate and respond to reports of discrimination by officers?
Do Black Lives Matter to you?
If these safeguards are not in place, and they certainly should be, I would support my local taxes
paying to fund these interventions.
Additional, tangible policy recommendations can be found
here: https://static1.squarespace.com/…/1590859294859/CampaignZer…
Thank you for your attention to my concerns. These are very literally matters of life and death. I hope
to hear back from you soon.
2
Sincerely,
Fredrick "Ricky" Denham II
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 4:11 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Systemic Reform
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Alyssa Garcia <
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:48 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Matt
Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Systemic Reform
Dear Temecula City Council Members,
My name is Alyssa Garcia and I am a 25 year resident of Temecula, CA. Today I am writing to you in an
attempt to understand how my local government is planning on protecting its members of color from racial
injustice. In light of recent events, it is clear that there is no longer an “if” when it comes to the presence of
racial bias in the police force and local governments. I urge you to understand that although racism by police
officers and officials is not always recorded in our community, it does exist. Please take the time to speak and
listen to the black residents that you vow to serve and protect and they will tell you that they experience racial
discrimination every day. You are in a great position of power and with that comes the responsibility to do
everything you can to protect people of all races, ethnicities, and walks of life. I am ultimately writing to you
today to ask what you specifically are doing to ensure that lives like that of George Floyd are no longer taken by
the hand (or knee) of the corrupt. The Minnesota Department of Human Rights is currently doing an in-depth
investigation of the Minneapolis Police Department over the course of the past ten years. What is California
Legislation doing to hold our police departments accountable? Are the police who are being dispatched to local
protests wearing functioning body cameras? Perhaps review of these videos are a good place to start.
Lastly, I would like to thank you, the political leaders, and police officers who are genuinely doing their part to
create safety and peace in an overwhelming time of crisis. In this time, I urge you to really empathize with those
who are crying out for their governments to show that every life has value. There are currently two deadly
diseases taking the lives of thousands everyday: COVID-19 and racism. Perhaps if our government treated both
as such, we would not still be in this position.
2
Thank you for your time,
Alyssa Garcia
Temecula CA 92591
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:04 PM
To:Rainer Rosilez
Subject:RE: On May 30th at the Duck Pond
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Rainer Rosilez <
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 9:05 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: On May 30th at the Duck Pond
Greetings,
I'm writing in regards to the happenings of the peaceful protest at the duck pond on May 30th. I was there from
approximately 3 PM to 5:45 PM, and what I saw was a prime example of why these sorts of protests need to happen.
While I understand that some individuals did cross into illegal territory when they began to protest in the street, the vast
majority stayed within the permitted territory (including myself.) The county's officers came in with the goal of showing
strength and decided before those incidents started that they were going to make a show of those protesting. They
decided that the group, composed of predominantly teens and young adults, we're thugs that needed to be policed and
herded. It felt like officers wanted to intimidate protestors, instead of protecting and serving them. As a transgender,
queer Chicano, I don't feel safe when the MAGA folks have their rallies at the duck pond. I don't see the county sending
in officers to intimidate those folks, but they had no problem sending numerous officers there when we were peacefully
protesting injustice. Who is Riverside County really protecting? The City of Temecula needs to speak out about the
blatant injustice that is the policing in our county and our country; the first step needs to be calling out the problematic
approach the officers took on May 30th. You want the people of Temecula to respect the police presence? Then make
the police presence respectable.
If you have any questions about my experience, feel free to reach out to me. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Rain Rosilez
He/They
2
BA, Sociology (Law & Society)
University of California, Davis - 2018
JD Candidate, Matriculating 2020
University of Wisconsin Law School
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:03 PM
To:
Subject:RE: 21st Century policing Report
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Judy Torres <
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 3:29 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: 21st Century policing Report
Esteemed Mayor and Council. Members,
I urge you to support and pledge to establish the foundation for policing policy that will eliminate the crime of
police murder and brutality against people of color and the rest of society. Institute the principle s in the the 21st
Century Policing as outlined in Obama.org.
Join city government across the nation to make police work effective and morally correct to end crimes by
police and the keep the public safe. Pledge
to implement 21st Policing.
Prevent other person's of color suffering and death due to brutal police abuse.
This problem of exteme police
Abuse can occur in the future
In Temecula. I implore you to act now
Sincerely,
Judy C. Torres
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:59 AM
To:
Subject:RE: James Stewart; Comments and Resignation
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Karleigh Shepard <
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 8:01 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: James Stewart; Comments and Resignation
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Karleigh Shepard and I am a concerned citizen of Temecula who believes that James Stewart should resign as Mayor.
Tonight I came across a screenshot of an email shared between another constituent and Stewart on social media (see: attached) and
was disappointed in the city government as a whole. Within the message Stewart states “I don’t believe there’s ever been a good
person of color killed by a police officer,” an ignorant, short-sighted comment that suggests extra-judicial killings of people of color
are justified based on their skin color and the white perception of African Americans as “dangerous”. People of color are people too,
however it seems that James Stewart doesn’t understand this given the callous unthinking comments he made.
Furthermore, Stewart’s rhetoric effectively criminalizes George Floyd, Sandra Bland, Trayvon Martin, and the long list of other
African Americans who’ve been brutally murdered by the police. Not only does this statement directly contradict Stewart’s comment
that “racism is not excepted [sic] or tolerated in the City of Temecula, but alienates a large swath of the population. Given the protests
spreading across all fifty states and several countries including France, Germany, and South Korea, these comments are insensitive at
best and carry tones of white supremacy at worse.
I am deeply disappointed with the city government and will be taking further action to make this exchange known by all. Therefore, I
am formally calling for the resignation of James Stewart as Mayor of Temecula effective immediately.
Karleigh Shepard
2
3
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:02 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Concerned families in Temecula
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Victoria Serrano <
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 11:07 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Concerned families in Temecula
Hello,
My family, friends, and I have seen your email reply to a concerned family in regards to what you and your team is doing
to end police brutality in our community, your response was ignorant and undeniably uneducated. You obviously don’t
know anything about what happens in “your city” since you’re unaware of an innocent black man being beaten by police
officers here in Temecula, an officer instigating violence at last weeks first BLM protest, and racist high school students
that will grow up to be those same authorities. Saying “I have African-American friends” proves nothing other than show
how absolutely ignorant you are to racism in America. Do better. Educate yourself because we can vote you out.
Sincerely,
Victoria Serrano
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:01 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Police Reform
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ginger Hitzke <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 7:52 AM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov >
Subject: Police Reform
Hello Mayor Stewart,
I am writing to you today to ask that you consider making police reform in Temecula a
priority in 2020.
I want to know what you plan to do to prevent a murder by a police officer like so many
that have occurred in our lifetime.
Thank you.
- Ginger -
Ginger Hitzke
Temecula, CA 92592
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:58 AM
To:
Subject:RE: JAME STEWART
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
-----Original Message-----
From: sarah velotta <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 9:10 AM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: JAME STEWART
Hello,
My name is Sarah Velotta and I am a resident of Hemet, California. I would like to voice how utterly disgusted with the
city of Temecula and the mayor. As an educator to children of all races, I would like to say that by the mayor stating,
“And I don’t believe there’s ever been a good person of color killed by a police officer”, this is allowing all children and
adults of color to believe that your mayor has qualifications for which people of color should be brutally murdered by
police. You should be ashamed that this is the face of your city. I do hope you consider the feelings and safety of the
brown and black folks in the community. Please reconsider who you choose to represent that city of Temecula.
Kind regards,
Sarah Velotta
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:27 AM
To:
Subject:RE: FW: 💬Citizen Note -Temecula-#311741 City Manager's Office [05696]
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Abram Cerda <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 3:29 PM
To: Luisa Tovar <luisa.tovar@temeculaca.gov>
Cc: Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar
<mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Council Assistant
<council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Re: FW: 💬 Citizen Note -Temecula-#311741 City Manager's Office [05696]
Good Afternoon,
Thank you for your response. I am a bit confused as to why a complaint against the Mayor would be
forward to the mayor himself for review? It would seem more appropriate for the city council to review
complaints against the Mayor, and grossly biased for someone to review a complaint against
themselves.
Can you please explain and/or make sure this gets forwarded to the city council? Actually, I found
their emails and CC'd them here.
Dearest City Council members, I am born/raised in Temecula. This complaint is with regards to the
Email and "facebook apology" from the Mayor I have attached to this email thread. I am sure you
have all read the article from the Press Enterprise posted just hours ago as well which addresses his
racist email. In my time living here, I have witnessed countless anti-Black racism against Black folks
by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, as well as by private security across the city. Again,
being a non-Black person myself, you really need to hold space for Black residents to come forward
with their experiences. Your negligence to do so at this time contributes to these cycles of system
racism.
2
Action Item For The Council -
Can you please respond with regards to hosting a virtual town hall meeting and issue a statement
that addresses the Mayor's egregious racist comment, repercussions for his actions (this is arguably
an ethics violation) AND addressing reform for the Riverside County Sheriff's Department's presence
in Temecula? Before you jump on board and echo the Mayor's denial of racism or police brutality
being experienced by folks in the community, please host a town hall where you actually listen to
Black folks in our community...
Do your research & listen to the community.
https://frenchvalleypress.com/matthew-tucker-update-teen-fatally-shot-by-riverside-county-
police/?fbclid=IwAR1Ad_ZcxXXW70nCPBHMzttT0woWN7BYHio_IF8wRMnLwgV9wfm0jaDc4ck
https://www.pe.com/2018/12/27/20-years-after-tyisha-miller-was-killed-by-riverside-police-what-is-her-
legacy/
Thank you.
Abram
Abram Cerda | Documentary Filmmaker
Pronouns: he/him/his
___________________________________
W: www.abramcerda.com
E:
C: (
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 3:10 PM Luisa Tovar <luisa.tovar@temeculaca.gov> wrote:
Good afternoon Mr. Abram,
I have forwarded your email inquiry via the CivicApp to the Mayor directly for his review. The CivicApp inquiry
was forwarded to me and I made sure to forward it to him directly so he can read it. That is the reason the
“resolved” appeared on your end via the CivicApp.
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to email me.
Luisa Tovar
Executive Assistant
City of Temecula
(951) 694-6416
luisa.tovar@temeculaca.gov
TemeculaCA.gov
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
3
From: Temecula <reply@mycivicapps.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 2:58 PM
To: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: 💬 Citizen Note -Temecula-#311741 City Manager's Office [05696]
Temecula
Notes Added By Citizen - #311741
Citizen Note:
Hi, How is this resolved? Sincerely, Abram
Status
resolved
Work Order
#311741
Issue Type
City Manager's Office
Staff Member(s)
Luisa Tovar
Notes
Hello,
The mayor of Temecula, Stew James Stewart, on June 3rd, posted the below email and "apology" for what is an egregiously
racist response to a citizen's request for information on the City of Temecula's response to national demand for reform to
address police brutality on a local level. These actions and this inappropriate response from the mayor merit a review of his
position in power for this city.
Stating you “don’t know” if anyone in Temecula has had issues with police brutality is not an appropriate response to
addressing the National conversation and movement for reform with the residents of the city you were elected to govern. Do
better. This is not ok. And coming onto a Facebook group to save face for a lackluster response, mentioning your “African-
American” friends is absolutely inappropriate and demonstrates what real disregard and lack of care you have for these
issues. Some action items for the mayor...1) Issue an apology 2) do research on these issues and 3) Acknowledge that
systemic racism and police brutality exist and the need for reform and consequence & 4) hold a virtual town hall where you
listen to Temecula residents concerns.
Sincerely,
Abram Cerda
Image
4
Reporter Name
Abram Cerda
Email
Phone
Report Submitted
JUN 04, 2020 - 1:12 PM
Please do not change subject line when responding.
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:25 AM
To:
Subject:RE:
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Mina m <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:00 PM
To: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject:
Dear local government official,
I am Mia Michael, a constituent raised in Menifee, and I am calling on you to denounce Temecula Mayor James
Stewart’s recent words and actions. When asked about police brutality by his constituent, he responded with a
poorly written paragraph including word-for-word statements like “i don’t believe there’s ever been a good
person of color killed by a police officer”, “I’m kind of confuse what you’re looking for”, and “racism is not
tolerated or excepted in the city of temecula. Or any surrounding areas I know for sure”. Now, let’s break down
each of these statements.
For the first statement, he later claimed, only after being publicly held accountable, that he did not mean to say
“good”, that it was a simple typo. However there are many holes in this statement. Firstly, he made that claim
after this email became public and he began receiving backlash. It truly seems to be a lazy excuse, as he did not
say this privately to the person he was conversing with once he realized his mistake. Secondly, the content of
the entire email aligns with that perspective. In addition, if this claim about it being a typo is true, that means
the mayor of the city would recklessly send out an email in response to the serious question of police brutality
and murder without care, without proof-reading, and without truly answering any questions and instead
deflecting responsibility to others. This is not how any public official should act.
He claims no people of color have been killed by police in Temecula, but Matthew Tucker was murdered on
May 4th, 2016, after he called the police for suicide intervention. The fact that the mayor of this city had no idea
of this young man’s tragic death is disgusting. Moreover, on May 30th, a peaceful protest in Temecula was
2
deemed an “unlawful gathering” and six people were arrested for practicing their first amendment right. It’s
clear through his actions that he does not care for his people he is supposed to represent.
For the second statement, the original email sent to mayor Stewart was quite clear as to what they wanted. We
want public officials who don’t hide behind excuses and claim that its someone else’s job to govern and care for
their city. Yes Temecula and the surrounding area is policed by Riverside county police, but as mayor you still
have the power and capability to make change. We constituents want elected officials who do everything in
their power to stop unjust murder. Even though you might not have full autonomous control of the police, you
still can make statements, call for action, educate people, and denounce police brutality. This is not a
controversial topic anymore, as all 50 states have had protests and so have many other countries. We are asking
on you and all other officials to use your platform for good.
Lastly, he claims that surrounding areas are not racist. This is where you come into play. If this statement is
truthful, then you will do everything in your power to put a stop for this. In case you don’t know how to start
with that, here are a few ideas:
-Denounce mayor Stewart’s bigoted words.
•this is by far the easiest action you could take to support your black constituents.
-Educate yourself about this issue:
•By watching documentaries like 13th, Time: the Kalief Browder story, and Crime + Punishment.
•By reading books like me and white supremacy, the new Jim Crow, and women, race, and class.
-Publicly advocate for police reform by:
•joining campaigns like #8cantwait (the 8 policies that have been shown to reduce police brutality by 72%)
•holding the officers in your city publicly accountable when they use extreme force
•push for social workers or mental health professionals to be sent out along with police to 911 calls for suicide
intervention. This is what caused the death of Matthew Tucker.
•denouncing the polices’ use of teargas, a substance banned in war (by the Geneva protocol of 1925), against
American citizens, especially during a respiratory pandemic.
•push for a smaller portion of budget to go to police. The US spends over 100 billion annually on police. To put
that in perspective, it’s been estimated to cost only 20 billion to effectively eliminate homelessness in to US,
and it would cost 34 billion to ensure free college for each American.
Thank you for your time.
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:22 AM
To:
Subject:RE: Mayor Stewart’s recents comments about African-Americans
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Annabelle Fletcher <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:15 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards
<Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>
Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Mayor Stewart’s recents comments about African-Americans
To the Temecula City Council -
I am writing with concern regarding Mayor Stewart’s recent comments about police violence in Riverside County. My
name is Annabelle Fletcher and I have been living in Temecula for 3½ years.
While blaming voice to text and lack of proofreading for the statement, “I don’t believe there’s ever been a good person
of color killed by a police officer,” the rest of the e-mail reads as tone deaf and divisive. While important conversations
and dialogues are happening all across our nation, the mayor sends a half-hearted email about a heavy subject without
proofreading it when corresponding with people he is supposed to represent.
The response posted on My Valley News is even more appalling, saying that someone just “literally did it to bait me and
set me up.” We are your constituents and just because our concerns don’t go along with your narrative doesn’t mean
that we are “baiting.” The original email was supposedly about sensitivity training for the Riverside Police Department,
but I ask the city council to educate and get sensitivity training for themselves. Mayor Stewart claims he is not a racist,
but this type of defensiveness instead of listening to your citizens shows that there is work to be done.
I humbly ask city council to please take a good look at what’s happening around the nation and to examine the systemic
problems at play and ensure that our citizens from the beautiful city of Temecula doesn’t suffer from any injustices.
Thank you for your time,
Annabelle Fletcher
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 9:01 AM
To:Delainey Pack
Subject:RE: Temecula Protest Comment
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Delainey Pack <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 8:31 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Temecula Protest Comment
Dear Temecula City Council,
Thank you for allowing me to have the opportunity to share my experience at one of the Temecula Duck Pond protests.
I was born in Fallbrook and raised in Temecula. When I heard about the protest happening, to be honest, I was both
proud and surprised that my hometown was holdimg a peaceful protest about social inequities and police brutality with
a large turnout.
I arrived at about 3 pm. When I got there, by then it was definitely intense. When I saw how many police officers were
there in riot gear — it was frightening, honestly, I couldn't understand why that was necessary, but I was able to join the
protest and I was near the front for the entire two hours I was there.
You all see the huge protests and how wild it gets in our major cities. That was not Temecula. We were a very small
group, very contained. But we were all forced back inside the fences of the duck pond.
There were a few protesters that were louder than others, for sure, using their right to expressing themselves with their
opinions on oppression and racism.
About an hour into my time there, Riverside Sheriff's put on their gas masks. I couldn't understand why, since at that
moment, the group was very peaceful but vocal.
2
We all understood that they were trying to intimidate us, but why? Why were they inciting violence against a crowd like
that considering the majority of protesters were high schoolers and young adults? I am 23, the two people beside me
were in high school. These are your children — we know your children.
Since the protest, I have been online talking about it, and along with a lot of support, there are residents that have
promoted and threatened to bring their own guns and shooting these protesters. I have attached screenshots of these
threats.
The Sheriff's Department said the protest was an "unlawful gathering" and threatened arrests and tear gas — and a day
later — Sheriff Bianco posted on social media that it was a "peaceful gathering." Which is it?
If either of those scenarios was the case, the fact that Riverside Sheriff's had tear gas and rubber bullets ready to go at
any point was patently unnecessary.
I ask you, please protect your protesters, your children, your citizens from this terrorism, and actively do
something about these threats instead of ignoring it.
Turning a human rights issue into a political issue is just totally WRONG. Temecula needs to own up to its faults — as
well as its great qualities — and protect every citizen's rights.
Delainey Pack
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:07 AM
To:Mackenzie Orr
Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mackenzie Orr <
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 9:23 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike
Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl
<randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Hello,
My name is Mackenzie Orr. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city
budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is
unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.
This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work
together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to
benefit those in need.
Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a
pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police
refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.
We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed
for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly
compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.
Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that
Enrich our public schools and students
Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small
businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation
2
Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to
be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have
communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands
have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.
Sincerely,
Mackenzie Orr
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:06 AM
To:Emily Kim
Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Emily Kim <
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:12 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike
Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl
<randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Hello,
My name is Emily Kim. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so
as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is
unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.
This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work
together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to
benefit those in need.
Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a
pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police
refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.
We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed
for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly
compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.
Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that
Enrich our public schools and students
Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small
businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation
2
Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to
be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have
communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands
have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.
Sincerely,
Emily Kim
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:06 AM
To:Gabby Waltz
Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gabby Waltz <
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:57 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike
Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl
<randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Hello,
My name is Gabriella. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so
as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is
unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.
This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work
together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to
benefit those in need.
Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a
pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police
refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.
We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed
for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly
compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.
Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that
Enrich our public schools and students
Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small
businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation
2
Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to
be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have
communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands
have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.
Sincerely,
Gabriella
Thank you,
Gabriella
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:05 AM
To:Mahmud Penjwini
Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mahmud Penjwini <
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:08 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike
Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl
<randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Hello,
My name is Chris Mitchell. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city
budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is
unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.
This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work
together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to
benefit those in need.
Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a
pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police
refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.
We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed
for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly
compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.
Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that
Enrich our public schools and students
Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small
businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation
2
Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to
be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have
communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands
have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.
Sincerely,
Chris Mitchell
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:05 AM
To:Nicolo Villasis
Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicolo Villasis <
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:53 PM
To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike
Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank
<Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl
<randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US
Hello,
My name is Nicolo Villasis. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city
budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is
unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.
This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work
together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to
benefit those in need.
Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a
pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police
refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.
We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed
for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly
compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.
Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that
Enrich our public schools and students
Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small
businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation
2
Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to
be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have
communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands
have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.
Sincerely,
Nicolo Villasis
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:40 AM
To:Kirk Lentz
Subject:RE: Citizen Concern- Temecula Police Department Reforms
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Kirk Lentz <
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 6:44 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Citizen Concern- Temecula Police Department Reforms
Hello Randi,
In these chaotic times, I know the talking points are to 'defund the police'. This is not only unreasonable, but dangerous
for our community and the recruitment of police. I am neither an activist or police hater, just very concerned with the
tactics and training of all police.
However, as a concerned citizen who has no record at all-I have had several run-ins with police who always want to use
a militaristic approach to dealing with me-the average citizen. Simply questioning an officer,has lead to backup being
called-even with small children in the car. And I am a white guy.
I would like the following to be added and or discussed at the next council meeting:
First- one systemic cancer within the police force-is the police union. The unions only goal is to keep all officers
employed-regardless of what offence they have committed. This type of third party collusion adds a layer of protection
that no other citizen enjoys. It also gives the police that 'above the law' attitude even when police are off the clock.
I am requesting that there be a de-certification discussion of the police union. I can assist at the next union meeting and
or help any officer who wants to initiate. The recent Supreme Court decision allows officers to stop paying union dues-
time to start now.
Second-I need someone to explain to me why motorcycle police officers 'lay and wait' ( many times on the sidewalk or
the median-which no citizen on a motorcycle can do), and only at certain intersections, to trap speeders and or traffic
light infractions. I have lived in many cities, and don't understand why this has not been challenged in court on its merits
alone. We do not live in a police state-yet their presence just waiting for someone to break the law, is unacceptable and
adds to the distrust of police. I have no problem holding up a sign warning drivers of impending police traps a block or
two before the position of the police officer should I see in the future.
2
Third-The immunity clause that will change all legal aspects of how police conduct themselves going forward, needs to
be discussed. When the Democrats agree with the Republicans-its only a matter of time before this becomes law- a law
that is long overdue. I would like to know if the Temecula Council is being proactive on the issue, as this will impact new
recruits and the liability of current officers.
Lastly, I have criticized the LAPD for other actions prior to the current chaos, and was amazed to see an LAPD cruiser
drive by my home soon afterwards. Way out of jurisdiction and not a resident of where I live. I hope there is not this
type of intimidation from the Temecula police department with my comments and concerns.
Times-they-are-a-changing. I hope the Temecula City Council is being proactive and are addressing the issues with the
police and how they deal with the public going forward.
Thank you-
--
Kirk Lentz
Temecula, CA. 92591
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:39 AM
To:Jon C
Subject:RE: Remarks for 9 June
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Jon C <
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 7:18 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Remarks for 9 June
To whom it may concern,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. Data proves that together
when these nine policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
Ban chokeholds & Strangleholds
Require De-escalation
Require warning before shooting
Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
Duty to intervene
Ban shooting at moving vehicles
Require use of force continuum
Require comprehensive reporting
Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side.
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the
unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all
cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
Require officers to exhaust all other alternatives, including non-force and less lethal force options, prior to resorting to
deadly force.
Require officers to give a verbal warning in all situations before using deadly force.
Require officers to intervene and stop excessive force used by other officers and report these incidents immediately to a
supervisor.
Ban officers from shooting at moving vehicles in all cases, which is regarded as a particularly dangerous and ineffective
tactic. While some departments may they restrict shooting at vehicles to particular situations, these loopholes allow for
police to continue killing in situations that are all too common. 62 people were killed by police last year in these
situations. This must be categorically banned.
Establish a Force Continuum that restricts the most severe types of force to the most extreme situations and creates
clear policy restrictions on the use of each police weapon and tactic.
Require officers to report each time they use force or threaten to use force against civilians. Comprehensive reporting
includes requiring officers to report whenever they point a firearm at someone, in addition to all other types of force.
By placing less than lethal weapons on the officers’/ deputies’ strongside and repositioning lethal weapons to an
alternate, less convenient location, less than lethal weapons will be the primary weapon system, saving countless lives
each year.
Having served in an active war zone, and multiple deployments. We had strict rules of engagement before we could
engage the enemy even while we were under direct enemy fire. I am appalled those same standards, at a MI NIMUM do
not apply to our law enforcement agencies who are here to serve and protect. Additionally, we had strict escalation of
force procedures we were required to follow before we could use deadly force.
3
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Jonathan Chang
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:39 AM
To:Emily Carian
Subject:RE: Public comment for Temecula City Council meeting 6/9/20
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Randi Johl
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:33 AM
To: Emily Carian <
Subject: RE: Public comment for Temecula City Council meeting 6/9/20
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not
wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Emily Carian <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:21 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public comment for Temecula City Council meeting 6/9/20
2
Please submit to and read the following comment at today's (6/9/20) City Council meeting.
"My name is Emily Carian, and I am a resident of Temecula. Like many other Americans, I am concerned about police
violence against Black Americans and the militarization of police. In the 2019-2020 fiscal year, the city of Temecula spent
44% of its general fund on police: nearly $35 million dollars, a 6.8% increase from the previous year. The city of
Temecula spent an additional $3.7 million on police from the Measure S fund. This totals to $38.5 million this year alone.
As the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and so many more illustrate, police presence makes Black Americans
and people of color less safe. Yet the city of Temecula has continued to spend an inordinate amount of money
contracting with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, which has a history of using excessive force against people
of color in our county. As one example, Riverside County sheriffs slammed Joaquina Valencia to the ground in 2017
because they assumed she was an undocumented immigrant. She is a citizen and has lived in the US for over 4 decades.
I asked City Council members via email on June 4, 2020, what they would do to advocate for change among the
Riverside County Sheriff's Department. I have received no response. Today, I demand that our City Council members
release a plan to ensure the Riverside County Sheriff's Department make sweeping changes. One immediate change is to
put out of commission the military-style equipment they have received from the Department of Defense since 1990.
This tactical equipment is excessive and unnecessary for local law enforcement. Second, I demand that our City Council
members reduce our city's police budget for the following fiscal year, and instead reinvest that money in Temecula
residents, specifically residents of color. Black Americans are asking us to affirm that their lives matter. What is the city
of Temecula's response?"
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:15 AM
To:Randi Johl
Subject:FW: City Council meeting
Attachments:Dear City Council.pdf
From: Randi Johl
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:59 AM
To: Stephanie Tabares <
Subject: RE: City Council meeting
Thank you for engaging. I will absolutely read the whole thing into the record. 😊
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Stephanie Tabares <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:56 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Re: City Council meeting
Here is my attached letter...I read it in under 30 seconds (enough time to read all other letters)...Thank you! We'll be
viewing the meeting tonight!
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:23 PM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote:
Yes, I will forward it to them right now.
From: Stephanie Tabares <
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 1:47 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Re: City Council meeting
Hi Randi,
Can you please share this to the board? Thank you
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:50 AM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote:
2
You can hear me read it, along with the many others by listening to or viewing the City Council meeting on Channel 3 or
online live here: https://temeculaca.gov/tv
From: Stephanie Tabares <
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 11:42 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Re: City Council meeting
How will I know if my message will get read?
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:33 AM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote:
Hi Stephanie – our Council meetings are currently being held virtually and not in-person because of the COVID
pandemic and the prohibition on mass gatherings. As such, all you have to do is send me an email and I will read it into
the record under public comments. Hope that helps.
From: Stephanie Tabares <
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 2:32 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: City Council meeting
Good evening,
My name is Stephanie and I am a concerned citizen. How do I go about speaking at Tuesdays council meeting?
Thank you
--
Stephanie Tabares
Psychological Science Major | California State University San Marcos
3
--
Dear City Council,
Please take a moment and stare at the color of your hands….what do you see?
Now imagine you were reborn into a lower-income Black or Brown
family….……your family decides to move to Temecula because it’s safer and
affordable…..Now imagine going to a school where you are made fun of
because of the color of your skin and a certain teacher (Mrs. Puorroy) tells you
that you don’t belong here…the school system doesn’t do anything about the
incident so you continue your years…the police tend to pull you and your
friends over more than your white friends because quote “you didn’t turn your
signal light” which then turns to an angry “DON’T MOVE!!!-LICENSE &
REGISTRATION”….you then again continue with your life with these built-in
microaggressions….Could you honestly say if you really were that imaginary
person that the city council has made any movement towards racial equity in
this city? What have you done? What can you do? And what are you going to
do? Your family and generations down will learn about George Floyd’s historic
movement just like how I learned about Rodney King. You have the privilege
and power to make an impact and tell your family that you made a difference
for the community in the city of Temecula. Two racial attacks happened in one
week and none of you made a statement……….Now, remember your imaginary
person? That person was me…the city of Temecula failed me and it’s failing
others. This new generation was asleep but now it’s awake and ready to be
heard. Racism will always exist in this city. We are realizing that it’s community
folks but also those in power like yourself and anyone who see’s injustice but
doesn’t say anything. Now tell me City Council- are you a board that looks out
for only Whites like previous boards have done in the past….or you are a board
that embodies inclusivity?…I would like for you to do a full investigation on
Josam and Mychal Ashley Santana for the May 30th, 2020 assault…As well as a
full investigation for the second assault that happened June 6th, 2020…the
abuser in the back seat has been identified as Brianna Starbuck, we still need
the identity of the passenger. Their plate number is 7MXT235. Also, take
another look at Mathew Tucker's case where a police officer killed him in our
own soil. Videos are uploaded on YouTube and Twitter. I hope to see a pride
festival soon, monthly food pantries held by the city, mandatory sensitivity and
cultural training for all public employees, celebration of Black History Month in
Oldtown, Senior Awareness Day, and well you get the idea. Thank you
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:51 PM
To:Christopher Bout
Subject:RE: Public Comment for Tonight's Meeting
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Christopher Bout <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:49 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for Tonight's Meeting
Randi, hello
I would like this to be read at the public comments tonight.
Good Evening Acting Mayor Edwards, Council and Staff, my name is Christopher Bout and I am a 21 year resident of the
City of Temecula.
I am deeply saddened and disappointed by the recent events taking place around the resignation and the City's
acceptance of said resignation, from then-Mayor James Stewart. Stew's comments do not bother me in that it was, and
should have remained, a harmless error compounded by a "not-always-accurate" voice-to-text technology, Stew's
dyslexic affliction and a nationwide, pervasive "outrage-culture" fueled by media glorification of all things even remotely
perceived to be racist. YOU, Acting Mayor Edwards, bought into the outrage culture and showed a glaring weakness in
the strength of your backbone and your shameful lack of resolve by accepting the resignation so effortlessly.
The community would have rallied around him, never got the chance. The City lost a perfect opportunity to rally around
its leader and unify the city against the shameless fingerpointing and thin-skinned holier-than-thou cultural elitists. We
lost an opportunity to be a voice of reason in a sea of chaos, and stand on conviction and values; but you chose to
appease the mob and sacrificed Stew. You threw him to the wolves, and you know it. Stew is a pillar of the community,
and a kind and thoughtful human being. Stew placed the people of Temecula first, before his own interests, and stepped
down to avoid the inevitable scrutiny the City would face, and even possible mayhem coming from the anarchists and
outrage-culture currently being espoused by leftist media elitists. You underestimated Temecula in a reprehensible and
embarrassing way. When is your term up, Ms. Edwards? That day can't come any sooner.
1
Erika Ramirez
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 PM
To:Ana M
Subject:RE: Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members-Meeting June 9, 2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ana M <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:02 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members-Meeting June 9, 2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 10 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. I’d like to
help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together when these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians.
Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use
the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating
within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Ana L. Moreno
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 PM
To:Courtney Sheehan
Subject:RE: Public comment for council meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Courtney Sheehan <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:09 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public comment for council meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a six year resident of Temecula and I am concerned
about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues,
like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
Require De-escalation
Require warning before shooting
Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
Duty to intervene
Ban shooting at moving vehicles
Require use of force continuum
Require comprehensive reporting
Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
End qualified immunity
Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, un affiliated with the
RSO or County Sherrif
Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for
EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law
enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing
officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints
must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need
to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their
policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of
Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be
enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Courtney Sheehan
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 PM
To:Charity Barczyszyn
Subject:RE: Policy reform
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Charity Barczyszyn <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:25 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Policy reform
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been ann8 year resident of
Temecula Valley and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d
like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
2
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently
allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Charity Barczyszyn
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:51 PM
To:Karen Wilson-Bonnar
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Karen Wilson-Bonnar <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:46 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 4 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract
with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle
civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and
procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of
you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Karen Wilson-Bonnar
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM
To:Laurel LaMont
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Laurel LaMont <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:21 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 12 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Laurel LaMont
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM
To:Sherry Bondy
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sherry Bondy <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:37 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have only been a resident of Temecula
for one year and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
YOUR NAME
Sherry Bondy
1
Erika Ramirez
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM
To:Riley Wold
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Riley Wold <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:36 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a six year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Riley Wold
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:27 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 25 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
S. Fairchild
Sent from my iPad
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:09 PM
To:Abraham Tehrani
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Abraham Tehrani <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:04 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 17 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
2
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Abraham Tehrani
1
Erika Ramirez
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:38 PM
To:
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From:
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:23 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I was raised in Temecula, and
my husband and I have chosen to build our own life here as adults, now residents of Temecula for the past six
years. I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherriff’s Department. I’d
like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against
officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherriff
2
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e.
if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified
psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are s imply blood chokes; the RSO currently
allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Kathryn Wright
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM
To:Terry
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council m eeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:37 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a XXX year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Teresa Dugan Mansfield
Fallbrook resident for 36 years
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM
To:Sally Jacobson Price
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sally Jacobson Price <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:37 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 7 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Sally Price
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM
To:Ashley Clingingsmith
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ashley Clingingsmith <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:35 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Re: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you. I have also lived here 27 years if that is needed...
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:32 PM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote:
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish
for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
2
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ashley Clingingsmith <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:21 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the
issue of systemic police violence. I have been a XXX year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public
safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common
policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than
72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting *
Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use
of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the
dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all
complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls
into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS,
allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team)
of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and
strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds.
Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both
chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where
possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I
understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, YOUR NAME
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM
To:REINA DIAZ
Subject:RE: Police Reform
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: REINA DIAZ <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:54 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Police Reform
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards, and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been resident of
Temecula for 6 months, and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County
Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
Require De-escalation
Require warning before shooting
Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
Duty to intervene
Ban shooting at moving vehicles
Require use of force continuum
Require comprehensive reporting
Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
End qualified immunity
2
Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force
against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper
funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified
psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO
currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death
or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Reina Diaz
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:32 PM
To:Tim McDonald
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Tim McDonald <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:18 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue
of systemic police violence. I have been a 30 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety
contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing
issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% *
Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires
exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force
continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant
side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of
excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for
services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of
funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified
psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently
dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or
strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck
restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with
subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own
police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics,
techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or
Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have
to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits.
Cheers,
2
Tim McDonald
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:31 PM
To:Tami Simms
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Tami Simms <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:31 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 32 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sheriff
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
2
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Tami Sims
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:47 PM
To:Fredric Ball
Subject:RE: Tonight's Meeting
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Fredric Ball <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Tonight's Meeting
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 15- year
resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s
Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against
officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
2
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e.
if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified
psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO
currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death
or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining
distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department
and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily
overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within
city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be
enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Fredric Ball
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:50 PM
To:Nathan Price
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Nathan Price <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:48 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 7 year resident of Temecula and I am
concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to
common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust
all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require
comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create
an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the
RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e.
if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological
Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds
and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing
officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck
restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects,
maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we
contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This
obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within
city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law
enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Nathan Price
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:46 PM
To:Ira Robinson
Subject:RE: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ira Robinson <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: RE: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting
Thanks Randi.
Please read this one aloud. 😊
Ira
From: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:32 PM
To: Ira Robinson <
Subject: RE: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
2
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Ira Robinson <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:22 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting
Randi,
Below are my comments for presentation during the PUBLIC COMMENTS portion of
tonight’s Council meeting – about two minutes and 45 seconds worth.
Please acknowledge receipt if you have time.
Thanks.
Ira
**********************************************************
Mayor Pro Tem Edwards and members of Council:
I am sending this message primarily to register my disappointment at the City’s
response to protests at the Duck Pond and at City Hall on May 30, 2020.
I was disappointed primarily because the City and its leadership team authorized an
overwhelming show of force by the Sheriff’s Department in response to essentially
peaceful protests by a multiracial, multigenerational – and largely local – group of
youngsters who saw what happened to Mr. George Floyd and decided to organize and
say “No More”.
I was disappointed because the City appears to have simply assumed – as indicated
by the Mayor - that the protesters were not Temecula area residents, and that they
were “ just trying to cause issues just like they did in LA and other cities around us”. I am
certain beyond doubt that the show of force decision was made by the City, but only
after consultation with every reachable member of the City’s leadership team.
3
Perhaps a more diverse group would have made a different and better decision.
I was disappointed because according to one officer on the scene, the decision to
declare the Duck Pond protest an “unlawful assembly” was prompted by the presence
of a number of protesters in the street. One would think that with an area overflowing
with officers, a handful of them could easily have addressed that concern
I was disappointed because the unlawful assembly order interrupted and had a chilling
effect on what was otherwise an essentially peaceful exercise of the First Amendment
rights of free speech and assembly.
In the evening, some of the protesters – AND I -- moved from the Duck Pond to City
Hall, a location which, like the Duck Pond, has been designated by the City as being
among the “good facilities for persons to gather for expressive activities”. Once there, I
was disappointed to find all access to the City Hall courtyard blocked off by police cars
and officers. I believe this denial of access was a clear violation of the First
Amendment.
More than anything, I was disappointed to learn that not a single member of the City’s
management team was present at any of the May 30 events.
I believe we can do better.
[RANDI: DROP THE BELOW TWO SENTENCES IF YOU MUST.]
Finally, much has been said recently about the idea of reducing police funding, and
redirecting funds to things that are in short supply but badly needed – including things
like mental health services, job training programs, school counselors and nurses,
computer equipment for needy students, affordable housing, and homelessness.
While it is too soon for anyone to have firm views on this subject, it is my hope that the
City will at least be thinking along these lines – especially when it is considered that a
whopping 44%
of the City’s annual operating budget is devoted to police services.
Thank you.
Ira L. Robinson
Temecula
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:47 PM
To:chris Smith
Subject:RE: Public comment
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: chris Smith <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public comment
As a resident of Temecula and registered voter, I urge the four remaining council members to take concrete and
demonstrable action to help make Temecula a truly inclusive city that welcomes individuals of all faiths, races,
ethnicities, orientations, and abilities.
The former Mayor’s initial comments and later apologies may have been the most dramatic episode in the City’s
problematic approach to race, but it was far from the first. Council member Naggar declared himself the City’s first
African-American Council member, a statement which may be technically accurate but grossly appropriates the
experiences of black Americans. Other Council members have made many “jokes” about race and ethnicity. And then
there’s the constant dog-whistling to nationalists and xenophobes, like the pointless resolution to uphold the
constitution.
Our council members are elected to be non-partisan, and to represent the interests of the community. Political
posturing and well intentioned but ill informed statements do real damage to real people. They incite opposition to a
mosque, protests against marriage equality, and racist firestorms defending a former mayor on social media.
It’s time to change. Affirm that Black Lives Matter (without qualification). Fight against racism—not just the overt
individual racism that wears a hood or swastika, but the less obvious, even more dangerous structural, institutional, and
cultural racism. Seek experts to help identify and unlearn your own implicit biases. Reject the divisive, partisan rhetoric
that is tearing our country apart. Be the leaders the community needs. Be the leaders you were elected to be.
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:34 AM
To:Alicia Rosenthal
Subject:RE: Public Safety Concerns - Public Comment for City Council
Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Alicia Rosenthal <
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 7:35 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Safety Concerns - Public Comment for City Council
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have lived in Menifee my whole life
and just became a resident of Temecula. I moved here because I thought it was safer than Menifee, but now I am
concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose
some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blo od chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I also believe there needs to be mandatory training on handling situations
with people with mental health issues, such as depression and suicidal ideation.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Respectfully,
Alicia Rosenthal
Sent from my iPhone
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1:28 PM
To:Anonymous Temecula Resident
Cc:All Executive Staff
Subject:RE: Pubic Comment, June 9
Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. By way of this response I am also
sharing with the City Council and Executive staff.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Anonymous Temecula Resident <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:02 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Pubic Comment, June 9
As a resident of this community, I have two items I would like to address, anonymously. I write anonymously today because of the hateful
comments I have read on social media directed towards those with similar opinions to myself.
First, I would like to thank the City for the swift and responsible response to the controversial and hurtful statement former Mayor James Stewart
made this past week. I understand many believe his comments were truly made in error, and that may be true, but I believe we all (but especially
elected’s and public servants) should be held accountable not only for the intentions of our actions but the impact they have. I also believe anyone
holding the position of mayor should be held to a professional standard of communication, especially in written statements, and especially when the
subject matter is as important as what was being discussed. I also believe even if his phone inserted the word “good” on its own accord, Mr.
Stewart’s statement was flippant, condescending, and insensitive. I would have understood his potential continued service had he owned his
mistake, but he did not. I can only imagine how people of color in this community must have felt hearing his words. To not have the care to
proofread in this situation (best case scenario), shows his absolute lack of understanding of the oppression people of color have endured in this
country as well as his lack of minimal professional competency. I am grateful for his resignation, thank you.
Second, I humbly beg everyone listening tonight to take a moment to consider the following: Why is it controversial to state that black lives
matter? Why do some of us pause or contest? Why do some respond defensively that, “all lives matter?” Can you not state that BLACK LIVES
matter?
Matter, as a verb, can be defined to “be of importance; have significance.” Are black lives not of importance? Do they not have significance? Aside
from any political issues or differing opinions on the appropriate role of policing, how can we not recognize the enormous significance of our
collective reluctance to state that the lives of a group in our community matter, that they’re important, and that they have significance?
I ask the following of city leaders:
Lead your community and officially state that black lives matter. State it proudly and without apology.
2
Commit to anti-racist policies and the continued conversation surrounding their implementation and include people of color in the discussion.
In the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “there comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:37 AM
To:Ronald Prentice
Cc:All Executive Staff
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. By way of this response I am also
sharing with the City Council and Executive staff.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the
California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ronald Prentice <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:34 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 17 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
2
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Ronald L. Prentice
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:37 AM
To:Shire .
Cc:All Executive Staff
Subject:RE: Council Meeting Comments
Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. By way of this response I am also
sharing with the City Council and Executive staff.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Shire . <
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 12:46 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Council Meeting Comments
Hello, I am emailing the city council to call for defunding the Temecula police department. Riverside county is second
highest in California in police shootings (Source: California Department of Justice URSUS Database), and Temecula plays
a role in these statistics. The police as an institution have historically been used to protect property and catch slaves,
rather than having any interest in protecting the people. Although we say that these intentions have changed, the
mindset and prioritization of land over people is still seen today. One example may be seen in the homeless than have
been forced to leave and arrested over camping out in the washouts, simply because they are considered "private
property" ,despite never being used and the homeless individuals harming or harassing no-one. This is not to mention
the racism prevalent throughout the police forces, or the immense problem of police brutality seen both across the
nation and in our own home. As city council members, I trust that you have the ability to do research yourselves as to
the statistics of these statements rather than me taking more of your time.
Rather than continuing to support such an institution, we need to pour more money into education, into healthcare and
public works, to mental health services, and to aiding those in poverty. When these aspects are not properly managed, it
is this that leads to higher rates of crime. If you want a safer city, stop fueling an outdated police system and instead
work to help the community itself. Additionally, we can begin training individuals in unarmed mediation to handle tense
situations. Many careers require handling violent or dangerous individuals and manage to successfully do so without
harming or killing those they are trained to manage.
I hope that you will please give what I have said some thought. Thank you.
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:11 PM
To:Leanne Gaffney
Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Leanne Gaffney <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:02 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 10- year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like
to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers,
unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of
all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to
2
accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows
carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of
civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and
otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we
have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple
Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to
use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials
operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Leanne Gaffney
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:51 PM
To:Sarah Peyton
Subject:RE: public comment city council meeting
Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for
your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Sarah Peyton <
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:32 PM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: public comment city council meeting
Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members,
I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 7.5 year resident of
Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. I’d
like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force.
Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%
* Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds
* Require De-escalation
* Require warning before shooting
* Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting
* Duty to intervene
* Ban shooting at moving vehicles
* Require use of force continuum
* Require comprehensive reporting
* Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side
* End qualified immunity
* Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against
officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif
* Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if
20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.
2
* Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists
to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls
Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently
allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious
injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases.
Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance,
and otherwise eliminating the need to use force.
I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and
we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a
simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each
of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement
officials operating within Temecula City Limits.
Very Respectfully,
Sarah Peyton
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:00 AM
To:Al Rubio
Subject:RE: Public Comment at June 9th Council meeting
Received and thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Al Rubio <
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 8:34 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment at June 9th Council meeting
Dear Honorable City Council,
The economic impacts of COVID19 on our local restaurant community and our local business districts has been
devastating. Business owners have been forced limiting the scope & service of their operation. They've had to
lay off staff, they've endured increasing costs due to supply chain issues, and they've incurred more costs in an
effort to invest in hygiene, sanitation, and risk mitigation efforts to comply with State and County mandatory
guidelines. The State's approval to re-open dine-in services at restaurants is exciting news, but it leaves
restauranteurs with increasing costs and a limitation to how much revenue they can generate out of limited
dining space. The City of Temecula's proposal to temporarily provide old town Temecula restaurants with
outdoor, space so that the restaurants can expand their dining areas is good. I fully support this effort because
it makes operating a business a bit more feasible, serves more patrons within our community, and creatively
protects the interest of public health considerations with economic progress. That said, I believe this proposal
will promote a fun and pleasant dining experience. We encourage you to give Old Town Temecula businesses
this opportunity.
Sincerely,
Al Rubio | Chairman of the Board
Chairman's Choice Recipient 2019
Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce
2
Temecula, CA 92591
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:55 AM
To:Connors, Brian
Subject:RE: Public comment for June 9th
Received and thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Connors, Brian <
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 9:46 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public comment for June 9th
Thank you, Randi for reading this during the public comment section, June 9 th:
My name is Brian Connors and I currently serve as the Past Chair of the TVCC Board of Directors. Please accept this note
as my support for the temporary expanded space for old town businesses to effectively operate and garner critically
needed business. When the citizens of this great country, region and city are in the hour of need, this can be one
example of how we can become united to overcome the greatest of challenges.
Brian Connors | Director of Marketing | SWHS - Rancho Springs & Inland Valley Medical Centers | Phone
(
Your Choice for Healthcare, Committed to
Hope, Health, and Healing
Building
Relationships
that Touch the Heart
Integrity • Compassion • Respect
UHS of Delaware, Inc. Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure
or distribution of this information is prohibited, and may be punishable by law. If this was sent to you in error, please
notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:40 AM
To:Cherise Manning
Subject:RE: Public Comment June 9th Meeting
Received and thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Cherise Manning <
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment June 9th Meeting
To whom it may concern:
In this time of economic uncertainty, is imperative that businesses and Government think outside of the box in
creative ways to increase revenue and balance public safety. The City of Temecula's proposal to temporarily
provide old town Temecula restaurants with outdoor, space so that the restaurants can expand their dining
areas is an example of forward thinking. This model has been successful in other communities and I fully
support this effort because it makes operating a business a bit more feasible, serves more patrons within our
community, and creatively protects the interest of public health considerations with economic progress. I
encourage you to give Old Town Temecula businesses this opportunity.
Sincerely,
Cherise Manning
Board Member Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce
Owner
A Grape Escape Balloon Adventure
Facebook Instagram Twitter
Experience, Safety and Professionalism make the difference!
1
From:Randi Johl
Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:40 AM
To:Kim Kelliher
Subject:RE: Public Comment for June 9 Meeting
Received and thank you.
Randi Johl, JD, MMC
Legislative Director / City Clerk
randi.johl@temeculaca.gov
41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public
Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt.
From: Kim Kelliher <
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for June 9 Meeting
To the Honorable Members of the Temecula City Council:
As a member of TVCC's Board of Directors and the founder of a tourism-related business
in Temecula, I would like to support the City's efforts to provide Old Town Temecula
restaurants with additional outdoor space for expanding their dining areas. I see this as
a creative solution to help struggling restaurants in a time of dire need. They have
suffered enough, and it is time to do everything we can to support the hard-working
entrepreneurs of Old Town. Temporary outdoor dining is a solution that is working well
in other areas such as Long Beach and Santa Barbara. And I personally think it is a
worthwhile experiment to see if a walking district in Old Town might be preferable to
drive-through access at some point in the future. Thank you for thinking outside the bo x
during this difficult time for small businesses and supporting Old Town restaurateurs.
Cheers!
Kim Kelliher
Founder/President
2
| GoGrape.com GoStryder.com
Follow Us: