HomeMy WebLinkAbout030910 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
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
MARCH 9, 2010 — 7:00 PM
At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can
be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meetinq. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M.
`6:00 P.M.'- Closed Session of the City Council pursuant, to Government.Code Section:
1) Conference with'City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)
with respect to one matter of potential litigation. With respect to such matter,,the
City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is 'a
significant exposure to litigation involving the City and City related entities based
on existing facts and circumstances. With respect to such matter, the City Council
will also meet pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) to decide whether
to initiate litigation.
Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties
may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held- by,the'City, Clerk.
Next in Order:
Ordinance: 10-07
Resolution: 10-21
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jeff Comerchero
Prelude Music: Great Oak High School Jazz Combo
Invocation: Pastor Gary Nelson of Calvary Chapel of Temecula
Flag Salute: Council Member Chuck Washington
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Comerchero
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Certificate of Achievement - Eagle Scout Patrick Baker
Certificate of Achievement - Eagle Scout Hans Britsch
1
Certificate of Achievement - Eagle Scout Brian Hizon
Certificate of Appreciation - The Castillo Familv
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on
items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an
item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are
called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak"
form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is a
five minute (5) time limit for individual speakers.
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 (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports.
Cd91ZKV194FAIL `gnsy— 7
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
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.
Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included
in the agenda.
Action Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the action minutes of February 23, 2010.
List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT
A
City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 2010
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 2010.
Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids
for the Storm Drain Repair at Rancho California Road, Project No. PW09-08
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public
Works to solicit construction bids for the Storm Drain Repair at Rancho California
Road, Project No. PW09-08.
6 Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids
for Road Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road, Project No. PW09-10 and approval of
an Amended Spending Plan for Proposition 1 B funding
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve an amendment to the City's Proposition 1 B Spending Plan for FY 2008-
09 to include East Vallejo Road and Cabrillo Avenue as part of the Road
Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road Project;
6.2 Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public
Works to solicit construction bids for the Road Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith
Road, Project No. PW09-10.
7 Payment of the City's share of the Regional Municipal Stormwater Permit for the Santa
Margarita Watershed for FY 2009-2010
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve payment to the Riverside County Flood Control District in the sum of
$188,825.16 as the City's portion of the cost-sharing reimbursement pursuant to
the Implementation Agreement between the Santa Margarita Watershed
Permittees approved by the City Council in January 2005.
Support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010
(at the request of Council Member Washington)
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
EXPRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL'S SUPPORT FOR THE LOCAL
TAXPAYER, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND TRANSPORTATION PROTECTION ACT
OF 2010, WHICH IS A BALLOT MEASURE SCHEDULED FOR THE
NOVEMBER 2010 STATEWIDE BALLOT, AND WOULD PROHIBIT THE
STATE FROM TAKING, BORROWING OR REDIRECTING LOCAL
TAXPAYER FUNDS DEDICATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY, EMERGENCY
RESPONSE AND OTHER VITAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES
Designation of March 2010 as Census Month (at the request of Council Member
Washington)
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO
SUPPORT THE UNITED STATES CENSUS - MAKE YOURSELF COUNT
MONTH MARCH 2010
10 Approve Payment for Golden Valley Music Society, Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Approve the payment to Golden Valley Music Society, Inc. in the amount of
$36,375 for services provided from December 13, 2007 to March 31, 2010.
11 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 10-04
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 10-04
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR
THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION NO. 2 PRE -ZONING
APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST
OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF
INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND
RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY WITH ZONING DESIGNATIONS HILLSIDE
RESIDENTIAL -SANTA MARGARITA (HR -SM) AND CONSERVATION
DISTRICT -SANTA MARGARITA (OS -C -SM) (LR09-0024)
12 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 10-05
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 10-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY
ADOPTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL -SANTA
MARGARITA (HR -SM) AND OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION DISTRICT -
SANTA MARGARITA (OS -C -SM) AND ADOPTING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR A PRE -ZONING OF THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA -'
ANNEXATION NO. 2 OF APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED
IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA
BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN
DIEGO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY (LR09-0024)
.**..*.**"****fF****
RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE
CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. CSD 10-01
Resolution: No. CSD 10-02
CALL TO ORDER: President Chuck Washington
ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington
CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of
Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of
Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to
Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come
forward and state your name for the record.
CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
13 Action Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Approve the action minutes of February 23, 2010.
14 Innerstate Dance Project Grant
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Approve the estimated grant Revenue in the Old Town Community Theater
Budget for the Innerstate Dance Project in the amount of $15,000;
14.2 Appropriate $15,000 in expenditures from the OTC Theater Grant Revenue for
the Innerstate Dance Project program;
14.3 Authorize the General Manager, on behalf of the Board of Directors, to take all
actions necessary and convenient to carry out and implement the Innerstate
Dance Project, and to administer the TCSD's obligations, responsibilities, and
duties to be performed under the Project, including but not limited to, approval
and execution on behalf of the TCSD of the Innerstate Dance Project with the
CDC Theater, certificates and other similar agreements and documents as
necessary and convenient for the implementation of the project.
CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT
CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
CSD ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, March 23, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with
regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. RDA 10-01
Resolution: No. RDA 10-04
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Mike Naggar
ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington,
Naggar
RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the
Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent
Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the
Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come
forward and state your name for the record.
RDA CONSENT CALENDAR
15 Action Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1 Approve the action minutes of February 23, 2010.
16 Third Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Pelican Properties LLC_
for the lease and development of Agency owned property
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Approve the Third Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement ("ENA")
between Pelican Properties LLC ("Pelican"), and the Temecula Redevelopment
Agency ("Agency").
RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
RDA ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, March 23, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular
session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California.
91
RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
17
pursuant to the Tribal State Compact between the Pechancia Band of Luiseno Indians
and the State of California
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE "INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT" BETWEEN THE
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS AND THE CITY AND APPROVING
THE "MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AT PECHANGA CASINO" BETWEEN THE
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS, CITY, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
AND THE SHERIFF OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Tuesday, March 23, 2010, at 5:30 PM, for a Closed Session, with regular
session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
10
PRESENTATIONS
The City of Temecula
Certificate of Achievement
The City Council of the City of Temecula commends
the outstanding achievement of
Patrick Bake
of Troop #148
We congratulate Patrick for his achievement on receiving the rank of Eagle Scout. We are
proud to present Patrick with this Award, and we wish him success in his future
accomplishments.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have
' hereunto affixed my hand and official seal
r thi mth a of March 2010.
V�
1989 Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Si san W. Jones; M11 City Clerk
The City of Temecula
Certificate of Achievement
The City Council of the City of Temecula commends
the outstanding achievement of-
fHans
HansBritsch
of Troop #148
We congratulate Hans for his achievement on receiving the rank of Eagle Scout. We are
proud to present Hans with this Award, and we wish him success in his future
accomplishments.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have
herto affixed my hand and official seal
is n' th, ay of March, 2010.
1989
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
usa w. Jones, MIC City Clerk
The City of Temecula
Certificate of Achievement
The City Council of the City of Temecula commends
the outstanding achievement of
Brian Hizon
of Troop #148
We congratulate Brian for his achievement on receiving the rank of Eagle Scout. We are
proud to present Brian with this Award, and we wish him success in his future
accomplishments.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ' I have
hereunto affixed my hand and official seal
this n' y f March, 2010.
VSA
1989 Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
UJ•
C S sarkW. Jones, MM City Clerk
City of Temecula
Certificate of Appreciation
Presented on behalf of the City Council and the
citizens of the City of Temecula to:
Rudolfo Castillo, Jr.
Joann Castillo and
Rudolfo Castillo III
The City Council would like to recognize the Castillo family for the lifesaving services they provided to fellow citizens
in need. Castillo, who served in the U.S. Army for four years, jumped into action, working to free a family from a
burning vehicle. With the assistance of other citizens who stopped to help, the family was carried up the steep, muddy
embankment, to safety. Joann and Rudolfo Castillo comforted a 6 -year-old girl, with signs of a concussion, bringing
her into their truck and keeping her awake until emergency personnel could arrive. The City Council and the citizens of
the City of Temecula would like to thank the Castillo family for truly being "good Samaritans."
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have
hereunto affixed my hand and official seal
this ninth day of March, 2010.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, City Clerk
CONSENT CALENDAR
Item No. 1
Item No. 2
ACTION MINUTES
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
FEBRUARY 23, 2010 — 7:00 PM
6:00 P.M. - Closed Session of the
pursuant to Government Code Section:
a
1) Conference with City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)
with respect to one matter of potential litigation. With respect to such matter, the
City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is a
significant exposure to litigation involving the City and City related entities based
on existing facts and circumstances.
Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties
may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk.
At 6:00 P.M., Mayor Comerchero called the Closed Session meeting to order.
The City Council meeting convened at 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jeff Comerchero
Prelude Music: Breanne Barnson
Invocation: Rabbi Barry Ulrych of Congregation B'Nai Chaim of Murrieta
Flag Salute: Council Member Roberts
ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Comerchero
Certificate of Appreciation to Dr. Combs
Certificate of Appreciation to Dr. Arthur C. Kalfus
Presentation to exchange students traveling to our Sister City Leidschendam-Voorburg
1
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals addressed the City Council:
• Tom Wiggins — Temecula
Resource Center
• Douglas Lanphere — Temecula
Resource Center
• Martin Victor — Temecula
• LaVonne Victor — Temecula
• Chuck Rear — Temecula
• Donald Lambert — Murrieta
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
Therapeutic Cannabis — Qualified Patients
Therapeutic Cannabis — Qualified Patients
Medical Marijuana Ban
Medical Marijuana Ban
Trash Segregation
Medical Marijuana Reports
1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the motion; it was
seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected
unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included
in the agenda.
2 Action Minutes - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member
Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the action minutes of February 9, 2010.
3 List of Demands - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member
Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
z
4 Approval of 2009-10 Mid -Year Budget Adjustments - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the motion; it was
seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected
unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 ANNUAL
OPERATING BUDGET
5 Property Insurance Renewal - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council
Member Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member
Washington; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve the City of Temecula Property Insurance Policy renewal with Travelers
Insurance Company and Empire Indemnity Insurance Company for the period of
February 26, 2010 through February 26, 2011, in the amount of $275,310.
6 2010 Workers' Compensation Coverage Annual Renewal - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the motion; it was
seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected
unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve the contract with the City's current workers' compensation provider,
Travelers Insurance Company, as the City's Employee Workers' Compensation
Insurance Carrier for 2010 for an estimated premium cost of $311,131.
7 Approve the Sponsorship Requests for the 2010 Temecula Spring Rod Run and the
2010 Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-
0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Council
Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve the Event Sponsorship Agreement in the amount of up to $39,100 in
city support costs for the 2010 Temecula Spring Rod Run and authorize the
Mayor to execute the agreement;
7.2 Approve the Event Sponsorship Agreement in the amount of $26,775 for the
2010 Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival and authorize the Mayor to
execute the Agreement. In addition, the Festival requests that the City will
provide temporary logistical support of the traffic control signs and devices to
assist the public safety during the Festival estimated at $3,200.
8 Authorize Temporary Street Closures for the 2010 Temecula Spring Rod Run Event
(Old Town Front Street, between Moreno Road and Second Street, and other related
streets) scheduled for March 12 and 13, 2010 - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-
0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Council
Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Receive and file the following proposed action by the City Manager: Temporarily
close Old Town Front Street and other related streets for the "2010 TEMECULA
SPRING ROD RUN EVENT'
9 Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with RBF Consulting for
Additional Engineering and Landscape Architecture Design Services Associated with
the Winchester Road/Highway 79 North Corridor Beautification — Project No. PW06-15
- Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the
motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Approve the Second Amendment to the agreement with RBF Consulting in an
amount not to exceed $4,200 to provide additional engineering and landscape
architecture design services for Winchester Road/Highway 79 North Corridor
Beautification — Project No. PW06-15.
10 Resolution to Adopt Mitiaated Neaative Declaration and Approve the Proiect French
Valley Parkway/ Interstate -15 Over -Crossing and Interchange Improvements Project -
Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the
motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE FRENCH
VALLEY PARKWAY / INTERSTATE -15 OVER -CROSSING AND
INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (PW02-11 AND PW07-04) AND
APPROVING THE PROJECT
11 Approval of the Drawinas and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Bids from Pre -
Qualified Vendors for the Audiovisual Integration of the Old Town Civic Center — Project
No. IS -02 - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards
made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Approve the drawings and specifications and authorize the Department of
Information Systems to solicit bids from Pre -qualified Vendors for audiovisual
(AV) integration for Phase 2 of the Old Town Civic Center Project.
12 Massage Appeal Hearing Fee Schedule - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) —
Council Member Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member
Washington; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING THE APPEAL FEE SCHEDULE FOR APPEALS RELATING
TO MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT PERMITS AND MASSAGE TECHNICIAN
PERMITS
13 Autism Awareness Program (at the request of Council Member Mike Naggar) -
Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the
motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Authorize staff to work with Council Member Naggar to create an Autism
Awareness Program.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM CONSIDERED UNDER SEPARATE DISCUSSION
13 Autism Awareness Program (at the request of Council Member Mike Naggar) -
Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the
motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Authorize staff to work with Council Member Naggar to create an Autism
Awareness Program.
Council Member Naggar highlighted the goals and intent of the proposed Autism Awareness
Program.
Mary Mollway, representing New Vision Children's Services, commented on the proposed
Autism Awareness Program.
PUBLIC HEARING
21 Consideration of approval of Resolutions/Ordinances for Santa Margarita Area
Annexation No. 2 - Approved Staff Recommendation 21.1. — 21.4 (5-0-0) — Council
Member Washington made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member
Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE ADDENDUM TO A CERTIFIED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH FOR THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION NO. 2 OF
APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST
OF THE EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF
INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND
RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY (LR09-0024)
21.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-17
A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION
COMMISSION TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS TO EXTEND THE CITY OF
TEMECULA'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BY APPROXIMATELY 4,126 ACRES
TO INCLUDE ALL TERRITORY OF THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA
ANNEXATION NO. 2 COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES,
LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF
TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF
THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY TO THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE CORTESE-KNOX-HERTZBERG LOCAL
GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000, COMMENCING WITH
SECTION 56000 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE (LR09-0024)
21.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-18
A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION
COMMISSION TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF
CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED HEREIN AS THE SANTA
MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION NO. 2 COMPRISED OF
APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST
OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF
INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO/RIVERSIDE COUNTY
BOUNDARY TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE CORTESE-KNOX-
HERTZBERG LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000,
COMMENCING WITH SECTION 56000 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT
CODE (LR09-0024)
21.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-19
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP TO INCORPORATE
HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL (HR) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) AS THE GENERAL
PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA
ANNEXATION NO. 2 OF APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED TO
THE SOUTH AND EAST OF THE EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY (LR09-0024)
21.5 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Roberts made the motion; it
was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected
unanimous approval.
ORDINANCE NO. 10-04
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR
THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION NO. 2 PRE -ZONING
APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST
OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF
INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND
RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY WITH ZONING DESIGNATIONS HILLSIDE
RESIDENTIAL -SANTA MARGARITA (HR -SM) AND CONSERVATION
DISTRICT -SANTA MARGARITA (OS -C -SM) (LR09-0024)
City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by title only Ordinance No. 10-04.
21.6 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Edwards made the motion;
was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
ORDINANCE NO. 10-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY
ADOPTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL -SANTA
MARGARITA (HR -SM) AND OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION DISTRICT -
SANTA MARGARITA (OS -C -SM) AND ADOPTING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR A PRE -ZONING OF THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA
ANNEXATION NO. 2 OF APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED
IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA
BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN
DIEGO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY (LR09-0024)
City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by title only Ordinance No. 10-05.
By way of a PowerPoint presentation, Junior Planner Lowrey presented the staff report as per
agenda material.
The public hearing was opened and the following individuals addressed the City Council:
• Kim Wilder -Lee — Temecula
• Matt Rahn — San Diego — San Diego State University
• Fred Bartz — Temecula
• Cliff Hewlett —Temecula
There being no additional comments, the public hearing was closed
CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
22 Implementation of existing 2008 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Contract
Provision — PERS Contract Amendment/Early Retirement Option
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) —
Council Member Washington made the motion; it was seconded by Council
Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
RESOLUTION NO. 10-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT
TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
22.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Washington made the motion;
it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
ORDINANCE NO. 10-06
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'
RETIREMENT SYSTEM
City Attorney Thorson introduced and read by title only Ordinance No. 10-06
22.3 Certify PERS Form CON -12, Certification of Governing Body's Action; -
Approved Staff Recommendation 22.3 — 22.5 (5-0-0) — Council Member
Washington made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member
Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval.
22.4 Certify PERS Form CON-12AA, Certification of Compliance with Government
Code Section 7507;
22.5 Approve a second early retirement option for City employees for 180 days from
July 1, 2010 to December 27, 2010.
23 Authorization for prepayment of the Civic Center Certificates of Participation (COP)
Bonds - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Council Member Naggar made
the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Roberts; and electronic vote
reflected unanimous approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1 Authorize the City Manager to initiate the prepayment of up to $12 million of the
Certificates of Participation Bonds.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
With respect to the Closed Session item, City Attorney Thorson advised that there was no
action to report.
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:12 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, March 9, 2010, at
5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 P.M., City Council
Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
10
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
Item No. 3
Approvals
City Attorney /V
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: List of Demands
PREPARED BY: Pascale Brown, Accounting Manager
Leah Thomas, Accounting Specialist
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
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: Resolution
List of Demands
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
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 $7,355,117.27.
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 March, 2010.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
r_T40r:61n
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of March, 2010, by the
following vote:
F-Ayd:.�Ko1l1►[MIN diIAdi1:l4:63
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
02/18/2010 TOTAL CHECK RUN
02/25/2010 TOTAL CHECK RUN
02/18/2010 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN:
$ 5,334,266.42
1,594,441.67
426,409.18
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 03/092010 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 7,355,117.27
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND
CHECKS:
001
GENERAL FUND
$ 1,725,254.20
130
RECOVERY ACT JAG FUNDING
3,104.98
165
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
9,956.16
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
202,863.31
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
128.81
193
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE
9,175.90
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
1,294.86
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT.
9,416.94
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
5,418.75
210
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND
96,396.24
280
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT
5,764.92
300
INSURANCE FUND
570.65
320
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
38,920.09
330
SUPPORT SERVICES
6,815.70
340
FACILITIES
27,086.55
370
CITY 2008 COP'S DEBT SERVICE
569,931.65
380
RDA DEBT SERVICE FUND
5,275.00
460
CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND
226,990.12
472
CFD 01-2 HARVESTON A&B DEBT SERVICE
471,518.89
473
CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND
485,536.21
474
AD03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE
47,093.02
475
CFD03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND
992,609.04
476
CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND
140,304.14
477
CFD- RORIPAUGH
1,847,281.96
$ 6,928,708.09
001
GENERAL FUND
$ 259,864.62
165
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
10,869.66
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
104,424.11
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
138.96
193
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE
4,506.76
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
1,481.75
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT.
1,265.72
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
422.39
280
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT
3,958.63
300
INSURANCE FUND
1,321.99
320
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
23,298.54
330
SUPPORT SERVICES
5,647.73
340
FACILITIES
9,208.32
426,409.18
TOTAL BY FUND: $ 7,355,117.27
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 1
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
1420
02/18/2010
010349
CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT
Support Payment
578.84
578.84
1421
02/18/2010
000444
INSTATAX (EDD)
State Disability Ins Payment
24,083.71
24,083.71
1422
02/18/2010
000283
INSTATAX(IRS)
Federal Income Taxes Payment
77,130.59
77,130.59
1423
02/18/2010
001065
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
Nationwide Retirement Payment
14,187.11
14,187.11
SOLUTION
1424
02/18/2010
000246
PERS (EMPLOYEES'
PERS ER Paid Member Contr Payment
114,409.22
114,409.22
RETIREMENT)
1425
02/18/2010
000389
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
OBRA- Project Retirement Payment
2,168.34
2,168.34
SOLUTION
1426
02/18/2010
005460
U S BANK
CFD 8&12 spec tax refund bond
226,990.12
226,990.12
1427
02/18/2010
005460
U S BANK
Total County SS#1 remittance
3,984,343.26
3,984,343.26
1428
02/18/2010
005460
U S BANK
2008 COPs debt svc
569,931.65
569,931.65
137057
02/18/2010
009374
ALLEGRO MUSICAL VENTURES
Piano Tuning & Repair: Theater
300.00
Piano Maint: Theater
740.00
1,040.00
137058
02/18/2010
006915
ALLIE'S PARTY EQUIPMENT
rental equip:winter wndrind 12/11
1,131.30
rental equip: NYE Old Town
2,420.45
3,551.75
137059
02/18/2010
012943
ALPHA MECHANICAL SERVICE
Roof Repair: City Hall
21,184.68
21,184.68
INC
137060
02/18/2010
011007
BARNETT, KIRK
reimb: osmosis water supplies
160.16
160.16
137061
02/18/2010
000413
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
streambed all app fee:FVP PW02-11
4,482.75
4,482.75
137062
02/18/2010
013422
CAMERON, RICHARD A.
refund:prkg cite viol. dismissed
65.00
65.00
137063
02/18/2010
005708
CLEAR CHANNEL
radio advertisements: theater
270.00
270.00
BROADCASTING INC
137064
02/18/2010
013425
COLE, WILLIAM D. & LINDA ANN
refund sr excursion 4100.102
20.00
refund:sr excursion 4100.101
30.00
50.00
Page:1
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 2
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137065
02/18/2010
004405
COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES
Community Health Charities Payment
106.00
106.00
137066
02/18/2010
006303
CONDUIT NETWORKS, INC
technical cnslt: Info Sys
479.32
479.32
137067
02/18/2010
013426
COOMES, TODD
refund:father/daughter date nite
20.00
20.00
137068
02/18/2010
013228
CRAWFORD, TIM
refund:prkg cite viol. dismissed
25.00
25.00
137069
02/18/2010
009214
CROWN INDUSTRIES INC
sign holders: theater
95.29
95.29
137070
02/18/2010
001393
DATA TICKET INC
refund:prkg cite pmt 2/2/10
224.00
224.00
137071
02/18/2010
004192
DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING
Fuel for City vehicles: CC/IS/PW LD
102.62
102.62
INC
137072
02/18/2010
013264
DOWNSTREAM SERVICES INC
Storm drain inspection:PW CIP
1,845.00
1,845.00
137073
02/18/2010
002390
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER
95366-02 Diego Dr Ldscp
47.28
47.28
DIST
137074
02/18/2010
004068
ECALDRE MANALILI-DE VILLA,
TCSD Instructor Earnings
262.50
AILEEN
TCSD Instructor Earnings
273.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
115.50
TCSD Instructor Earnings
31.50
TCSD Instructor Earnings
136.50
TCSD Instructor Earnings
52.50
871.50
137075
02/18/2010
009565
EMPTY CRADLE
Community Service Funding FY 09/10
1,000.00
1,000.00
137076
02/18/2010
013427
EVANS, HUGH
refund:sec dep:kitchen rental:tcc
150.00
150.00
137077
02/18/2010
000165
FEDERAL EXPRESS INC
1/7-11 express mail svcs: citywide
243.03
243.03
137078
02/18/2010
004074
FRANCHISE MGMT SERVICES INC
supplies: Father/Daughter 2/13
174.14
174.14
137079
02/18/2010
009608
GOLDEN VALLEYMUSIC SOCIETY
sttlmnt: InstrumentsfVoices 2/6
767.30
767.30
137080
02/18/2010
013428
GREAVES, VIRGINIA M.
refund:knit wkshp 1060.102
12.00
12.00
Page2
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 3
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137081
02/18/2010
013423
GRUMMET, BONNIE L.
refund:prkg cite viol. dismissed
300.00
300.00
137082
02/18/2010
005311
H2O CERTIFIED POOL WATER
Jan fountain maint town square
175.00
SPCL.
Jan pool maint: crc & tes
900.00
1,075.00
137083
02/18/2010
000186
HANKS HARDWARE INC
Hardware supplies: Theater
21.15
Hardware supplies: TCC
65.93
Hardware supplies: MPSC
58.70
Hardware supplies: Parks
1,666.06
Hardware supplies: Ch Museum
46.70
Hardware supplies: PW Maint
229.72
Hardware supplies: PW Traffic
102.21
Hardware supplies: Ch/TV Museum
284.97
Hardware Supplies: B&S
53.67
Hardware Supplies: Crc
331.69
Hardware Supplies: Crc/Spits Pgm
377.09
Hardware supplies: Library
8.91
Hardware supplies: Aquatics
39.51
Hardware supplies: Info Sys
80.52
Hardware supplies: Fire
597.80
3,964.63
137084
02/18/2010
010210
HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC, THE
maint supplies: city hall
134.92
134.92
137085
02/18/2010
003198
HOME DEPOT, THE
maint supplies: theater
60.81
maint supplies: theater
253.20
314.01
137086
02/18/2010
000194
1 C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN
I C M A Retirement Trust 457 Payment
6,135.68
6,135.68
303355
137087
02/18/2010
003296
INTL CODE COUNCIL
Publications: B&S
345.78
'09 code books: fire prevention
411.85
757.63
137088
02/18/2010
003266
IRON MOUNTAIN OFFSITE
Jan storage:City/IS Backup Tape
354.31
354.31
137089
02/18/2010
012295
JAMESON MANAGEMENT INC
Door Maint: Stn 84
370.84
370.84
137090
02/18/2010
013382
MAHAFFEY, MICHELLE, R.
TCSD Instructor Earnings
392.00
392.00
137091
02/18/2010
004141
MAINTEX INC
custodial supplies: CRC/FOC
113.71
113.71
137092
02/18/2010
010728
MCKNIGHT, ELINOR PINKSTON
Presentation: Black History Month
350.00
350.00
137093
02/18/2010
007210
MIDORI GARDENS
Jan Idscp maint: TCSD parks
70,105.00
70,105.00
Page3
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 4
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137094
02/18/2010
009835
MIRACLE PLAYGROUND SALES
playground surfacing materials:tcsd
203.92
203.92
INC
137095
02/18/2010
012264
MIRANDA, JULIO C.
TCSD Instructor Earnings
28.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
336.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
147.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
63.00
574.00
137096
02/18/2010
007705
MITCHELL, DANIEL
refund:sec dep:rm rental TCC 1/22
150.00
150.00
137097
02/18/2010
000883
MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
sand/silt removal:long cyn wash:pw
18,967.00
18,967.00
137098
02/18/2010
002257
MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS drinking fountain parts:park sites
333.25
333.25
137099
02/18/2010
013424
NEAL, NIKKI
refund:prkg cite viol. dismissed
300.00
300.00
137100
02/18/2010
002139
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Jan newspaper subscr:mpsc
27.30
27.30
137101
02/18/2010
002292
OASIS VENDING
vending svcs: Fld Op Ctr
190.08
vending svcs: city hall
490.05
vending svcs: Maint Facility
218.35
898.48
137102
02/18/2010
010167
ODYSSEY POWER
city fire protection systems maint
2,001.17
2,001.17
CORPORATION
137103
02/18/2010
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
35.89
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
382.54
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
184.07
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
230.86
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
75.00
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
155.07
city vehicle maint svc: PW Maint
295.82
city vehicle maint svc: PW CIP
36.57
1,395.82
137104
02/18/2010
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
city vehicle maint svcs: TCSD
80.07
80.07
137105
02/18/2010
001171
ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY
misc supplies: tiny tot pgrm
66.89
66.89
INC
137106
02/18/2010
013198
ORTENZO-HAYES, KRISTINE
TCSD Instructor Earnings
616.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
500.50
TCSD Instructor Earnings
616.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
619.50
TCSD Instructor Earnings
536.90
TCSD Instructor Earnings
206.50
3,095.40
Page:4
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 5
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137107
02/18/2010
005656
PAPA
PAPA regis:Thurman, D. 3/25
70.00
70.00
137108
02/18/2010
010501
PC WORLD
annual PC World subscr:lnfo Sys
24.95
24.95
137109
02/18/2010
001958
PERS LONG TERM CARE
PERS Long Term Care Payment
169.04
169.04
PROGRAM
137110
02/18/2010
007484
PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC
AED pads:paramedics
1,060.31
1,060.31
137111
02/18/2010
004529
QUAID TEMECULA
veh repair & maint:pd motorcycles
2,395.24
2,395.24
HARLEY-DAVIDSON
137112
02/18/2010
002612
RADIO SHACK INC
Misc supplies for IS
34.76
credit:misc supplies for IS
-13.02
21.74
137113
02/18/2010
000262
RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRICT
Feb various water meters TCSD
4,798.41
Feb water meters: 41951 moraga
232.36
Feb water metem:lndscp:calle elenita
32.79
5,063.56
137114
02/18/2010
000353
RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR
Jan10 prkg citation assessments
7,125.19
Dec '09 prkg citation assessments
7,546.44
14,671.63
137115
02/18/2010
000418
RIVERSIDE CO CLERK &
recording fees:cert of comp./LLA
103.00
103.00
RECORDER
137116
02/18/2010
000815
ROWLEY, CATHY
TCSD Instructor Earnings
350.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
245.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
245.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
350.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
210.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
420.00
1,820.00
137117
02/18/2010
009196
SACRAMENTO THEATRICAL
misc lighting supplies:theater
69.08
69.08
LIGHTING
137118
02/18/2010
013429
SAMONTE, ANTOINETTE
refund:sec dep:rm rental:crc
150.00
150.00
137119
02/18/2010
008470
SAN DIEGO HARBOR EXCURSION
excursion: whale watch 2/23/10
450.00
450.00
137120
02/18/2010
006815
SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF
Support Payment Account # 581095025
12.50
12.50
137121
02/18/2010
009980
SANBORN, GWYN
settlemnt:Country... Merc 2/6/10
468.00
468.00
Pages
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 6
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137122
02/18/2010
008529
SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL
Support Pmt LO File # 2008059437
200.00
200.00
137123
02/18/2010
008529
SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL
Support Pmt LO File # 2008059437
100.00
100.00
137124
02/18/2010
009746
SIGNS BY TOMORROW
signs/materials:gallery at the merc
22.75
22.75
137125
02/18/2010
000645
SMART & FINAL INC
hospitality supplies:theater
64.30
misc program supplies :F.I.T.
154.82
misc supplies:Team PACE events
311.87
530.99
137126
02/18/2010
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
Feb 2-31-419-2659:27606 ynez TC1
88.87
Feb 2-30-608-9384:28582 harveston
236.69
325.56
137127
02/18/2010
012252
SOUND SKILZ ENTERTAINMENT
DJ/soundAights:teen dance 1/23
750.00
750.00
INC
137128
02/18/2010
000519
SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTROL
pest control svcs:crc
541.00
541.00
INC
137129
02/18/2010
005786
SPRINT
Dec 25- Jan 26 cellular usage/equip
7,128.25
7,128.25
137130
02/18/2010
003000
STATE WATER RESOURCES
dredge & fll:fee dep:PW02-11
640.00
640.00
137131
02/18/2010
008023
STATER BROTHERS MARKETS
Refreshments: Fire
67.44
67.44
137132
02/18/2010
002366
STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET
water extraction:mpsc
200.00
CLEANING
water extraction: c. museum
220.00
420.00
137133
02/18/2010
012188
STRONG FAMILIES
TCSD Instructor Earnings
56.00
56.00
137134
02/18/2010
011667
T & T JANITORIAL INC
cleaning svcs:OT police storefront
790.00
janitorial srvcs:tcc
7,073.83
7,863.83
137135
02/18/2010
000305
TARGET BANK BUS CARD SRVCS
recreation supplies:FAM prgm
152.85
artist hospitality:Theater
67.70
artist hospitality:Theater
31.69
252.24
137136
02/18/2010
012265
TEMECULA ACE HARDWARE C/O
misc hardware supplies: FS#92
18.85
misc supplies:var park sites
17.16
36.01
137137
02/18/2010
013335
TEMECULA ACE HARDWARE INC
uniforms & supplies:fre explorers
509.64
509.64
Pages
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 7
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137138
02/18/2010
010679
TEMECULAAUTO
vehicle repair/maint:fre prev
520.00
520.00
REPAIR/RADIATOR
137139
02/18/2010
011736
TEMECULA TROPHY INC
rec supplies:sports softball trophies
540.71
usher nametags:Theater
323.53
864.24
137140
02/18/2010
010046
TEMECULA VALLEY
Dec'09 Bus. Impry District Asmnts
30,521.27
30,521.27
CONVENTION &
137141
02/18/2010
007340
TEMECULA VALLEY FIRE EQUIP.
fire extinguisher maint svc/equip
25.00
25.00
CO
137142
02/18/2010
009194
TEMECULA VALLEY NEWS
Advertising:Tem. Presents
429.60
429.60
137143
02/18/2010
000306
TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE &
irrigation/plumbing supplies: var parks
18.47
SUPPLY
plumbing supplies:CRC
21.34
39.81
137144
02/18/2010
004274
TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY
locksmith svcs:var park locations
94.08
CENTR
locksmith svcs:harveston prk storage
22.51
116.59
137145
02/18/2010
010276
TIME WARNER CABLE
Feb high speed intemet: FS#92
139.60
139.60
137146
02/18/2010
013078
TOROK, LORI A.
performances:OTTCT 2/26-27/10
200.00
200.00
137147
02/18/2010
013292
TREY MCINTYRE PROJECT LTD
performances:Theater 2/26-27/10
15,500.00
15,500.00
137148
02/18/2010
004484
TRU WEST INC
misc supplies:recreation pgrm
186.86
186.86
137149
02/18/2010
004759
TWIN GRAPHICS
graphics: City police units
30.45
30.45
137150
02/18/2010
005460
U S BANK
Rda Tabs
5,275.00
5,275.00
137151
02/18/2010
002492
U S TOY COMPANY INC
misc supplies:holiday lights pgrm'09
53.40
53.40
137152
02/18/2010
007766
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
cable/utility locators:pw traffic div
133.50
133.50
137153
02/18/2010
008517
UNITED SITE SERVICES OF
Feb fence rental main street bridge
26.65
26.65
CA,INC
137154
02/18/2010
000325
UNITED WAY
United Way Charities Payment
36.00
36.00
Page:7
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 8
02/18/2010
1:22:52PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank:
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
137155
02/18/2010 000621
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL
Jan'10 TUMF Payment
58,872.00
58,872.00
OF
137156
02/18/2010 008402
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Jan'10 MSHCP payment
11,628.00
11,628.00
137157
02/18/2010 013083
XTREME CLEAN HOODS
kitchen hood/maint svc:TCC
425.00
425.00
Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 5,334,266.42
Pageb
Item No. 4
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 2010
PREPARED BY: Rudy Graciano, Revenue Manager
RECOMMENDATION: Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 2010.
BACKGROUND: Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004 require reports to the
City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio, receipts, and disbursements respectively.
Adequate funds will be available to meet budgeted and actual expenditures of the City for the next
six months. Current market values are derived from the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
reports, Union Bank of California trust and custody statements, and from US Bank trust statements.
Attached is the City Treasurer's Report that provides this information.
The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy and
Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635 as of January 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ATTACHMENTS: City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 2010
Current Year
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
Reporting period 91/91/2919-91/31/2919
Run Dare av2v2310-1824
162,13] 07 1,541,81052
191,324,951.75 184,447,924.59
1.18% 1.42%
Portfolio TEME
CP
PM IPRF`M1l rsyMRDpt8 42
Retort Ve[500
Par
Market
City of Temecula
% of
City of Temecula, California 43200 Business Park Drive
days to
Portfolio Management Po. Box 9033
g Temecula, CA, 92596
IMV i�
Portfolio Summary (951)694 6430
--_ —!
January 31, 2010
Current Year
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
Reporting period 91/91/2919-91/31/2919
Run Dare av2v2310-1824
162,13] 07 1,541,81052
191,324,951.75 184,447,924.59
1.18% 1.42%
Portfolio TEME
CP
PM IPRF`M1l rsyMRDpt8 42
Retort Ve[500
Par
Market
Book
% of
days to
wm
wm
Investments
Value
Value
Value
Portfolio
Term
Maturity
360 Equiv.
355 Equiv.
Certificates of DepositBank373,983.53
373,983.A
8]3,929.63
0.53
1,177
212
6.BBo
6878
Managed Pool A000unts
59,097,321.62
59,097,321.62
59,097,321 53
36.69
1
1
2451
0457
Letter of credit
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1
1
0.000
0.000
Lodal Agensylrrvestmern Funds
59,075,34999
59,1 25,B23 H
59,075,34999
36.62
1
1
0.660
0.662
Federal Agency Callable 5eourniies
30000000.00
30,32$220.00
30000000.00
12.07
1,389
1,070
2220
2269
Federal Agency Bullet 5eourities
15,000,000 00
15,229,480.00
14,977,910.00
9.02
1,112
725
2494
2529
Investment oantrads
2031,4BB78
2031,48278
2031,48278
1 22
8979
2789
6.609
6626
166,078,124.86
166,800,138.50
166,056,034.86
199.99%
449
295
1.199
1.294
Investments
Cash
Passbook/obeokirg
5,344,13712
6,344,13]12
5,344,13712
1
1
0.000
0.000
(not Imind d In yield oaloulations)
Total Cash and Investments
171,422,262.94
1U, 144,275.68
171,499,172.94
449
295
1.188
1.294
Current Year
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
Reporting period 91/91/2919-91/31/2919
Run Dare av2v2310-1824
162,13] 07 1,541,81052
191,324,951.75 184,447,924.59
1.18% 1.42%
Portfolio TEME
CP
PM IPRF`M1l rsyMRDpt8 42
Retort Ve[500
City of Temecula, California
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
January 31, 2010
Page 2
Average Purchase Stated YTM VTM Daysto Maturity
CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate 360 365 Maturity Date
Certificates of Deposit - Bank
95453516-2 66-12 GENIM2 USBANK 06/12/2007 673,963.53 673,963.53 673,963.53 5.600
Subtotal and Average 873,983.53 873,983.53 873,983.53 873,983.53
Managed Pool
Accounts
1.00
1 2221 60 03-2
CITY
COP RE2
104346006-1
01-2
IMP 2
104346006-4
01-2
RESA2
104346016-3
01-2
RESB2
104346000-4
01-2
SPTAX2
94669911-2
03-1
ACQA2
946699213
03-1
ACQB3
946699023
03-1
BOND3
946699063
03-1
RES A3
94669916-2
03-1
RES B2
94669900-4
03-1
SPTAXI
793593011-2
03-2
ADO
793593009-2
03-2
EMW D 2
793593007-2
03-2
IMP 2
793593016-4
03-2
LOC 2
793593010-2
03-2
PWADM2
793593006-2
03-2
RES 2
793593000-3
03-2
SPTX2
744727011-2
03-3
ACQ2
744727002-2
03-3
BOND 2
744727007-2
03-3
CITY2
744727009
03-3
EMW D 1
744727006-3
03-3
RES3
744727000-4
03-3
SP TX 4
94666001-2
03-4
ADMIN2
94666005-1
03-4
PREP1
94666000-1
03-4
RED1
94666006-2
03-4
RES2
766776002-2
03-6
BON D2
766776007-2
03-61MP2
73,747.57
766776006-2
03-6
RES2
766776000-3
03-6
SP TX3
95453510-2
66-12 BON D2
95453516-4
66-12 G14
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
5.600 5.676 212 09/01/2010
5.600 5.678 212
ASSURED GUARANTY
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.000
0.966
1.000 1
First American
Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
441,606.99
441,606.99
441,606.99
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
203,290.10
203,290.10
203,290.10
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
152,621.37
152,621.37
152,621.37
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
4,530.51
4,530.51
4,530.51
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
15,113.21
15,113.21
15,113.21
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
07/01/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
666,294.73
666,294.73
666,294.73
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
223,566.93
223,566.93
223,566.93
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
306,426.74
306,426.74
306,426.74
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
73,747.57
73,747.57
73,747.57
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
4,229.47
4,229.47
4,229.47
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
4,364.66
4,364.66
4,364.66
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
2,641,523.06
2,641,523.06
2,641,523.06
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
2,961.04
2,961.04
2,961.04
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
367.56
367.56
367.56
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
130,066.54
130,066.54
130,066.54
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
16,611.36
16,611.36
16,611.36
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
07/01/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
2,176,102.75
2,176,102.75
2,176,102.75
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
209,694.67
209,694.67
209,694.67
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
5,222.74
5,222.74
5,222.74
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
4,071.65
4,071.65
4,071.65
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
2,349.99
2,349.99
2,349.99
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
96,467.50
96,467.50
96,467.50
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
07/01/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
1,402.16
1,402.16
1,402.16
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
337,942.60
337,942.60
337,942.60
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
49,351.36
49,351.36
49,351.36
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
1,390.73
1,390.73
1,390.73
0.000
0.000 1
First American
Treasury
66,649.65
66,649.65
66,649.65
0.000
0.000 1
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
Report Var_ 5 00
City of Temecula, California
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
January 31, 2010
Page 3
Subtotal and Average 59,698,171.17
Letter of Credit
104346006-1 02006 ASSURANCE CO BOND INSURANCE 07/01/2009
Subtotal and Average 1.00
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
59,097,321.58
1.00
1.00
59,097,321.58
1.00
1.00
59,097,321.58
1.00
1.00
0.451 0.457 1
0.000 0.000 1
0.000 0.000 1
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
Average
Purchase
Stated
YTM
YTM
Daysto Maturity
CUSIP
Investment#
Issuer Balance
Date
Par Value
Market Value
Book Value
Rate
360
365 Maturity Date
Managed Pool Accounts
1 2221 60 03-4
CITY COP RE4
First American Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
122216006-3
CITY COPCIP2
First American Treasury
07/01/2009
6,577.76
6,577.76
6,577.76
0.000
0.000
1
122216000-2
CITY COPLPF2
First American Treasury
37.11
37.11
37.11
0.000
0.000
1
94434160-1
RDA 021NT1
First American Treasury
650,406.13
650,406.13
650,406.13
0.000
0.000
1
94434161-2
RDA 02 PRIN2
First American Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666006-2
RDA 06 CIPA2
First American Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666001
RDA 06 PRIN
First American Treasury
07/27/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666000-2
RDA 06A INT2
First American Treasury
373,516.13
373,516.13
373,516.13
0.000
0.000
1
107666016-3
RDA 06B CIPS
First American Treasury
959,432.06
959,432.06
959,432.06
0.000
0.000
1
107666010-2
RDA 06B INT2
First American Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666016-2
RDA 06B RES2
First American Treasury
202,115.00
202,115.00
202,115.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666030-2
RDA 07 CAPI2
First American Treasury
07/01/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666027-2
RDA 07 ESC2
First American Treasury
07/01/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666020-2
RDA 07 INT2
First American Treasury
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
107666026-2
RDA 07 PROJ2
First American Treasury
216,256.29
216,256.29
216,256.29
0.000
0.000
1
107666026-2
RDA 07 RES2
First American Treasury
316.62
316.62
316.62
0.000
0.000
1
94432360-2
TCSD COP INT
First American Treasury
07/01/2009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1
94432363
02001
Financial Security Assurance
07/01/2009
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.000
0.000
1
793593011-1
03-2-1 ACQUI
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
29,111,625.54
29,111,625.54
29,111,625.54
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
793593009-1
03-2-1 EMWD
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
1,557,052.13
1,557,052.13
1,557,052.13
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
793593007-1
03-2-1 IMPRO
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
602,264.65
602,264.65
602,264.65
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
793593010-1
03-2-1 PW AD
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
472,647.57
472,647.57
472,647.57
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
793593006-3
03-2-3 RESER
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
3,594,377.36
3,594,377.36
3,594,377.36
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
122216006
CITY COP CIP
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
7,401,766.69
7,401,766.69
7,401,766.69
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
1 2221 60 03-1
CITY COP RE1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
619,772.96
619,772.96
619,772.96
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666006-1
RDA 06 CIP-1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666016-2
RDA 06 CIP-2
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666030-1
RDA 07 CAP -1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666027-1
RDA 07 ESC -1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666026-1
RDA 07 PRO -1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
3,575,066.66
3,575,066.66
3,575,066.66
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666026-1
RDA 07 RES -1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
1,105,452.42
1,105,452.42
1,105,452.42
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
107666006
RDA 06 RESA
MBIA Surety Bond
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.000
0.000
1
94434166
RDA TABS RES
MBIA Surety Bond
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.000
0.000
1
Subtotal and Average 59,698,171.17
Letter of Credit
104346006-1 02006 ASSURANCE CO BOND INSURANCE 07/01/2009
Subtotal and Average 1.00
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
59,097,321.58
1.00
1.00
59,097,321.58
1.00
1.00
59,097,321.58
1.00
1.00
0.451 0.457 1
0.000 0.000 1
0.000 0.000 1
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
City of Temecula, California
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
January 31, 2010
Page 4
Federal Agency
Callable Securities
Average Purchase
01067
31331GZ36
01145
Stated
YTM
YTM
Daysto Maturity
CUSIP
Investment#
Issuer Balance Date
Par Value
Market Value
Book Value
Rate
360
365 Maturity Date
Local Agency Investment Funds
3133XUKAO
01136
3133XUNQ2
01141
3133XVF63
01147
3126X6R46
01126
94669911-1
03-1 ACQ A2
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
726,503.39
726,503.39
726,503.39
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
94669921-1
03-1 ACQ B2
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
3,670,076.41
3,670,076.41
3,670,076.41
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
744727011-1
03-3 ACQ2
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
1,276,711.70
1,276,711.70
1,276,711.70
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
744727007-1
03-3 CITY 2
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
766776007-1
03-6 IMP 1
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
157,001.56
157,001.56
157,001.56
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
SYSCITY
CITY
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
31,790,940.63
31,621,073.06
31,790,940.63
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
SYSRDA
RDA
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
7,163,536.07
7,170,327.65
7,163,536.07
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
SYSTCSD
TCSD
CA Local Agency Investment Fun
14,066,576.03
14,099,927.64
14,066,576.03
0.556
0.550
0.556
1
773
Subtotal and Average 45,716,767.68
59,075,349.99
59,125,623.63
59,075,349.99
1,006,750.00
0.550
0.558
1
Federal Agency
Callable Securities
31331YTS9
01067
31331GZ36
01145
3133XRSM3
01102
3133XRVA5
01109
3133XRWE6
01110
3133XRM
01116
3133XUAE3
01131
3133XUBXO
01133
3133XUGS6
01136
3133XUKAO
01136
3133XUNQ2
01141
3133XVF63
01147
3126X6R46
01126
3126X6S52
01129
3126X9NT3
01152
3136F9CB7
01066
3136F9DP5
01090
3136FHRX5
01126
3136FHXF7
01127
3136FHY66
01132
31396AYN6
01134
3136FJAD3
01140
31396AZD7
01142
3136FJFD6
01143
3136FJHX2
01146
3136FJNN7
01146
31396AZY1
01149
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
Federal Farm Credit Bank
02/14/2006
2,000,000.00
2,001,660.00
2,000,000.00
3.750
3.699
3.750
1,106
02/11/2013
Federal Farm Credit Bank
10/19/2009
1,000,000.00
1,003,130.00
1,000,000.00
1.550
2.399
2.432
699
07/19/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
07/23/2006
1,000,000.00
1,017,500.00
1,000,000.00
4.050
3.995
4.050
721
01/23/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
07/30/2006
1,000,000.00
1,016,440.00
1,000,000.00
4.220
4.162
4.220
910
07/30/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
06/12/2006
1,000,000.00
1,001,250.00
1,000,000.00
4.125
4.066
4.125
557
06/12/2011
Federal Home Loan Bank
06/20/2006
1,000,000.00
1,019,060.00
1,000,000.00
4.070
4.014
4.070
931
06/20/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
07/27/2009
1,000,000.00
1,005,310.00
1,000,000.00
2.000
1.973
2.000
907
07/27/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
07/30/2009
1,000,000.00
1,006,130.00
1,000,000.00
2.375
2.342
2.375
1,094
01/30/2013
Federal Home Loan Bank
06/26/2009
1,000,000.00
1,011,250.00
1,000,000.00
2.500
2.466
2.500
1,121
02/26/2013
Federal Home Loan Bank
06/26/2009
1,000,000.00
1,010,940.00
1,000,000.00
2.560
2.545
2.560
25
02/26/2010
Federal Home Loan Bank
09/15/2009
1,000,000.00
1,005,940.00
1,000,000.00
1.700
1.677
1.700
773
03/15/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
10/26/2009
1,000,000.00
1,006,750.00
1,000,000.00
2.100
2.071
2.100
1,160
04/26/2013
Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp
06/25/2009
2,000,000.00
2,022,140.00
2,000,000.00
3.000
2.959
3.000
1,240
06/25/2013
Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp
06/29/2009
1,000,000.00
1,007,520.00
1,000,000.00
2.450
2.416
2.450
679
06/29/2012
Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp
12/10/2009
1,000,000.00
999,220.00
1,000,000.00
1.630
1.606
1.630
1,043
12/10/2012
Federal National Mtg Assn
03/11/2006
2,000,000.00
2,130,620.00
2,000,000.00
4.000
3.945
4.000
1,134
03/11/2013
Federal National Mtg Assn
03/27/2006
1,000,000.00
1,066,560.00
1,000,000.00
4.000
3.945
4.000
1,150
03/27/2013
Federal National Mtg Assn
05/21/2009
1,000,000.00
1,005,630.00
1,000,000.00
2.125
2.096
2.125
1,570
05/21/2014
Federal National Mtg Assn
06/10/2009
1,000,000.00
1,006,750.00
1,000,000.00
2.000
1.973
2.000
1,043
12/10/2012
Federal National Mtg Assn
06/03/2009
1,000,000.00
1,007,500.00
1,000,000.00
2.000
1.973
2.000
914
06/03/2012
Federal National Mtg Assn
07/26/2009
1,000,000.00
1,006,560.00
1,000,000.00
3.000
2.959
3.000
1,636
07/26/2014
Federal National Mtg Assn
09/03/2009
1,000,000.00
1,006,440.00
1,000,000.00
2.200
3.519
3.566
1,036
12/03/2012
Federal National Mtg Assn
09/21/2009
1,000,000.00
1,003,130.00
1,000,000.00
2.170
2.140
2.170
1,144
03/21/2013
Federal National Mtg Assn
09/26/2009
1,000,000.00
1,005,000.00
1,000,000.00
2.050
2.022
2.050
1,061
12/26/2012
Federal National Mtg Assn
10/26/2009
1,000,000.00
1,003,130.00
1,000,000.00
2.000
1.973
2.000
1,061
12/26/2012
Federal National Mtg Assn
11/16/2009
1,000,000.00
1,002,190.00
1,000,000.00
2.000
1.973
2.000
1,751
11/16/2014
Federal National Mtg Assn
11/10/2009
1,000,000.00
1,000,310.00
1,000,000.00
3.125
3.062
3.125
1,743
11/10/2014
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
City of Temecula, California
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Investments
January 31, 2010
Page 5
Average Purchase Stated YTM YTM Daysto Maturity
CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate 360 365 Maturity Date
Subtotal and Average 30,451,612.90 30,000,000.00 30,388,280.00 30,000,000.00 2.820 2.859 1,070
Federal Agency
Bullet Securities
31331 XMQ2
01059
31331YG46
01092
31331Y3R3
01105
31331Y3N6
01111
31331 GF47
01135
31331 GG37
01137
31331 GZ44
01144
3133XRRU6
01101
3133XSWM6
01124
3133XTN65
01125
3133XTXC5
01130
3133XVEM9
01150
3133XVRS2
01151
31396AYM6
01139
Federal Farm Credit Bank
01/26/2007
1,000,000.00
1,015,630.00
1,000,000.00
5.000
4.934
5.002
114
05/26/2010
Federal Farm Credit Bank
04/21/2006
2,000,000.00
2,049,360.00
1,993,700.00
2.630
2.703
2.740
444
04/21/2011
Federal Farm Credit Bank
07/15/2006
1,000,000.00
1,042,610.00
996,140.00
3.500
3.514
3.563
609
10/03/2011
Federal Farm Credit Bank
07/30/2006
1,000,000.00
1,041,560.00
999,000.00
3.625
3.610
3.661
529
07/15/2011
Federal Farm Credit Bank
07/29/2009
1,000,000.00
1,012,190.00
997,500.00
2.250
2.264
2.316
1,274
07/29/2013
Federal Farm Credit Bank
06/04/2009
1,000,000.00
1,015,630.00
1,000,000.00
2.150
2.121
2.150
1,099
02/04/2013
Federal Farm Credit Bank
10/15/2009
1,000,000.00
1,001,660.00
1,000,000.00
1.550
1.529
1.550
967
10/15/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
07/03/2006
1,000,000.00
1,040,310.00
996,570.00
3.625
3.626
3.676
515
07/01/2011
Federal Home Loan Bank
01/23/2009
1,000,000.00
1,019,690.00
1,000,000.00
2.100
2.071
2.100
721
01/23/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
05/07/2009
1,000,000.00
1,010,000.00
1,000,000.00
1.500
1.479
1.500
644
11/07/2011
Federal Home Loan Bank
06/11/2009
1,000,000.00
1,022,500.00
1,000,000.00
2.250
2.219
2.250
661
06/11/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
11/04/2009
1,000,000.00
1,003,130.00
1,000,000.00
1.625
1.603
1.625
1,024
11/21/2012
Federal Home Loan Bank
11/16/2009
1,000,000.00
999,690.00
999,750.00
1.000
0.996
1.012
695
12/26/2011
Federal National Mtg Assn
06/10/2009
1,000,000.00
1,009,060.00
991,250.00
1.750
2.024
2.052
921
06/10/2012
Subtotal and Average 14,977,910.00
Investment Contracts
95453516-1 66-12 GEN IM IXIS Funding Corp
95453516-1 66-12 RES 2 IXIS Funding Corp
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
15,000,000.00 15,283,460.00 14,977,910.00 2.494 2.529 725
07/24/1996 500,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00 5.430 5.509 5.565 2,769 09/01/2017
07/24/1996 1,531,466.76 1,531,466.76 1,531,466.76 5.430 5.509 5.565 2,769 09/01/2017
Subtotal and Average 2,031,468.76 2,031,468.76 2,031,468.76 2,031,468.76 5.509 5.585 2,769
Total and Average 161,324,951.75
166, 078,124.86 166,800,138.50 166,056, 034.86
1.188 1.204 295
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
City of Temecula, California
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - Cash
January 31, 2010
Page 6
Average Balance 0.00
Total Cash and Investments 161,324,951.75
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
171,422,262.04 172,144,275.68 171,400,172.04
1.188 1.204 295
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
Average Purchase
Stated
YTM
YTM
Days to
CUSIP Investment#
Issuer
Balance Date
Par Value
Market Value
Book Value Rate
360
365 Maturity
Retention Escrow Account
SYSAAA#1202 AAA#1202
COMMUNITY BANK
07/01/2009
1,166,556.69
1,166,556.69
1,166,556.69
0.000
0.000
1
4110170261 EDGEDEV
TORRY PINES BANK
07/01/2009
1,567,563.16
1,567,563.16
1,567,563.16
0.000
0.000
1
23303600 PCL CONST
Wells Fargo Bank
07/01/2009
1,443,133.14
1,443,133.14
1,443,133.14
0.000
0.000
1
Passbook/Checking Accounts
SYSPetty Cash Petty Cash
City of Temecula
07/01/2009
2,610.00
2,610.00
2,610.00
0.000
0.000
1
SYSFIex Ck Acct Flex Ck Acct
Union Bank of California
07/01/2009
24,925.44
24,925.44
24,925.44
0.000
0.000
1
SYSGen Ck Acct Gen Ck Acct
Union Bank of California
1,060,612.06
1,060,612.06
1,060,612.06
0.000
0.000
1
SYSParking Ck PARKING CITA
Union Bank of California
07/01/2009
16,334.49
16,334.49
16,334.49
0.000
0.000
1
Average Balance 0.00
Total Cash and Investments 161,324,951.75
Run Date_ 02/23/2010 -16 24
171,422,262.04 172,144,275.68 171,400,172.04
1.188 1.204 295
Portfollo TEME
CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRapt 6 42
Cash and Investments Report
CITY OF TEMECULA
Through January 31, 2010
Fund Total
001
GENERAL FUND
$44,513,175.05
100
STATE GAS TAX FUND
77.01
101
STATE TRANSPORTATION FUND
1,375,406.73
120
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND
4,845,896.92
150
AB 2766 FUND
450,239.11
160
AB 3229
22.78
165
RDA AFFORDABLE HOUSING 20%
8,491,771.47
170
MEASURE A FUND
6,449,388.13
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
1,884,185.47
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "B" STREET
143,862.44
193
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C"
726,488.54
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "D"
3,080,724.29
195
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "R"
9,872.97
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE
204,645.87
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
1,292,375.77
210
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
24,509,206.49
273
CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL
4,618,225.52
275
CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK
1,277,066.14
276
CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2
158,403.74
277
CFD-RORIPAUGH
31,553,304.22
280
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP
3,252,569.07
300
INSURANCE FUND
872,464.92
310
VEHICLES FUND
858,527.59
320
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
508,125.19
330
SUPPORT SERVICES
314,848.91
340
FACILITIES
191,553.29
370
CITY 2008 COP'S DEBT SERVICE
855,076.19
380
RDA DEBT SERVICE FUND
7,660,800.76
390
TCSD 2001 COP'S DEBT SERVICE
12,281.65
460
CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND
4,452,004.68
472
CFD 01-2 HARVESTON A&B DEBT
1,325,953.88
473
CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT
1,926,573.01
474
AD 03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD
157,297.10
475
CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT
3,723,484.10
476
CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT
565,995.05
477
CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT
9,880,916.05
700
CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-
1,465.58
Grand Total: $172,144,275.68
Item No. 5
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit
Construction Bids for the Storm Drain Repair at Rancho California Road, Project
No. PW09-08
PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - CIP
Jon Salazar, Associate Engineer - CIP
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the plans and specifications and
authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Storm Drain Repair at
Rancho California Road, Project No. PW09-08.
BACKGROUND: There are three, 72" diameter, Corrugated Metal Pipes (CMP) that
cross Rancho California Road just east of Hope Way. Subsidence of the roadway surface of
Rancho California Road in the vicinity of the pipes was observed in the past. This subsidence was
corrected during construction of the Rancho California Road Pavement Rehabilitation project
(PW06-14). However, in order to determine if the roadway subsidence was the result of the failure
of the storm drain pipes below it, a video inspection of the storm drain system was performed. In
addition, a physical inspection of the pipes was conducted. The video and the physical inspection
revealed that the three CMP had some corrosion. While it was concluded that this minor corrosion
of the three CMP was not the cause of the roadway subsidence, in order to extend the life of the
three CMP, staff determined that performing rehabilitative work on the pipes would extend their
useful life by up to 10 years. This scope of this project consists of removing the corrosion and the
application of a protective coating on the interior of the three CMP.
Project specifications are complete and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids.
The contract documents are available for review in the Director of Public Works' office.
The Engineer's Construction Estimate for the project is $50,000.00.
FISCAL IMPACT: This project is included in the FY 2010-2014 Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) as the Road and Storm Drain Repair at Rancho California Road project and is
funded with Prop 1 B — Transportation Bond/ Local Streets & Roads (Spending Plan for FY 2008-09).
Adequate funds are available in the project accounts.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
Project Description
PROJECT LOCATION
Project Title: ROAD AND STORM DRAIN REPAIR AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
m
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Title:
Project Type:
Description:
Department:
Scope of Project:
Benefit:
Project Cost:
Administration
Construction
Construction Engineering
Design
Totals
ROAD AND STORM DRAIN REPAIR AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
Circulation
PRIORITY: I
Project will replace approximately 140 feet of aging corrugated metal pipe under Rancho California Road, east of Hope Drive,
with reinforced concrete pipe, and reconstruct that portion of the roadway.
Public Works - Account No. 210.165.510
Project will include environmental processing, design, and reconstruction of the roadway segment affected by the failing drainage
pipe.
Project will improve safety and circulation while maintaining the integrity of the streets during inclement weather.
Actuals
to Date 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-2013 2013-2014 Future Years Total Project Cost
$ 86,071 $ 86,071
$ 209,623 $ 209,623
$ 25,000 $ 25,000
$ 20,000 $ 20,000
$ $ 340,694 $ $ $ $ - $ - $ 340,694
Source of Funds:
Proposition 113 (Streets and
Roads) $ 340,694 $ 340,694
Total Funding: $ - $ 340,694 $ - $ $ $ $ $ 340,694
Future O & M Cost: N/A
69
Item No. 6
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Approval of the Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit
Construction Bids for Road Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road, Project No.
PW09-10 and approval of an Amended Spending Plan for Proposition 1 B
funding.
PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - CIP
Jon Salazar, Associate Engineer - CIP
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Approve an amendment to the City's Proposition 1 B Spending Plan for FY 2008-09 to
include East Vallejo Road and Cabrillo Avenue as part of the Road Reconstruction at
Jedediah Smith Road Project.
2. Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit
construction bids for the Road Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road, Project No. PW09-
10.
BACKGROUND: In 2006, California voters approved Proposition 1B (Prop 1B —
Transportation Bond/Local Streets & Roads), which authorized the sale of over Million in bonds for
the rehabilitation and reconstruction of local streets and roads. The State authorized the release of
Prop 1 B funds to local agencies in two installments; in Fiscal Years 2007-08 and 2008-09.
The City received its first installment ($1.57 million) of Prop 1 B bond funds in mid -2008. The second
installment ($1.45 million) was received in June 2009. In order to receive these funds, the City was
required to submit a Spending Plan with a list of projects to the California Department of Finance
(DOF). The City's Prop 1 B Spending Plans for Fiscal Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 were approved
by the City Council on February 28, 2008 and December 16, 2008, respectively. These funds are
being used to repair and maintain a variety of city-wide roadways that would not have been included
in the City's annual maintenance and rehabilitation program due to funding limitations. The Road
Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road Project is one of the projects identified within our FY 2008-
09 Spending Plan.
Due to the current slowdown in construction activities, recent construction bids have been lower
than the original engineering cost estimates that were used to prepare the City's FY 2008-09
Spending Plan. As a result, it is anticipated that funds will be available from savings associated with
the Rancho California Road Storm Drain Repair Project to complete additional roadway work in
accordance with the Prop 1 B guidelines. In order to fully utilize the remainder of these funds, staff is
recommending that the City Council approve an administrative amendment to our Prop 1 B Spending
Plan for Fiscal Year 2008-09 to include the addition of East Vallejo Road and Cabrillo Avenue as
part of the Jedediah Smith Road Project.
Although various streets and roads in the City have been identified as requiring some form of
maintenance and/or rehabilitation, it has been determined that the best use of our Prop 1 B funding
allocation is to expand the Road Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road Project to include East
Vallejo Road and Cabrillo Avenue . This project will consist of the rehabilitation of both roadways
using the Asphalt Rubber Aggregate Membrane (ARAM) method.
Project specifications are complete and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids.
The contract documents are available for review in the Director of Public Works' office.
The Engineer's Construction Cost Estimate for the project is $375,000.00.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Road Reconstruction at Jedediah Smith Road project is included
in the City's FY2010-2014 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and is funded with Prop 1B —
Transportation Bond/Local Streets & Roads (Spending Plan for FY 2008-09). As noted above,
savings from the Rancho California Road Storm Drain Repair project will be transferred to the
Jedediah Smith Road project account at the time of award to fully fund this project.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
Project Description
PROJECT LOCATION
Project Title: ROAD RECONSTRUCTION AT JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD
N
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Title:
Project Type:
Description:
Department:
Scope of Project:
Benefit:
ROAD RECONSTRUCTION AT JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD
Circulation
PRIORITY: I
Project will rebuild 28 feet of roadway striping and asphalt berms at Jedediah Smith Road between Temecula Parkway and
Cabrillo.
Public Works - Account No. 210.165.511
Project will include environmental processing, design, and reconstruction of the road segment.
Project will improve the quality and extend the service life of Jedediah Road.
Project Cost: Actuals
to Date
2009-10 2010-11
2011-12 2012-2013 2013-2014 Future Years Total
Project Cost
Administration
$
43,036
$
43,036
Construction
$
215,000
$
215,000
Construction Engineering
$
17,311
$
17,311
Design
$
20,000
$
20,000
Totals $
$
295,347 $
$ $ $ $ $
295,347
Source of Funds:
Proposition 1B (Streets and
Roads)
$
295,347
$
295,347
Total Funding: $
$
295,347 $ -
$ - $ - $ $ $
295,347
Future O & M Cost: N/A
71
Item No. 7
Approvals
City Attorney /10
Director of Finance
City Manager Go,,
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Payment of the City's share of the Regional Municipal Stormwater Permit for the
Santa Margarita Watershed for FY2009-2010
PREPARED BY: Aldo Licitra, Associate Engineer, NPDES
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve payment to the Riverside County
Flood Control District in the sum of $188,825.16 as the City's portion of the cost-sharing
reimbursement pursuant to the Implementation Agreement between the Santa Margarita
Watershed Permittees approved by the City Council in January 2005.
BACKGROUND: On January 26, 2005, the City of Temecula executed a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Implementation Agreement (IA) with the
Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD). The IA manages the regional components of
the City's NPDES Order (No. R9-2004-001) and establishes proportional cost shares for each
permittee based on a cost-sharing formula. The RCFCD administers the IA, the regional
components, and associated costs.
The regional components of the City's NPDES Order that are covered by the agreement include
water sampling programs, the Watershed Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP), municipal
staff training, Watershed Annual Reports, business inspections, Receiving Water Monitoring
Reports, education and outreach programs, and Reports of Waste Discharge (ROWDs).
The cost for Temecula's share, based on the formula in the agreement, is $188,825.16 for
FY 2009-10.
FISCAL IMPACT: $188,825.16 has been budgeted in the NPDES Division Operating
Budget to pay for Temecula's share of the IA for FY 2009-10.
ATTACHMENTS: FY 2009-10 Cost -Sharing Reimbursement Invoice from RCFCD
Executed Implementation Agreement dated March 1, 2005
WARREN D. WILLIAMS
General Manager -Chief Engineer
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
951.955.1200
FAX 951.788.9965
www.reflood.org
128823
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RECEIVED
January 25, 2010 FEB 0 3 2010
CITY MANAGER'S
Mr. Shawn Nelson, City Manager OFFICE
City of Temecula RECEIVED ECEI\ ED
Post Office Box 9033 1'� Cl V Lr LJ
Temecula, CA 92589-9033 FEB 0 4 2010
Attention: Aldo Licitra CITY OF TEMECULA
KS RARTMMr
Dear Mr. Nelson: Re: FY 2009-10 Cost Sharing Rhe mbu�rsemenntt
Regional Costs for Santa Margarita
NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit
In compliance with the Santa Margarita River Watershed NPDES Permit adopted by the San Diego Regional
Water Quality Control Board on July 14, 2004 as Order No. R9-2004-001 (NPDES No. CAS0108766) and the
Implementation Agreement (IA) adopted by the County, District, and Cities of Murrieta and Temecula
(Permittees) on March 1, 2005, a cost sharing provision between the Permittees was established. Per the IA,
Item 3 "Shared Costs" provides for annual cost sharing of estimated regional program costs ("Estimated
Costs"), with the "Combined Contribution" from the County and Cities not to exceed $500,000 annually.
Although Item 3 also notes that the District shall invoice the County and Cities for their "Individual
Contribution" to the total "Combined Contribution" in two installments (50% each installment), it has been
verbally agreed by all Permittees that this year the District will invoice the County and Cities for their
contribution of the FY 2009-10 "Estimated Costs" in one installment (100% contribution).
The District has determined the "Estimated Costs" for the period of July 2009 through June 2010 to be
$537,318 with a "Combined Contribution" total of $467,830. Per the calculations and the attached invoice,
your Agency's contribution is $188,825.16. Therefore, please remit $188,825.16 as payment for the full
amount and mail to the following address. Please note that payment is due within 60 days of receipt of
invoice.
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
1995 Market Street
Riverside, California 92501-1770
Attention: Accounts Receivable
Re: FY 2009-2010 Cost Sharing Reimbursement
Regional Program Costs for Santa Margarita NPDES Permit
The District appreciates your continued cooperation and prompt response to this request. If you have any
questions concerning this matter, please feel free to call Jason Uhley at 951.955.1273 /Clauo Padres at
951.955.8602.
Very truly our
WARREN D. WILLIAMS
Attachments: Table and Invoice General Manager -Chief Engineer
c: Santa Margarita NPDES Permit Representatives (via e-mail)
NPDES File
PLN:cw:bjp
128823
SANTA MARGARITA RIVER WATERSHED
CO -PERMITTEE COST SHARING
FOR
REGIONAL NPDES PROGRAM COSTS
FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010
Mq�F CHS„t' PUS00DC p STRi
tgNp WP E EO STRERTATt
gg51 Cq 82501
t fdER51Q ' CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. BOX 9033
TEMECULA CA 92589-9033
County of Riverside
INVOICE
Page:
Invoice No:
Invoice Date:
Customer Number:
Payment Terms:
Due Date:
Contact Person:
Inquiry Number:
1
FC0000012011
01/21/2010
FC -000576
30 Days
02/20/2010
Flood Control Accounts Receive
951-955-1245
For billing questions, please call 951-955-1245
Line Ad! Identifier Description Quantity UOM Unit Amt Net Amount
1 FY09-10 NPDES COST SHARING 1.0000 EA 188,825.16 188,825.16
CUSTOMER NOTE: SANTA MARGARITA RIVER WATERSHED
679R9922/ 8-9-00980
SUBTOTAL:
188,825.16
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE : 188 825.16
Please Remit To:
Invoice No:
FC0000012011
Flood-Accounting-Rvrsd
Invoice Date:
01/21/2010
Requestor
Customer Number:
FC -000576
Flood Control
Accounting
1995 Market St
AMOUNT DUE:
188,825.16
Riverside CA 92501
United States
Enclosed:
ATTN: FC -A/R
srxxn
Original
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
91463.1
AGREEMENT
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Stormwater Discharge Permit
Implementation Agreement
San Diego Region
(Santa Margarita Drainage Area)
This Agreement, entered into by the RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (the "DISTRICT"), the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
(the "COUNTY"), and the CITIES OF MURRIETA and TEMECULA (the "CITIES"), establishes
the responsibilities of each party concerning compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ("NPDES") Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System ("MS4") Discharge Permit
(the "NPDES Permit") issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board — San Diego
Region (CRWQCB-SDR) pursuant to Order No. R9-2004-001.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Congress in 1987 added Section 402(p) to the Federal Clean Water Act
(CWA) (33 U.S.C.§1342(p)); and
WHEREAS, Section 402(p) of the CWA requires certain municipalities to obtain',
NPDES Permits in order to discharge storm water from MS4s to waters of the United States; and
WHEREAS, Section 402(p) of the CWA requires operators of certain industrial
facilities to obtain NPDES Permits for storm water discharges associated with designated industrial
activities, including construction activities; and
WHEREAS, Section 402(p) further requires the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate regulations for NPDES Permit applications; and
WHEREAS, EPA adopted such regulations in November 1990; and
WHEREAS, EPA delegated authority to the California State Water Resources
Control Board ("SWRCB") to administer the NPDES Permit process within the boundaries of the
State of California; and
WHEREAS, SWRCB has in turn delegated its NPDES permitting authority to the
California Regional Water Quality Control Boards to administer the NPDES Permit process within
the boundaries of their respective regions; and
4 -
MAR - 12005 I1.�
91463.1
1 WHEREAS, the jurisdiction of the California Regional Water
g Quality Control
2 Board -San Diego Region ("CRWQCB-SDR") includes that portion of Riverside County known as
3 the Santa Margarita Region; and
4 WHEREAS, DISTRICT was created to provide for the control of flood and storm
5 waters within the County of Riverside and is empowered to investigate, examine, measure, analyze,
6 study and inspect matters pertaining to flood and storm waters; and
7 WHEREAS, on May 30, 2003, DISTRICT, COUNTY and CITIES submitted a
8 Report of Waste Discharge as an application to renew NPDES Permit No. CAS0108766; and
9
WHEREAS, the application for renewal of the NPDES Permit was submitted in
10
accordance with the provisions of the previous NPDES Permit (Order No. R9-98-02, NPDES No.
I1
CAS0108766) which expired on November 8, 2003; and
12
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2004, CRWQCB-SDR adopted Order No. R9-2004-001 to
13
serve as Waste Discharge Requirements in accordance with Section 13263(a) of the California Water
14
Code and as an NPDES Permit pursuant to Section 402(p) of the CWA; and
15
WHEREAS, the NPDES Permit issued pursuant to Order No. R9-2004-001 meets
16
17 both the requirements of Section 402(p)(3)(B) of the CWA and those requirements issued under
18 CRWQCB-SDR discretionary authority in accordance with Section 402(a)(1)(B) of the CWA; and
19 WHEREAS, the NPDES Permit designates DISTRICT as "PRINCIPAL
20 PERMITTEE" and DISTRICT, COUNTY and CITIES as "PERMITTEES'; and
21 WHEREAS, cooperation between PERMITTEES in the administration and
22 implementation of the NPDES Permit is in the best interest of PERMITTEES; and
23 WHEREAS, DISTRICT is willing to utilize its staff to coordinate the activities of
24 PERMITTEES to facilitate compliance with the NPDES Permit and CWA requirements; and
25 WHEREAS, DISTRICT established the Santa Margarita Watershed Benefit
26 Assessment Area (the "BENEFIT ASSESSMENT") pursuant to District Ordinance 14 on May 14,
27 1991 to offset the DISTRICT's program and administrative costs associated with the development,
28 implementation and management of the federally -mandated NPDES Program and DISTRICT is
willing to use the BENEFIT ASSESSMENT funds to support DISTRICT's role as PRINCIPAL
-2-
91463.1
1 PERMITTEE and to support regional program costs to the extent that BENEFIT ASSESSMENT
2 funds are available; and
3 WHEREAS, PERMITTEES are to perform and/or execute certain activities
4 prescribed in the NPDES Permit that will benefit all parties.
5 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows:
6 1. Incorporation of the NPDES Permit. The NPDES Permit issued to
7 PERMITTEES by CRWQCB-SDR pursuant to Order No. R9-2004-001 is attached to this
8
Agreement as Exhibit "A" and is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety and made a part of
9
this Agreement.
10
2. Delegation of Responsibilities. The responsibilities of each of the parties shall
11
be as described in the NPDES Permit and reiterated as follows:
12
a. DISTRICT shall assume the responsibilities and meet the
13
requirements of the NPDES Permit by:
14
(1) Complying with Section M (Principal Permittee
15
Responsibilities), including providing COUNTY and CITIES
16
an opportunity to review and comment on the Watershed
17
18 Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP), Watershed SWMP
19 Annual Report and any other reports prepared by the District
for the Permittees.
20
21
(2) Complying with Sections A through N (Prohibitions, Non -
22 Storm Water Discharges, Receiving Water Limitations, Legal
23 Authority, SWMP, Development Planning, Construction,
24 Existing Development, Education, Illicit Discharge Detection
25 and Elimination Program, Watershed -Based Activities,
26 Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Standard Provisions,
27 respectively), as they pertain to DISTRICT facilities and
28 operations, at no cost to COUNTY and CITIES.
(3) Coordinating watershed efforts specified in Provision K.
-3-
91463.1
1
b. COUNTY and CITIES shall, at no cost to DISTRICT, assume the
2
responsibilities and meet the requirements of the NPDES Permit for
3
land area within their individual jurisdictions by:
4
(1) Complying with Sections A through N (Prohibitions, Non -
5
Storm Water Discharges, Receiving Water Limitations, Legal
6
Authority, SWMP, Development Planning, Construction,
7
Existing Development, Education, Illicit Discharge Detection
8
and Elimination Program, Watershed -Based Activities,
9
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Standard Provisions,
10
respectively), as they pertain to COUNTY and CITIES
I1
facilities and operations.
12
(2) Demonstrating compliance with NPDES Permit requirements
13
through timely implementation of the approved Individual
14
and Watershed SWMPs and any approved modifications,
15
revisions or amendments thereto.
16
(3) Providing to DISTRICT (on DISTRICT provided forms)
17
information needed to satisfy the reporting requirements as
18
described in the Provisions E, L and K or to respond to
19
information requests from the CRWQCB-SDR. COUNTY
20
and CITIES shall specifically:
21
(a) Submit their Individual SWMPs and data necessary to
22
prepare the Watershed SWMP and Receiving Waters
23
Monitoring Reports no later than September 15 of
24
each year.
25
(b) Provide information on existing MS4 facilities and/or
26
27
other data as it pertains to COUNTY or CITIES
28
facilities when requested by DISTRICT.
C. Public Education Program. On behalf of PERMITTEES, DISTRICT
-4-
91463.1
1
shall conduct public education activities on a regional basis that focus
2
on reducing pollution of Urban Runoff within the Santa Margarita
3
Region, including radio and print advertising, developing brochures,
4
and attending public events. DISTRICT shall also develop and
5
implement mechanisms to determine the effectiveness of the regional
6
public education program. The COUNTY and CITIES shall be
7
individually responsible for developing and implementing public
8
education programs targeted at individual communities or
9
stakeholders within their respective jurisdictions.
10
]I
d. Monitoring Program. DISTRICT shall perform sampling of surface
water and urban runoff in accordance with the provisions of the
12
NPDES Permit Monitoring and Reporting Program (M&RP),
13
Provision II.A. The location of the sampling sites shall be determined
14
by PERMITTEES, subject to approval by CRWQCB-SDR. The
15
PERMITTEES shall be individually responsible for complying with
16
Provision II.B of the M&RP. The DISTRICT shall also enter into a
17
contract with a local lab to provide analysis of water quality samples
18
collected under the M&RP for PERMITTEES. The contract shall be
19
used strictly for water quality samples collected to comply with
20
Provision II of the M&RP.
21
e. Consultant's Services. In the event DISTRICT requires the services j
22
23
of a consultant or consultants to assist in preparing manuals,
developing programs or performing studies relevant to the entire
24
25
Santa Margarita Region, the cost of said consultant services shall be
26
shared by PERMITTEES in accordance with the cost sharing
27
provisions set forth in Section 3 of this Agreement. COUNTY and
28
CITIES shall be notified in writing of DISTRICT's request for
proposals from consultants, selection of a consultant, consultant's fee,
-5-
91463.1
1 contract timetable and payment schedule, and be allowed the
2 opportunity to participate in decisions related to consultant's services.
3 f. Support for Regional Programs. The PERMITTEES shall jointly
4 provide funding for certain regional efforts that benefit the Santa
5 Margarita Region, including but not limited to: County
6 Environmental Health's Compliance Assistance Program; the County
7
Fire Department's Hazardous Materials Team; County Environmental
8
Health's Household Hazardous Waste and Antifreeze, Batteries, Oil
9
and Paint collection program; the DISTRICT's membership with the
10
California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) on behalf of
I1
PERMITTEES; the DISTRICT's administration of Principal
12
Permittee duties, and other NPDES support activities as needed.
13
Where these programs are implemented countywide in support of
14
other NPDES permit regions, the DISTRICT shall estimate the
15
portion of the total cost of these regional programs that benefits the
16
Santa Margarita Region.
17
g. Regulation and Enforcement. COUNTY and CITIES shall be
18
19 responsible for the regulation and enforcement of local ordinances
20 and regulations within their respective jurisdictions to ensure
21 compliance with the NPDES Permit. This includes the exercise of
22 land use controls, the exercise of police powers and the enforcement
23 of ordinances that COUNTY or CITIES presently have adopted or
24 will adopt in the future.
25 3. Shared Costs. Costs for services to be performed in accordance with Sections
26 2.c., 2.d., 2.e, and 2.f. of this Agreement shall be shared by the PERMITTEES in accordance with
27 the procedure specified below.
28 In December of each year of this Agreement the DISTRICT shall:
a. Estimate the costs of services specified in Sections 2.c., 2.d., 2.e. and
-6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
M
91463.1
21 for the upcoming fiscal year (ESTIMATED COSTS);
b. Estimate the DISTRICT's internal costs for developing, implementing
and administering the NPDES program in the Santa Margarita Region
as specified in 2.a. (INTERNAL COSTS); and
C. Estimate the revenues expected from the BENEFIT ASSESSMENT
program (the "ASSESSMENT REVENUES").
d. Determine actual costs for NPDES programs administered in the
previous fiscal year.
e. Determine Credits or Debits (the "CREDITS" or "DEBITS") due to
COUNTY and CITIES based on the difference of the actual
contributions from the previous fiscal year with the actual
contributions provided by the COUNTY and CITIES for that fiscal
year.
By February 1 of each year of this Agreement, the DISTRICT, CITIES and
COUNTY, through a NPDES representative assigned by the General Manager -Chief Engineer, City
Managers, and County Executive Office, respectively, shall approve, by majority vote, ESTWATED
COSTS for the upcoming fiscal year.
3.1 DISTRICT Contribution
The DISTRICT contribution (the "DISTRICT CONTRIBUTION") to programs
specified in Sections 2.c., 2.d., 2.e., and 21 for the upcoming fiscal year shall be determined using
the following formula:
DISTRICT CONTRIBUTION = ASSESSMENT REVENUES — INTERNAL
COSTS - 20% ASSESSMENT REVENUE. 1
If the calculation yields a negative result, the DISTRICT shall have no contribution
for the upcoming fiscal year other than the INTERNAL COSTS it has incurred.
3.2 COUNTY and CITIES Contribution
1 District retains 20a of assessment revenue as a reserve for District's
administrative and program costs associated with the NPDES Permit pursuant to
RCFC&WCD Ordinance No. 14.
-7-
91463.1
1 The total shared COUNTY and CITIES contribution (the "COMBINED
2 CONTRIBUTION") shall be determined using the following formula:
3 COMBINED CONTRIBUTION = ESTIMATED COSTS — DISTRICT
4 CONTRIBUTION
5 The COUNTY and individual CITIES respective pro rata share of the COMBINED
6 CONTRIBUTION (the "INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION) shall be determined on the basis of an
7 equally weighted average of population and Benefit Assessment Units within the Santa Margarita
8 Region of Riverside County. More specifically, such percentage contribution shall be calculated as
9 the equally weighted average of:
10 a) the population of COUNTY or individual CITIES within the Santa Margarita
I 1 Region, divided by the total population of the COUNTY and CITIES in the Santa
12 Margarita Region and;
13
b) the calculated number of Benefit Assessment Units (BAU) for COUNTY or
14
individual CITIES, divided by the total BAU for COUNTY and individual
15
CITIES.
16
The INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION shall be further adjusted by any CREDITS or DEBITS due
17
from the previous fiscal year.
18
The population of CITIES shall be determined by the latest California State
19
20 Department of Finance population figures issued in May of each year. COUNTY population shall
21 be based on the most current Tax Rate Area (TRA) information best fitting the NPDES PERMIT
area.
22
23 The BAU count of COUNTY and CITIES shall be estimated by comparing the most
24 current TRA information best fitting the NPDES PERMIT area with the Assessment Rolls from the
25 current fiscal year's BENEFIT ASSESSMENT Engineer's Report.
26 COUNTY and CITIES may generate credits toward payments due by providing labor
27 or services in lieu of cash payments. DISTRICT shall determine value of labor or services based on
28 ESTIMATED COSTS for the fiscal year.
Starting in Fiscal Year 2004-2005, DISTRICT shall invoice COUNTY and CITIES
-8-
91463.1
1 for INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION in two installments. The first installment, for 50% of
2 INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION, shall be prepared upon approval of this agreement, or after Fiscal
3 Year 2004-2005, at the beginning of the fiscal year, by DISTRICT and paid within 60 days of receipt
4 of invoice from DISTRICT. The second installment, due for the balance of INDIVIDUAL
5 CONTRIBUTION, will be invoiced after January 1 of the current fiscal year and shall be paid by
6 April 30 or within 60 days of invoice from DISTRICT if received after March 1. The COMBINED
7 CONTRIBUTION for COUNTY and CITIES shall not exceed $500,000 annually under this
8 Agreement.
9 4. Term of the Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date
10 of execution by the last duly authorized representative of the PERMITTEES. The term of the
I 1 Agreement shall be indefinite or as long as required for compliance with the CWA, unless each of
12
the parties withdraws in accordance with the terns of this Agreement.
13
5. Additional Parties. Any City which incorporates after the date of issuance of the
14
NPDES Permit and/or after the date of execution of this Agreement may file a written request with
15
16 DISTRICT asking to be added as a party. Upon receipt of such a request, DISTRICT shall solicit
17
the approval or denial of PERMITTEES. If a majority of the PERMITTEES, each having one, co -
18 equal vote, approves the addition of the City, DISTRICT, on behalf of the PERMITTEES, will ask
19 CRWQCB-SDR to add the City to the NPDES Permit as an additional Permittee. Once the City is
20 made an additional PERMITTEE to the NPDES Permit, this Agreement shall be amended to reflect
21 the addition, and the City shall, thereafter, comply with all provisions of the NPDES Permit and this
22 Agreement. Upon execution of the amended Agreement, the City shall be responsible for the shared
23 costs discussed in Section 3 of this Agreement for the current and any subsequent budget year.
24 6. Withdrawal from the Agreement. Any party may withdraw from this Agreement
25 60 days after giving written notice to DISTRICT and CRWQCB-SDR. The withdrawing party shall
26 agree in such notice to file for a separate NPDES Permit and to comply with all of the requirements
27 established by CRWQCB-SDR. In addition, withdrawal shall constitute forfeiture of all of the
28 withdrawing party's share of the costs paid as described in Section 3. The withdrawing party shall
be responsible for all lawfully assessed penalties as a consequence of its withdrawal. The cost
-9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
91463.1
allocations to the remaining parties shall be recalculated in the following budget year.
7. Non-compliance with Permit Requirements. Any party found to be in non-
compliance with the conditions of the NPDES Permit within its jurisdictional boundaries shall be
solely liable for any lawfully assessed penalties. Common or joint penalties shall be calculated and
allocated between the affected parties in equal shares.
8. Amendments to the Agreement. Except as provided in Section 5, this Agreement
may only be amended by consent of all parties to this Agreement. No amendment to this Agreement
shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the duly authorized representatives of all
parties to the Agreement.
9. Authorized Si atones. The General Manager -Chief Engineer of DISTRICT, the
Chief Executive Officer of COUNTY and the City Managers of CITIES (or their designees) shall
be authorized to execute all documents and take all other procedural steps necessary to file for and
obtain an NPDES Permit(s) or amendments thereto.
10. Notices. All notices shall be deemed duly given when delivered by hand; or three
(3) days after deposit in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid.
11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California. If any provision or provisions of this Agreement shall be
determined to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the
remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired hereby.
12. Consent to Waiver and Breach. No term or provision hereof shall be deemed
waived and no breach excused, unless the waiver or breach is consented to in writing, and signed by
the party or parties affected. Consent by any party to a waiver or breach by any other party shall not
constitute consent to any different or subsequent waiver or breach.
13. Applicability of Prior Agreements. This Agreement and the exhibits attached
hereto constitute the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter; all prior
agreements, representations, statements, negotiations and undertakings are superseded hereby.
14. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed and delivered in
any number of counterparts or copies (counterparts) by the parties hereto. When each party has
-10-
7
8
9
10
11
12'
13i
14
15'
16 1
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
91463.1
signed and delivered at least one counterpart to the other parties hereto, each counterpart shall be
deemed an original and, taken together, shall constitute one and the same Agreement, which shall
be binding and effective as to the parties hereto.
-11-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
PA
91463.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as
of the date the last duly authorized representative executed it. This Agreement will only become
effective when fully executed by each of the parties hereto.
IVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
BRyB
COMMENDE F�PROVAL: AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRIC3
Y
WARREN D. WILLIAMS MARIO ASHLEY, Chai an
General Manager -Chief Engineer District Board of Supervisors
Dated:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN
County Counsel
By
DAVID H. K. HUFF, Deputy
Uounty Executive Utticer
Dated:
JU:MHW:blj
01/03/05
NANCY ROMERO
By
Clerk to the card /
Deputy
(SEAL)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
By I' (ZJ4 �^-,'1
MARIO ASHLEY, Chairman
Riverside County Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
NANCY ROMERO
Clerk to the Board
By
Deputy
(SEAL)
-12-
4AP, - 12005 it •5r
91463.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of
the date the last duly authorized representative executed it. This Agreement will only become
effective when fully executed by each of the parties hereto.
i MENDED FOR APPROVAL:
7
By
WARREN D. WILLIAMS
General Manager -Chief Engineer
Riverside County Flood Control
apd Water Conservation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN
C ounsel
By _
VID H. K. HUFF, Deputy
Dated: (Z 2 2-
S MENDED FOR APPROVAL:
By
LARRY PARRISH
County Executive Officer
J J:MHW:blj
11/16/04
Tr SIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WANSERVATION DISTRICT
By -
JAMES A. VENABLE, Chairman
District Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
Y ROMERO
Clerk to the
7
By
Deputy
(SEAL)
1 Y OF RIVERSIDE
By
ROY WILSON, Chairman
Riverside County Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
Y ROMERO
Clerk to the
By
7
Deputy
(SEAL)
-13-
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
B
City Attomey
91463.1
CITY OF MURRIETA
ATTEST:
By Dated:
City Clerk
-14-
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TEMECULA
wl": .
�,,._,
.,
r C-- Peter M. Thorson
ney
Dated: / /2/, /�
-14-
91463.1
Item No. 8
Approvals
City Attorney /V
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Aaron Adams, Assistant City Manager
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act
of 2010 (at the Request of Council Member Washington)
PREPARED BY: Tamra Middlecamp, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA EXPRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL'S SUPPORT
FOR THE LOCAL TAXPAYER, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND
TRANSPORTATION PROTECTION ACT OF 2010, WHICH IS A
BALLOT MEASURE SCHEDULED FOR THE NOVEMBER 2010
STATEWIDE BALLOT, AND WOULD PROHIBIT THE STATE
FROM TAKING, BORROWING OR REDIRECTING LOCAL
TAXPAYER FUNDS DEDICATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY,
EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND OTHER VITAL GOVERNMENT
SERVICES.
BACKGROUND: California voters have overwhelmingly passed separate ballot
measures to prevent the State from taking local government, transit and transportation funds.
Despite this, the State recently passed a budget that borrows and takes approximately $5 billion
in city, county, transit, redevelopment and special district funds this year and the State
continues to threaten to borrow or take billions in transportation funds every year. The
borrowing and raiding of local government and transportation funds jeopardize our local
economy and business climate.
Each year the State attempts to take or borrow local government and transportation and transit
funding using loopholes, or illegal funding diversions that have only been stopped after lengthy
court battles. This year alone, the Legislature:
Borrowed approximately $2 billion in property taxes from local governments, despite no
clear path to repay these funds.
Took $2.05 billion in local redevelopment funds, despite a recent Superior Court ruling
that says these types of raids are unconstitutional.
Shifted $910 million in transit funding away from local transit agencies. The courts have
since ruled these types of raids are unconstitutional.
Voted to take more than $1 billion of the local government share of the Highway User
Tax (HUTA) to repay state bond debt (but the measure stalled in the Assembly). These
are funds that have always been used to finance local roads and maintenance.
Took action to eliminate the state sales tax on gasoline (Prop 42 funds) and HUTA and
replace with a gasoline "fee" that would have no constitutional protection from future
raids by the legislature (the Governor ultimately vetoed this measure).
Threatened to borrow Prop 42 transportation funds to address the State's deficit.
This measure would close loopholes in current law that the legislature has exploited to take or
divert local funds. It would also tighten sections of the law to prevent State funding raids of local
government and transportation funds before they happen.
The League of California Cities is providing funding and support for this ballot measure with
non-public funds.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA EXPRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL'S
SUPPORT FOR THE LOCAL TAXPAYER, PUBLIC
SAFETY, AND TRANSPORTATION PROTECTION ACT
OF 2010, WHICH IS A BALLOT MEASURE SCHEDULED
FOR THE NOVEMBER 2010 STATEWIDE BALLOT, AND
WOULD PROHIBIT THE STATE FROM TAKING,
BORROWING OR REDIRECTING LOCAL TAXPAYER
FUNDS DEDICATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY, EMERGENCY
RESPONSE AND OTHER VITAL GOVERNMENT
SERVICES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, California voters have repeatedly and overwhelmingly passed
separate ballot measures to stop State raids of local government funds, and to dedicate
the taxes on gasoline to fund transportation improvement projects; and
WHEREAS, these local government funds are critical to provide the police and
fire, emergency response, parks, libraries, and other vital local services that residents
rely upon every day, and gas tax funds are vital to maintain and improve local streets
and roads, to make road safety improvements, relieve traffic congestion, and provide
mass transit; and
WHEREAS, despite the fact that voters have repeatedly passed measures to
prevent the State from taking these revenues dedicated to funding local government
services and transportation improvement projects, the State Legislature has seized and
borrowed billions of dollars in local government and transportation funds in the past few
years; and
WHEREAS, this year's borrowing and raids of local government, redevelopment
and transit funds, as well as previous, ongoing raids of local government and
transportation funds, have lead to severe consequences, such as layoffs of police, fire
and paramedic first responders, fire station closures, stalled economic development,
healthcare cutbacks, delays in road safety improvements, public transit fare increases
and cutbacks in public transit services; and
WHEREAS, State politicians in Sacramento have continued to ignore the will of
the voters, and current law provides no penalties when state politicians take or borrow
these dedicated funds; and
WHEREAS, a coalition of local government, transportation and transit advocates
recently filed a constitutional amendment with the California Attorney General, called
the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, for
potential placement on California's November 2010 statewide ballot; and
WHEREAS, approval of this ballot initiative would close loopholes and change
the Constitution to further prevent State politicians in Sacramento from seizing,
diverting, shifting, borrowing, transferring, suspending or otherwise taking or interfering
with tax revenues dedicated to funding local government services, including
redevelopment, or dedicated to transportation improvement projects and mass transit.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that CITY formally endorses the Local
Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, a proposed
constitutional amendment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we hereby authorize the listing of LOCAL
GOVERNMENT in support of the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety, and Transportation
Protection Act of 2010.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 9th day of March, 2010.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of March, 2010, by the
following vote:
F-Ayd:.�Ko1l1►[MIN diIAdi1:l4:63
1►to] x.�Ko1l1►[MIN d/IAd/l1J4:&1
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Item No. 9
Approvals
City Attorney /V
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Planning and Redevelopment
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Designation of March 2010 as Census Month - at the request of Council
Member Washington
PREPARED BY: Dale West, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA TO SUPPORT THE UNITED STATES CENSUS —
MAKE YOURSELF COUNT MONTH MARCH 2010
BACKGROUND: The U.S Constitution requires the count of every resident in the United
States every ten years through a census count process. The information gathered during the
census count is used to draw congressional districts and to distribute federal aid to state, local
and tribal governments. Federal aid is distributed for hospitals, schools, senior centers,
infrastructure, and emergency services based on the demographic data generated by the
census. In March 2010 Census forms will be delivered to every resident in the United States,
with the goal of returning the forms by April 1, 2010. By July 2010, the Census data collection
process will be complete and the Census Bureau will begin the process of assembling the data.
To demonstrate commitment to the census and the goal to count everyone in the City of
Temecula, a resolution designating the month of March 2010 as "Make Yourself Count Month"
is attached to this report. The resolution emphasizes the importance of achieving an accurate
count by encouraging the public to participate by completing census forms and returning it to the
U.S. Census Bureau.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA TO SUPPORT THE UNITED STATES
CENSUS — MAKE YOURSELF COUNT MONTH MARCH
2010
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Temecula supports an accurate and complete Census
count; and
A. The Census is a mechanism for the allocation of federal funds and
determination of political representation.
B. Participation in the Census by mail response is the most cost effective
method of enumeration.
C. Focusing attention on Census participation, the City of Temecula can help
the region ensure an accurate count of population.
D. Census Month is an opportunity for government, industry, and community
based organizations to recognize the potential of an accurate Census and to work
together to encourage participation for a prosperous and sustainable future;
Section 2. The City of Temecula does hereby proclaim that March 2010 is
Census Month, thereby urging all community members and businesses in Western
Riverside County to fully participate in local and regional promotion and educational
activities in order to achieve a complete 2010 Census count for the subregion.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 9 day of March, 2010.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9 day of March, 2010, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
IG1011�Ko1l1►NllNdiIAdil:l:4:& 1
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Item No. 10
Approvals
City Attorney /V
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Approve Payment for Golden Valley Music Society, Inc.
PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the payment to Golden Valley
Music Society, Inc. in the amount of $36,375 for services provided from December 13, 2007 to
March 31, 2010.
BACKGROUND: On December 13, 2007, the City entered into a non-exclusive
agreement with Golden Valley Music Society, Inc. to provided bands, orchestras, groups of
musicians or an individual musician to perform at the Old Town Temecula Community Theater
and Merc.
Our "Classics at the Merc" program held on Sunday afternoons is an example of the services
provided by Golden Valley Music Society. Due to the success of the programs like "Classics at
the Merc", payments from December 13, 2007 to present have totaled $36,375.
FISCAL IMPACT: The payments from prior fiscal years were appropriated in past
fiscal year's budget. These amounts were $6,000 in FY 2007-2008 and $15,750 in FY 2008-
2009. The remaining amount of $14,625 paid in FY 2009-2010 has been appropriated in the
current operating budget.
ATTACHMENTS: Agreement for Procurement of Muscial Services betweeen the
City of Temecula and the Golden Valley Music Society, Inc.
AGREEMENT
FOR PROCUREMENT OF MUSICAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AND THE GOLDEN VALLEY MUSIC SOCIETY, INC
THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of 13 December 2007,
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and the Golden Valley
Music Society Inc., a California not-for-profit corporation ("Contractor"). In
consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as
follows:
1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on 13 December 2007,
and shall remain and continue in effect until 12 December 2010, unless sooner terminated
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
2. SERVICES.
a. Upon request of the City, Contractor shall assemble a band,
orchestra, group of musicians or an individual musician to perform at venues within the
City of Temecula ("Musicians"), Contractor shall match the skill and experience of the
Musicians to the type of music and performance requested by the City.
b. The Director of Community Services ("Director") shall be the
person designated to request the assembly of Musicians for the City. The Director may
delegate this authority to another City employee and if it is so delegated, the Director
shall notify the Contractor in writing that the designees who are authorized to request the
assembly of Musicians for the City and the limitations, if any, on their authority.
C. The process for assembling Musicians shall begin when the
Director transmits a Request for Musicians to the Contractor, by facsimile or email at
such addresses designated by the Contractor ("Request'). The Request shall contain the
following information: (1) date of event; (2) venue; (3) the time of the event; (4) type of
music to be played; (5) the number of musicians required; (6) the types of musical
instruments required; and (7) the type of clothing to be worn by the musicians.
d. As soon as possible following receipt of the request, but not later
than 24 hours, Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the Request.
e. As soon as possible but not later than ten working days following
receipt of the Request, Contractor shall submit a proposal to the City for the assembly of
Musicians ("Proposal"). The Proposal shall state: (1) the date and location of the
performance; (2) the type of music to be performed; (3) the Musicians and the
instruments they will be performing on; (4) the individual rate for the Musicians; (5)
additional costs not reflected in the rates of the Musicians; (6) the times the Musicians
will perform; (7) any special needs of the Musicians which will be part of the Proposal;
(8) total fees and costs of the proposal; (9) time and terms for payment; and (10) that the
proposal shall be subject to the terms of this Agreement.
f. Within five (5) working days after receipt of the Proposal, the
Director shall notify Contractor of his or her acceptance of the Proposal by email or
facsimile. Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of this notice by facsimile or email as
soon as possible, but no later than 24 hours.
g. Upon acceptance of the Proposal by the Director, the parties
acknowledge that a binding amendment to this Agreement exists composed of the
Request, Proposal and the Director's acceptance of the Proposal, which will be subject to
the terms of this Agreement and may be enforced by the terms of this Agreement.
h. This Agreement is non-exclusive. Contractor acknowledges and
agrees that the City retains the right to seek proposals from other pasties for the assembly
of musical services for venues within the City.
3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CONTRACTOR.
a. Contractor shall at all time faithfully, competently and to
the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein.
Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices
utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor
hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.
b. Contractor shall be fully responsible for the payment of all
wages, taxes, union fees, workers compensation insurance for the musicians, and
withholdings required by applicable laws or regulations.
C. Contractor shall be fully responsible for paying any legally
required royalties of fees for the use by the Musicians of copyrighted material unless
advised in writing by the Director that the City or another performer has paid such
royalties or fees.
d. Contractor and the Musicians shall comply at all times with
all applicable copyright laws.
4. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Contractor the costs and
fees for each performance according to the terms of the Proposal accepted
by the Director.
5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT The
City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this
Agreement by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. The
City may, in its sole discretion, rescind its termination of the Agreement within this 10 -
day period.
6. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend,
indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and
volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or
expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or
nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which
may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property
arising out of Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any
way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only
liability arising out of the negligence of the City.
7. _INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Contractor shall procure and
maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons
or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of
the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees.
as: a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad
(I) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability
form No. Co 00 01 1185 or 88.
(2) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State
of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the
Contractor has no employees while performing under this
Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not
required, but Contractor shall execute a declaration that it
has no employees.
less than: b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain Iimits no
(1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury and property damage. If
Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with
a general aggregate limit is used, either the general
aggregate limit shall apply separately to this
project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be
twice the required occurrence limit.
(2) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of
California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars
($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease.
C. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-
insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option
of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-
insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or
the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile
liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(1) The City, Temecula Community Services District,
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, their
officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insured's as respects: liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor;
products and completed operations of the Contractor;
premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or
automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the
Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special
limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City,
Temecula Community Services District, Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Temecula, their officers, officials,
employees or volunteers.
(2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's
insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects
the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers.
Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City,
Temecula Community Services District, Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Temecula, their officers, officials,
employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
(3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of
the policies including breaches of warranties shall not
affect coverage provided to the City Temecula Community
Services District, Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Temecula, their officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
(4) The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each
insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought,
except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
(5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended,
voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in
limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by
certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to
the City.
e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers
with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the
City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements.
f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with
original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are
to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The
endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be
received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the
City's forms, the Contractor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all
required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by
these specifications.
8. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
a. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly
independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on
behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and
control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have
control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees, or
agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any
manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner
officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to
incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner.
b. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in
connection with the performance of this Agreement, Except for the fees paid to
Contractor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other
compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be
liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out
of performing services hereunder.
9. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself
informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any
manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service
pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with
all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees,
shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply
with this section.
10. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to
the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (1)
personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not
limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or
(iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt
requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address
as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the
addresses specified below or on the third. business day following deposit with the
document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above.
To City: City of Temecula
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Attention: Director of Community Services
To Contractor: Golden Valley Music Society
PO Box 272
Murrieta, CA 92564
11. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance
of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior
written consent of the Director.
12. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement,
Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the
performance of the services described in this Agreement.
13. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and
agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties
and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this
Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal,
superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula.
In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights
under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall
be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted.
14. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of
the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this
Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub -contractors for this
project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants
and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any
interest, whether contractual, non -contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction,
or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub -contractors on this project.
Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered
whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement.
15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire
understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in
this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings,
representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall
be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely
upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent
investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.
16. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The
person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and
represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the
Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations
hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CIT OF E LA
Shawn . elson, City Manager
Attest:
W. J¢nks, CMC, City
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attome);�r
CONTRACTOR
Golden Valley Music Society
PO Box 272
Murrieta, CA 92564
Attn: Luanne Ferrer
951.698.1035
gyc�ryO.tc�utJ �• ��^-UUcC��
Name: C llLi t1 cJc r ��%CF%�J
Title: �716A
(Two Signatures of Corporate Officers Required.ior Corporations)
LS
Item No. I I
ORDINANCE NO. 10-04
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA FOR THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA
ANNEXATION NO. 2 PRE -ZONING APPROXIMATELY
4,510 ACRES, LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST
OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA
BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE -15 AND
NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND RIVERSIDE
COUNTY BOUNDARY WITH ZONING DESIGNATIONS
HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL -SANTA MARGARITA (HR -SM)
AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT -SANTA MARGARITA
(OS -C -SM) (LR09-0024)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08-110
certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation (No. 1), a proposed expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence
and Annexation to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District
of approximately 4,997 acres located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula
Boundary line, west of Interstate -15. The City Council also adopted findings pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act, adopted a statement of overriding
considerations and adopted a mitigation monitoring and reporting program in connection
therewith (collectively, "Certified Final Environmental Impact Report" or "Certified Final
E I R").
B. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 08-111
and 08-112 to apply to the Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") for an
expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and Annexation to the City of
Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District of approximately 4,997 acres
located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula Boundary line, west of
Interstate -15 ("Santa Margarita Annexation Area")
C. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08-113
amending the General Land Use Map within the Santa Margarita Area Annexation,
contingent upon LAFCO's approval of the annexation.
D. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 08-14
prezoning the territory of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation, contingent upon
LAFCO's approval of the annexation.
E. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 08-15
amending the official zoning map of the City of Temecula by adopting zoning
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04
designations Hillside -Santa Margarita (SM) and Open Space Conservation District —
Santa Margarita (OS -C -SM) and adopting Hillside Development Standards for the Santa
Margarita Area Annexation, contingent upon LAFCO's approval of the annexation.
F. Thereafter, the City of Temecula submitted to LAFCO a Sphere of
Influence Amendment Application and Annexation Application along with requisite
application submittal documents in connection therewith for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation proposal ("LAFCO Applications").
G. On May 12, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 09-42
confirming that the proposal for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation was pursuant to
the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000,
commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code.
H. On June 4, 2009, LAFCO denied the LAFCO Applications made by the
City for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation proposal and approved the City's
Municipal Service Review; and adopted resolutions in connection therewith on June 25,
2009.
I. On July 23, 2009, the City of Temecula submitted an Application for
Reconsideration by LAFCO of the LAFCO Applications for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation proposal. The City's proposal removed approximately 487 acres of the
southeast corner of the uninhabited 4,997 -acre Santa Margarita Area Annexation
territory, and included revised boundaries of the Sphere of Influence expansion from
4,443 acres to 4,126 acres to match the boundaries of the area to be annexed to the
City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District comprising of 4,510
acres of that certain uninhabited territory located immediately southwest of the City of
Temecula boundary line, west of Interstate 15, and north of the San Diego/Riverside
County boundary as depicted on the maps attached hereto as Exhibits 1 and 3, and
incorporated herein as though set forth in full ("Santa Margarita Area Annexation No.
2").
J. On September 24, 2009 LAFCO denied the City's Application for
Reconsideration and determined the City of Temecula must file a new LAFCO Sphere
of Influence Amendment Application and a new LAFCO Annexation Application to
proceed with the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal.
K. On December 3, 2009 LAFCO voted unanimously to waive the one-year
waiting period to allow the City to proceed with LAFCO Sphere of Influence Amendment
and Annexation Applications for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal
and LAFCO approved a reduction in the application fees by fifty percent.
L. On January 12, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10-03
authorizing the preparation of documents and actions necessary to proceed with a
Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation Application for the Santa Margarita
Area Annexation No. 2 proposal pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 2
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 commencing with Section 56000 of the
California Government Code.
M. The City of Temecula proceeded with the preparation of documents
associated with the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal including a
General Plan amendment to the Land Use Map, zoning amendment to Title 17 of the
Temecula Municipal Code including hillside development standards and pre -zoning
designations, and Sphere of influence and Annexation applications (LR09-0024) in a
manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Municipal Code and are
hereby incorporated by reference, for the property consisting of approximately 4,510
acres located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula boundary, west of
Interstate 15 and north of the San Diego County/Riverside County boundary referred to
as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal (collectively, the "Amendment').
N. The Amendment was processed including, but not limited to a public
notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the
California Environmental Quality Act and pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 commencing with section 56000 of the
California Government Code.
O. An Addendum to the Certified Final EIR was prepared for the Santa
Margarita Area Annexation No. 1 ("Addendum") in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
("CEQA") to address the reduced boundaries of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation
proposal that comprise the Santa Margarita Annexation Area No. 2 proposal.
P. The Planning Commission considered the Addendum to the Certified Final
EIR and the various components of the Amendment on February 3, 2010, at a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff presented its
report and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in
opposition to this matter.
Q. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the
public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Amendment and Addendum to
the Certified Final EIR, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 10-02
recommending that the City Council approve the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR,
adopt findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopt a Statement
of Overriding Considerations and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
R. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due
consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission hearing, and after
due consideration of the testimony regarding the proposed Amendment, the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 10-03 recommending that the City Council
approve the Amendment including: (1) approve a Resolution amending the General
Plan Land Use Element to incorporate Hillside Residential (HR) and Open Space (OS)
as the General Plan Land Use Designations within the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation No 2; (2) approve a pre -zoning Ordinance for the pre -zoning of the Santa
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 3
Margarita Area Annexation No. 2; and (3) approve a zoning Ordinance amending Title
17 of the Temecula Municipal Code and amending the official zoning map of the City of
Temecula by adopting zoning designations Hillside Residential -Santa Margarita (HR -
SM) and Conservation District -Santa Margarita (OS -C -SM) and adopting Hillside
Development Standards for a pre -zoning of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2.
S. On February 23, 2010, the City Council of the City of Temecula
considered the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR and the various components of the
Amendment, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the
City staff presented its report and interested persons had an opportunity to and did
testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. After considering all the
testimony and comments and the entire record concerning the components of the
Amendment and the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 10-16, approving the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR, adopting
findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
T. On February 23, 2010, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a
duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Amendment at which time all persons
interested in the proposed Amendment had the opportunity to, and did, address the City
Council on these matters. Following receipt of all public testimony the City Council
closed the hearing. .
Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council in approving the Pre -Zoning,
hereby finds, determines and declares that:
A. The Proposed Amendment implements the direction, goals and policies of
the City's General Plan.
The proposed Pre -Zone implements the proposed and existing General Plan
Land Use Designations, which ultimately implements the direction, goals and
policies outlined within the City of Temecula General Plan. The Pre -Zone applies
Zoning Districts within the Development Code to match the boundaries of the
proposed General Plan Land Use Designations for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation (No. 2). The Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) encompasses
approximately 4,510 acres of which 4,284 acres propose Conservation—Santa
Margarita (OS -C -SM) as the Zoning District to implement the Open Space (OS)
General Plan Land Use Designation and 225 acres propose Hillside Residential—
Santa Margarita (HR -SM) as the Zoning District to implement the Hillside
Residential (HR) General Plan Land Use Designation.
The proposed Pre -Zoning for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) are
consistent with goals, policies and implementation programs as outlined in the
adopted City of Temecula General Plan including, but not limited to, the General
Plan Land Use Policies identified within Table 3.4-3 of the EIR and the General
Plan Goals, Policies and Implementation Programs as follows:
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 4
-The Open Space Element (Water Resources Pages OS -23 and OS -24)
calls for the protection of the Santa Margarita River from development impacts
supported by Goal OS -2, Policies 2.1 and 2.9.
-The Open Space Element (Biological Resources Pages OS -25 and OS -
26) emphasizes permanent dedication of open spaces in and around the
community aimed to conserve resources of significance and safeguard viable
ecological connections between significant natural areas supported by Goal OS -
3, Policies 3.1-3.7 (Policy 3.7 specifically indicates the City's policy to maintain
and enhance the resources of the Santa Margarita River to ensure the long term
viability of the habitat, wildlife and wildlife movement corridors).
-The Open Space Element (Open Space Page OS -26 through Page OS -
28) recognizes that topographical features such as the western escarpment and
southern ridgelines, as well as natural drainage courses and states that the
environmental resources of the Santa Margarita River should be protected from
insensitive development and activities, supported by Goal OS -5, Policies 5.1-5.3,
and 5.8.
-The Open Space Implementation Programs of the City of Temecula
General Plan including OS -9; OS -10; OS -11; OS -12; OS -13; OS -14, OS -19; OS -
20, OS -21; OS -22; OS -25; OS -33; OS -34; OS -35.
-The Land Use Element (Natural Resources and Community Aesthetics
Page LU -47) indicates the importance of hillsides, which form an aesthetic
backdrop for the community, and is supported by Goal LU -6, Policies 6.1, 6.3
and 6.4.
-The Land Use Implementation Programs of the City of Temecula General
Plan including LU -14; LU -18, LU -20; and LU -21. The propose Hillside
Development Standards specifically address LU -19 which states, "Promote
preservation of hillsides surrounding the community through the following
actions: (1) Enforce hillside grading standards to naturalize the effects of grading;
(2) Require the preservation of unique natural features; (3) Encourage a broad
range of architectural and site planning solutions; and (4) Develop hillside
development standards that consider site constraints in determining location,
type and intensities of new development along the western escarpment and other
surrounding hillside areas.
-The Community Design Implementation Programs of the City of
Temecula General Plan including CD -6 Viewshed Preservation which states,
"Establish a program to acquire, or permanently protect, critical hillside areas
from development, including critical escarpment and major hillside areas on the
west and south edges of the City. This should include working with the County of
Riverside to protect surrounding hillside areas from inappropriate grading and
development."
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 5
The Pre -Zoning designations shall not be effective unless or until such time as
any of the properties are annexed to the City. If approved, the proposed
amendment will establish the framework to ensure development within the
project area implements the directions, goals and policies related to the
protection and preservation of natural and sensitive resources, habitat and the
hillsides area as outlined within the City of Temecula General Plan.
The General Plan Policies referenced herein are hereby incorporated into this
Resolution by reference as if set forth in full.
B. The proposed Amendment protects the research value of the Santa
Margarita Ecological Reserve by prohibiting incompatible land uses within adjacent
properties.
The proposed zoning and development standards would protect the research
value of the Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve ("SMER') by prohibiting
incompatible land uses within adjacent properties within the City of Temecula.
The majority of the project area is undisturbed and is in a pristine natural area, of
which approximately 95% of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2
boundary has been conserved as part of the SMER.
Section 3. Pre -Zoning.
A. The property as shown on Exhibit 1, and described in Exhibit 2, is hereby
pre -zoned Hillside Residential - Santa Margarita (HR -SM), which shall become the
zoning upon annexation of all or part of the property to the City.
B. The property as shown on Exhibit 3 and described in Exhibit 4, is hereby
pre -zoned Open -Space Conservation Santa Margarita (OC -C -SM), which shall become
the zoning upon annexation of all or part of the property to the City.
Section 4. Severability. If any portion, provision, section, paragraph,
sentence, or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared to be invalid by any final
court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive
legislation, the remaining portions, provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and
words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted by
the court so as to give effect to such remaining portions of the Ordinance.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days
after its adoption, but will not become effective unless and until the Annexation of the
Santa Margarita Area Annexation or the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2, or any
territory within it, is approved by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation
Commission.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and
cause it to be published in the manner required by law.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 6
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
this day of ,
Jeff Comerchero , Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 10-04 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading
at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 23rd day of February,
2010, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of by the following
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-04 8
n Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2)
0
San Diego Courq
Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2
• • City of Temecula Corporate Limits
Streets
Zoning Designations
for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation
Q HR
R`GI9MGMMNgMYPYnrvnySAl+A_FYrloSankw bmcMe mE I
"..,j :L.
City of Temecula - Santa Margarita Area Anexation No. 2
Exhibit 1
Pre -Zoning Amendment
Properties with HR -SM Designation
a
s,
O
Y� flbt
4 3
y
"..,j :L.
City of Temecula - Santa Margarita Area Anexation No. 2
Exhibit 1
Pre -Zoning Amendment
Properties with HR -SM Designation
EXHIBIT 2
PRE -ZONING
Properties with
Hillside Residential - Santa Margarita (HR -SM)
Zoning Designation
APN
ACRES
918060009
20.91
918060010
20.78
918060021
9.44
918060024
9.64
918060013
39.32
918060023
9.81
918060022
9.38
918060011
24.14
918060008
15.77
918080008
30.12
918080009
35.89
Total: 225.2
Item No. 12
ORDINANCE NO. 10-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADOPTING ZONING
DESIGNATIONS HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL -SANTA
MARGARITA (HR -SM) AND OPEN SPACE
CONSERVATION DISTRICT -SANTA MARGARITA
(OS -C -SM) AND ADOPTING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR A PRE -ZONING OF THE SANTA
MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION NO. 2 OF
APPROXIMATELY 4,510 ACRES, LOCATED
IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING
CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF
INTERSTATE -15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO AND
RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY (LR09-0024)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08-110
certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation (No. 1), a proposed expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence
and Annexation to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District
of approximately 4,997 acres located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula
Boundary line, west of Interstate -15. The City Council also adopted findings pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act, adopted a statement of overriding
considerations and adopted a mitigation monitoring and reporting program in connection
therewith (collectively, "Certified Final Environmental Impact Report" or "Certified Final
E I R").
B. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 08-111
and 08-112 to apply to the Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") for an
expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and Annexation to the City of
Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District of approximately 4,997 acres
located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula Boundary line, west of
Interstate -15 ("Santa Margarita Annexation Area")
C. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08-113
amending the General Land Use Map within the Santa Margarita Area Annexation,
contingent upon LAFCO's approval of the annexation.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05
D. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 08-14
prezoning the territory of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation, contingent upon
LAFCO's approval of the annexation.
E. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 08-15
amending the official zoning map of the City of Temecula by adopting zoning
designations Hillside -Santa Margarita (SM) and Open Space Conservation District —
Santa Margarita (OS -C -SM) and adopting Hillside Development Standards for the Santa
Margarita Area Annexation, contingent upon LAFCO's approval of the annexation.
F. Thereafter, the City of Temecula submitted to LAFCO a Sphere of
Influence Amendment Application and Annexation Application along with requisite
application submittal documents in connection therewith for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation proposal ("LAFCO Applications").
G. On May 12, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 09-42
confirming that the proposal for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation was pursuant to
the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000,
commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code.
H. On June 4, 2009, LAFCO denied the LAFCO Applications made by the
City for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation proposal and approved the City's
Municipal Service Review; and adopted resolutions in connection therewith on June 25,
2009.
I. On July 23, 2009, the City of Temecula submitted an Application for
Reconsideration by LAFCO of the LAFCO Applications for the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation proposal. The City's proposal removed approximately 487 acres of the
southeast corner of the uninhabited 4,997 -acre Santa Margarita Area Annexation
territory, and included revised boundaries of the Sphere of Influence expansion from
4,443 acres to 4,126 acres to match the boundaries of the area to be annexed to the
City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District comprising of 4,510
acres of that certain uninhabited territory located immediately southwest of the City of
Temecula boundary line, west of Interstate 15, and north of the San Diego/Riverside
County boundary as depicted on the maps attached hereto as Exhibit A -A, and
incorporated herein as though set forth in full ("Santa Margarita Area Annexation No.
2").
J. On September 24, 2009 LAFCO denied the City's Application for
Reconsideration and determined the City of Temecula must file a new LAFCO Sphere
of Influence Amendment Application and a new LAFCO Annexation Application to
proceed with the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal.
K. On December 3, 2009 LAFCO voted unanimously to waive the one-year
waiting period to allow the City to proceed with LAFCO Sphere of Influence Amendment
and Annexation Applications for the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal
and LAFCO approved a reduction in the application fees by fifty percent.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 2
L. On January 12, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10-3
authorizing the preparation of documents and actions necessary to proceed with a
Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation Application for the Santa Margarita
Area Annexation No. 2 proposal pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 commencing with Section 56000 of the
California Government Code.
M. The City of Temecula proceeded with the preparation of documents
associated with the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal including a
General Plan amendment to the Land Use Map, zoning amendment to Title 17 of the
Temecula Municipal Code including hillside development standards and pre -zoning
designations, and Sphere of influence and Annexation applications (LR09-0024) in a
manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Municipal Code and are
hereby incorporated by reference, for the property consisting of approximately 4,510
acres located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula boundary, west of
Interstate 15 and north of the San Diego County/Riverside County boundary referred to
as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2 proposal (collectively, the "Amendment').
N. The Amendment was processed including, but not limited to a public
notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the
California Environmental Quality Act and pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 commencing with section 56000 of the
California Government Code.
O. An Addendum to the Certified Final EIR was prepared for the Santa
Margarita Area Annexation No. 1 ("Addendum") in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
("CEQA") to address the reduced boundaries of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation
proposal that comprise the Santa Margarita Annexation Area No. 2 proposal.
P. The Planning Commission considered the Addendum to the Certified Final
EIR and the various components of the Amendment on February 3, 2010, at a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff presented its
report and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in
opposition to this matter.
Q. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the
public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Amendment and Addendum to
the Certified Final EIR, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 10-02
recommending that the City Council approve the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR,
adopt findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopt a Statement
of Overriding Considerations and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
R. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due
consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission hearing, and after
due consideration of the testimony regarding the proposed Amendment, the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 10-03 recommending that the City Council
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 3
approve the Amendment including: (1) approve a Resolution amending the General
Plan Land Use Element to incorporate Hillside Residential (HR) and Open Space (OS)
as the General Plan Land Use Designations within the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation No 2; (2) approve a pre -zoning Ordinance for the pre -zoning of the Santa
Margarita Area Annexation No. 2; and (3) approve a zoning Ordinance amending Title
17 of the Temecula Municipal Code and amending the official zoning map of the City of
Temecula by adopting zoning designations Hillside Residential -Santa Margarita (HR -
SM) and Conservation District -Santa Margarita (OS -C -SM) and adopting Hillside
Development Standards for a pre -zoning of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2.
S. On February 23, 2010, the City Council of the City of Temecula
considered the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR and the various components of the
Amendment, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the
City staff presented its report and interested persons had an opportunity to and did
testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. After considering all the
testimony and comments and the entire record concerning the components of the
Amendment and the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 10-16, approving the Addendum to the Certified Final EIR, adopting
findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopting a Statement of
Overriding Considerations and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
T. On February 23, 2010, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a
duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Amendment at which time all persons
interested in the proposed Amendment had the opportunity to, and did, address the City
Council on these matters. Following receipt of all public testimony the City Council
closed the hearing.
Section 2. Table 17.03.010 (Planning and Zoning Approval Authority) of
Section 17.03.010 of Chapter 17.03 (Administration of Zoning) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the
Temecula Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add a new row immediately following
the row entitled "Secondary Dwelling Unit," to read as follows, with all other aspects of
the table remaining unchanged:
Table 17.03.010
Planning and Zoning Approval Authority
Application
Administrative
Approval
Planning
Director
Planning
Commission
City
Council
"Hillside Development Permit
X1
Section 3. A new Section 17.04.060 (Hillside Development Permit) is hereby
added to Chapter 17.04 (Permits) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code
to read as follows:
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 4
"17.04.060 Hillside Development Permit
A. Purpose and Intent. A Hillside Development Permit is required to facilitate
and permit the orderly development of property within the HR -SM (Hillside
Residential -Santa Margarita) and the OS -C -SM (Conservation -Santa
Margarita) Zoning Districts within the Santa Margarita Area Annexation.
The permit process will ensure that projects comply with a set of hillside
development standards aimed a protecting the public health, safety and
welfare; protecting and preserving natural and biological resources for
long-term benefit of the City by carefully considering the size, type,
location, density, and intensity of development based on available
infrastructure; the geographic steepness of terrain; presence of unique
geographic conditions and constraints; and presence of environmentally
sensitive areas. Specific regulations and standards address the following
City objectives:
B. Application Requirements. Applications for a Hillside Development Permit
shall be completed in accordance with the Section 17.03.030 of the
Temecula Municipal Code.
C. Authority of Hearing Bodies for a Hillside Development Permit. The
Planning Commission shall have the authority to hear and act upon a
Hillside Development Permit in accordance with the Temecula
Development Code. The City Council shall have the authority to hear and
act upon any appeal to the decision of the Planning Commission, pursuant
to Section 17.03.090 of the Development Code.
D. Hearing and Notice. Upon the determination that a Hillside Development
Permit application is complete, a public hearing shall be scheduled with
the Planning Commission. Notice of the time, date and place of public
hearing shall be given as provided in Section 17.03.040 of this Code.
E. Approval. A Hillside Development Permit may, based on findings set for in
this Section, be approved, conditionally approved or denied after a public
hearing. Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the
City Council, pursuant to Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal
Code.
F. Findings. The Planning Commission may approve or conditionally
approve a Hillside Development Permit only when the following findings
can be made:
1. The Hillside Development Permit does not permit uses that are not
otherwise allowed in the zone.
2. The proposed use is compatible with the nature, character and use
of the surrounding area.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 5
3. The proposed use will not adversely affect adjacent residents or
structures.
4. The nature and location of the proposed use will not be detrimental
to the health, safety, or welfare of the community.
5. The Hillside Development Permit places suitable conditions on the
project to protect surrounding properties.
G. Notice of Decision. A copy of the notice of decision shall be provided to
the applicant in accordance with Section 17.03.040.E of the Temecula
Municipal Code.
H. Revocation. A Hillside Development Permit may be revoked or modified
by the Planning Commission in accordance with the provisions of Section
17.03.080 of the Temecula Municipal Code."
Section 4. A new subsection H (Hillside Residential -Santa Margarita (HR -SM)
is hereby added to Section 17.06.020 of Chapter 17.06 (Residential Districts) of Title 17
(Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows, with all other portions of
Section 17.06.020 remaining unchanged:
H. Hillside Residential -Santa Margarita (HR -SM). The Hillside Residential -
Santa Margarita zoning district is intended to provide for development of
very low density residential uses within the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation boundaries. This includes properties that have severe
development constraints such as areas with slopes over twenty-five
percent, biological resources and, limited emergency access. Typical lot
sizes in the HR -SM district are equal to or greater than 10 acres."
Section 5. A new column entitled "HR -SM" immediately following the column
entitled "H," along with a new footnote 9, is hereby added to Table 17.06.030
(Residential Districts) of 17.06.030 (Use Regulations) of Chapter 17.06 (Residential
Districts) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows, with all
other portions of the table remaining unchanged:
Description of Use
...
"HR-SM9
Residential
...
Single-family detached
...
P
Duplex (two-family dwellings)
...
Single-family attached (greater than two units)
...
Multiple -family
...
Manufactured homes
...
P
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 6
Description of Use
...
"HR-SM9
Mobilehome park
...
Facilities for the mentally disordered, handicapped, or
dependent or neglected children (six or fewer)
...
P
Facilities for the mentally disordered, handicapped, or
dependent or neglected children (seven to twelve)
...
C
Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility (six or
fewer)
...
P
Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility (seven or
more)
...
C
Residential care facilities for the elderly (six or fewer)
...
P
Residential care facilities for the elderly (seven or more)
...
C
Congregate care residential facilities for the elderly 6
...
Boarding, rooming and lodging facilities
...
Secondary dwelling units 7
...
P
Granny flat
...
P
Guest house
...
P
Family day care homes -small
...
P
Family day care homes -large 1
C
Day care centers
...
C
Bed and breakfast establishments 6
...
C
Emergency shelters
...
C
Transitional housing
...
C
Non -Residential
...
Agriculture/open space uses 6
...
C
Religious institutions
...
C
Public utility facilities
...
C
Educational institutions
...
C
Libraries
...
-
Medical marijuana dispensary
...
-
Museums and art galleries (not for profit)
...
-
Kennels and catteries 6
...
-
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05
Description of Use
...
"HR-SM9
Noncommercial keeping of horses, cattle, sheep and goats s
...
P
Temporary real estate tract offices
...
P
Recreational vehicle storage yard 3
...
-
Parking for commercial uses
...
-
Nonprofit clubs and lodge halls
...
-
Convalescent facilities
...
-
Golf courses
...
-
Home occupations
...
P
Construction trailers 5'6
P"
Notes:
'9 Development within the HR-SM zoning district is subject to Section 17.06.080
Hillside Development Standards."
Section 6. A new column entitled "HR -SM" added immediately following the
column entitled "H," is hereby added to Table 17.06.040 (Development Standards -
Residential Districts) of Section 17.06.040 (Development Standards) of Chapter 17.06
(Residential Districts) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code to read as
follows, with all other portions of the table remaining unchanged:
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05
Table 17.06.040
Development Standards — Residential Districts
Residential Development Standards
"HR -SM
Lot Area
Minimum net lot area (square feet)
. . .
Minimum net lot area (acres)
. . .
10
Dwelling Units per net acre
. . .
Lot Dimensions
Minimum lot frontage at front property line (feet)
. . .
50
Minimum lot frontage for a flag lot at the front property line
(feet)
. . .
40
Minimum width at required front setback area (feet)
. . .
100
Minimum average width (feet)
. . .
100
Minimum lot depth (feet)
. . .
150
Setbacks
Minimum front yard (feet)
. . .
40
Minimum corner side yard (feet)
. . .
40
Minimum interior side yard (feet)
. . .
25
Minimum rear yard (feet)
. . .
25
Other Requirements
Maximum height (feet)
...
Subject to
Section
17.06.080
Maximum percent of lot coverage
...
Subject to
Section
17.06.080
Open space required
...
Subject to
Section
17.06.080
Private open space/per unit
...
Subject to
Section
17.06.080"
Section 7. A new Section 17.06.080 (Hillside Development Standards) is
hereby added to Chapter 17.06 (Residential Districts) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the
Temecula Municipal Code and Chapter 17.06 to read as follows:
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 9
"Section 17.06.080 Hillside Development Standards.
A. Purpose and Intent.
This Section is established to achieve the City's objective to facilitate and
permit the orderly development of property within the HR -SM zone in the
Santa Margarita Area Annexation through a set of hillside development
standards aimed a protecting the public health, safety and welfare;
protecting and preserving natural and biological resources for long-term
benefit of the City and the broader community, recognizing the inherent
value in the properties subject to the HR -SM Zone; allowing size, type,
location, density, and intensity of development based on available
infrastructure; the geographic steepness of terrain, presence of unique
geographic conditions and constraints; and presence of environmentally
sensitive areas; and optimizing the use of sensitive site design, grading,
landscape architecture, and architecture, all to achieve the City's
objectives. Specific regulations and standards address the following City
objectives:
1. To protect the value of the community and the subject property of
ridgelines, prominent landforms, rock outcroppings, open space
areas, hydrologic features, wildlife communities, unique and
sensitive habitat and vegetation communities, and other natural,
biological, archaeological/historical, and scenic resources.
2. To preserve the visual and aesthetic quality of hillsides as viewed
from the surrounding community.
3. To promote and encourage a variety of high quality, alternative
architectural and energy efficient development designs and
concepts appropriate for hillside areas.
4. To preserve the public health, safety, and welfare and specifically
protect the public and property from hazards such as seismic,
geologic, and fire.
B. Applicability and Permit Required.
This Section applies to all properties within the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation that are located within the HR -SM Zoning District.
In addition to any other permit or approval required by this Code, any
person proposing to subdivide, grade, erect, or construct into, over, or on
top of property within the HR -SM Zoning Districts shall first obtain a land
use entitlement through the approval of a Hillside Development Permit
pursuant to Section 17.04.060 to ensure compliance with this Section.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 10
C. Definitions.
The following terms shall have the following meanings for purposes of this
Section:
1. Accessory Facilities: Buildings, structures, roads, driveways, walls
or fences incidental to permitted, or conditionally permitted, use.
2. Disturb: Alter the natural surface of the land or the natural
vegetation by any means, including, but not limited to, grading,
clearing, brushing, grubbing, or landscaping.
3. Graded Slope: All the faces of a graded slope, from the toe of the
slope to the top of the slope, whether the faces are covered by
natural vegetation, riprap, retaining walls or other material.
4. Hill: A well-defined natural elevation that extends above
surrounding terrain.
5. Hillside: The side or slope of a hill.
6. Hillside Development Permit: An entitlement based upon an
application which includes all required submittal documents that
comprehensively evaluated to determine its impacts on neighboring
property and the community as a whole, from the standpoint of the
site, landscape design, architecture, materials, colors, lighting,
signs, in accordance with the applicable development standards for
the zone, as well as the Hillside Development Standards.
7. Hillside Development Standards: The Hillside Development
Standards approved by the City Council of the City of Temecula as
now exist and as may from time to time be amended.
8. MSHCP: The Western Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation Plan as adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula on December 16, 2003.
9. Peak: The summit of a hill.
10. Restoration: The process of repairing a disturbed site to replicate
its natural condition.
11. Ridgeline: A line connecting the highest elevation points of a ridge,
running center and parallel to the long axis of the ridge.
12. Site: The parcel on which development is proposed.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 11
13. Slope Analysis: An analysis prepared by a California licensed land
surveyor or civil engineer based on a topographic map with contour
intervals not exceeding 10 feet.
D. Exemptions from Hillside Development Permit.
1. The following are exempt from the provisions of this Section:
(a) Any development proposal calling for the construction of a
structure in a ridgeline area having received approval,
pursuant to the adopted regulations in effect at the time of
approval, prior to enactment of the Ordinance shall be
exempt; however, the requirements of the Ordinance shall
be applied if an extension of time is requested.
(b) Open space projects and regional or community trails on
City of Temecula owned property.
(c) City or other governmental projects that receive approval by
the City Council of the City of Temecula.
E. Environmental Assessment Required.
A Hillside Development Permit processed under this Section shall be a
"project" for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act.
F. Application Requirements.
In addition to the application requirements of Section 17.03.030 of the
Development Code, all of the following shall be submitted with a Hillside
Development Permit application in the HR -SM Zoning District.
1. A site plan drawn to scale by a California licensed land surveyor or
registered civil engineer, showing the location of all existing peaks,
ridge lines, hills, hillsides and other significant landforms including
rock outcroppings, all areas within two hundred (200) feet of a peak
or ridge line, the location of all existing watercourses, the location of
all existing vegetation including oak trees and the type and quantity
thereof, the location of all existing and proposed agricultural areas,
the location of all existing and proposed dwellings and the location
of all existing and proposed accessory facilities.
2. A grading plan, including a blasting permit, if necessary, subject to
the requirements of Title 18 of the Temecula Municipal Code
3. A topographic map of the site, drawn to scale by a California
licensed land surveyor or civil engineer, showing all the items
referenced in paragraph 1 above. The scale on the topographic
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 12
map shall be no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200)
feet with contour intervals not exceeding ten (10) feet.
4. A slope analysis of the site showing the following slope categories:
0-15% grade, 16-20% grade, 21-25% grade and over 25% grade
prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor or a Registered Engineer.
5. Underground utility plan.
6. A biological report for the site addressing the topics enumerated in
Section (conservation required) of this ordinance.
7. A Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by a qualified by
archaeologist.
8. Photographs of the portion(s) of the site that would be disturbed
taken from each corner of the site and from all vantage points
deemed appropriate by the Director of Planning.
9. A proposed land disturbance plan showing and describing the
portion(s) of the site that would be disturbed, and the nature and
extent of the disturbance.
10. A proposed erosion and sedimentation control plan showing and
describing interim and ultimate erosion and sedimentation control
measures.
11. A proposed landscape and habitat restoration plan, including a
restoration time schedule, showing and describing how the site
would be landscaped and repaired and how the natural conditions
of the site would be replicated. A qualified biologist shall prepare
the habitat restoration plan.
12. A proposed architectural plan showing how primary and accessory
structures would be constructed.
13. A proposed exterior lighting plan showing how primary and
accessory structures, and landscaping would be illuminated.
14. A line of sight analysis, visual analysis, geologic study or any other
requirement deemed appropriate by the Planning Director.
15. A fuel modification plan consistent with the General Guidelines for
Creating Defensible Space adopted by the State Board of Forestry
and Fire Protection, February 8, 2006.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 13
G. Development Standards.
The following development standards shall apply in the Hillside
Residential -Santa Margarita (HR -SM) Zone whenever a Hillside
Development Permit is required by this Section:
1. Height.
(a) No dwelling, building or structure shall have more than two
(2) stories.
(b) On a level building pad, the maximum height of a dwelling,
building or structure shall be thirty (30) feet measured from
the foundation.
(c) On a terraced building pad, the maximum height of a
dwelling, building or structure shall be forty (40) feet
measured from the lowest finished floor level, excluding any
basement areas.
2. Lot Area.
(a) The minimum lot size shall be ten (10) acres in the HR -SM
zone.
(b) Development in accordance with this Section may occur on
a lot smaller than ten (10) acres in the HR -SM zone if the lot
was legally created or previously existed on the effective
date of this Ordinance, but no further subdivision of such a
lot shall be allowed.
3. Land Disturbance.
Land disturbance shall conform in all respects with the land
disturbance plan approved by the Director of Planning. A land
disturbance plan shall, at a minimum, meet the following
requirements, but meeting these requirements does not guarantee
approval of the plan.
(a) Areas situated within two hundred (200) feet of a peak or
ridgeline shall not be disturbed.
(b) Natural slopes having a twenty-five (25) percent or greater
grade shall not be disturbed.
(c) The horizontal distance between a natural or graded slope
and a roof, or portion thereof, shall not be less than twenty
(20) feet.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 14
(d) The vertical distance of a graded slope shall not exceed
fifteen (15) feet from the toe of the slope to the top of the
graded slope, unless a five (5) foot bench is placed between
two (2) graded slopes and the bench is planted with
vegetation similar to that growing on the portion(s) of the site
that have not been disturbed.
(e) The maximum height of a graded slope, including required
benching, shall not exceed thirty (30) feet.
(f) The use of blasting for road construction or pad grading shall
be strongly discouraged and alternate construction
techniques shall be used if feasible. Site disturbance and
grading shall be kept to a minimum.
(g) Land disturbance shall not exceed the following limitations:
Land Disturbance Limitations Table HR -SM Zoning District
Parcel/Lot Size
Maximum Area That May Be Disturbed
10 net acres or greater
40,000 square feet
Less than 10 acres
10% of the lot area
(h) Land disturbance shall conform in all respects with the
erosion and sedimentation control plan approved by the
Director of Planning or Public Works.
4. Landscaping and Restoration.
Landscaping and restoration shall conform in all respects with the
landscaping and restoration plan approved by the Director of
Planning. A landscaping and restoration plan shall be
accompanied by a cash deposit equal to the cost of the re -
vegetating all disturbed areas. The restoration plan shall be
prepared by a biologist with expertise in habitat restoration. The
Director of Planning shall retain this deposit until he/she is satisfied
that re -vegetation has been successful, but in no event shall the
Director of Planning retain the deposit for more than five (5) years.
Within the five (5) year period, the Director shall have the authority
to use the deposit to complete the required re -vegetation.
5. Architecture.
Dwellings and accessory facilities shall conform in all respects with
the architectural plan approved by the Planning Commission.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 15
91
Exterior Lighting.
Exterior lighting shall conform in all respects with the exterior
lighting plan approved by the Director of Planning. An exterior
lighting plan shall, at a minimum, meet the following requirements,
but meeting these requirements does not guarantee approval of the
plan:
(a) Lights shall not be located on the portion(s) of the site that
have not been disturbed.
(b) Lights shall not be located closer than ten (10) feet from any
property line.
(c) Lights shall be fully shielded and directed away from areas
deemed inappropriate by the Director of Planning.
(d) Walls and other architectural elements shall not be lighted
for decorative purposes.
(e) Tennis and other sport courts shall not be lighted for any
purposes.
(f) The maximum lighting intensity of the site shall not exceed
250 lumens when measured at any property line.
7. EnergV Efficient Standards.
Energy efficient standards shall be incorporated during the
construction and operational phase of any structure permitted
under this Section.
(a) Construction of any structure for human habitation permitted
under a Hillside Development Plan shall be required to
exceed Title 24 standards by a minimum of 10 percent.
(b) All structures for human habitation shall incorporate sealed
duct systems.
(c) All structures for shall incorporate fluorescent lighting where
practical.
(d) "Energy Star" appliances shall be installed in all structures
where applicable.
(e) All structures for human habitation shall incorporate high -
albedo roofing.
(f) All structures for human habitation shall incorporate dual
pained glass windows
(g) All residential structures shall incorporate at least two of the
following features to obtain a final building inspection.
(1) Spectrally selective or Low -E glass on all windows
and doors.
(2) Enhanced insulation which exceeds Title 24
standards by at least 15 percent.
(3) A landscape design that utilizes trees or other
vegetation to shade the structures sidewalks, patios,
and driveways.
(4) Solar water heaters.
(5) Photovoltaic systems to supply at a minimum 80% of
the normal power needs of the structures proposed
and existing based on an annual average.
8. Green Building.
All residential structures will be required to incorporate one of the
following features in order to obtain a final building inspection.
(a) Engineered and certified wood, which is harvested in a
sustainable manner.
(b) Tankless water heaters.
(c) Cellulose attic insulation made from recycled materials.
(d) Floor coverings made from recycled or sustainable
materials.
9. Environmental Protection.
Projects within the HR -SM zoning district shall comply with all
applicable mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with the pre -
zoning and annexation of the property to the City.
H. Hillside Design Standards.
In deciding whether to approve a Hillside Development Permit as required
by this article and any subordinate land disturbance plan, erosion and
sedimentation control plan, landscaping and restoration plan, architectural
plan or exterior lighting plan, the Director of Planning shall certify that the
plan complies with this Ordinance and the Hillside Design Standards.
Applicants are strongly advised to consider the Hillside Design Standards
in formulating the above -referenced plans.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 17
Relief from Development Standards.
Notwithstanding the specific requirements set forth in this Section
17.06.080 above, relief from the development standards may be granted
concurrently with the processing of a Hillside Development Permit in
accordance with the following procedure:
1. An applicant may file an application for relief from certain
development standards with the Planning Department. The
application shall be filed on forms and submitted with information as
required by the Department.
2. Applications for an relief from development standards shall be
submitted to the Planning Department and shall be accompanied
by the submittal requirements of Sections F and G of this
Ordinance, and the following:
(a) Fees in accordance with the most recently adopted fee
schedule.
(b) In certain cases, the Directors of Planning, Building and
Safety, or Public Works may require the project applicant to
provide additional studies, including but not limited to,
geological studies and or a visual analysis of the project
design either through a project simulation using computer
aided three-dimensional modeling coordinated with
photography showing before and after conditions or a scaled
three-dimensional model showing before and after
conditions.
3. The Planning Commission may approve relief from the
requirements of Section (G of this Chapter) if:
(a) The applicant demonstrates that the proposed alternative
complies with and, furthers the intent of this ordinance.
(b) The applicant demonstrates that the proposed alternative
provides a design solution that is equivalent to or better than
the standards prescribed in this ordinance for quality,
effectiveness, durability, and safety.
4. The relief from development standards shall be heard at a public
hearing of the Planning Commission.
J. Conservation Required.
Any project for which a Hillside Development Permit is required by this
Section shall be designed to protect wildlife habitat areas, biological
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 18
corridors, native plants and plant communities, and where practicable,
support interconnected, contiguous, and integrated open space systems
within an area, particularly when located contiguous to open space
preserve areas. A Hillside Development Permit shall be in compliance
with the MSHCP.
K. Hillside Cluster Development Option.
1. The purpose of the hillside cluster development option is to provide
(a) Site planning and unity of design in harmony with the natural
features and constraints of specific sites, and particularly on
sites possessing unique or severe topographic or hydrologic
features and biological resources;
(b) Protection of natural, historic and man-made elements of
scenic, environmental or cultural significance;
(c) Design innovation;
(d) Flexibility of siting of structures and roadways;
(e) More cost effective development due to decreased grading
and more efficient servicing of the development with utilities,
roads and other essential services;
(f) Additional open space for private or community purposes;
(g) A preferred planning tool for the development of land within
the HR -SM zone.
2. Definitions.
Cluster Open Space: Open space, either natural or functional,
provided to compensate for lot size reductions from minimum lot
size area requirements in the applicable zone.
Public Open Space: Open space owned by a public agency, such
as the City of Temecula, or the Western Riverside County Regional
Conservation Authority and maintained for scientific and biological
values or in furtherance of the goals of the Western Riverside
County Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
Scope: The cluster development option is permitted in the HR -SM
Zoning District.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 19
3. Planned Development Overlay Required.
Proposed cluster developments must be processed pursuant to the
requirements of the Planned Development Overlay District as set
forth in Section 17.22 of the Development Code.
4. Development Standards.
(a) Minimum Site Area: None in the HR Zoning District.
(b) Overall Density: Greater than 10 acres per dwelling unit in
the HR Zoning District.
(c) Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: No minimum lot size,
as may be approved by the Hillside Development Plan.
(d) Minimum Set Back Requirements: As may be approved by
the Hillside Development Plan.
(e) Minimum Distance Between Buildings: As may be approved
by the Hillside Development Plan.
(f) Utilities: Utilities shall be located within the development
portion of the site wherever possible to reduce the future
impact of maintenance and repair activities on cluster open
space.
(g) Excess cut and fill material shall be disposed of in
accordance with the Title 18 of the Temecula Municipal
Code.
(h) Roads: All streets and highways must have horizontal and
vertical alignments consistent with an approved design
speed, and roadway geometrics consistent with an approved
design vehicle, as specified in (the City of Temecula road
design manual).
(i) Landscaping: In accordance with subsection G.4 of this
Section and section 17.32 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Q) Exterior Lighting: Any exterior lighting shall conform to
subsection G.6 of this Section.
(k) Environmental Protection: Cluster developments within the
HR -SM district shall comply with all applicable mitigation
measures adopted in conjunction with the pre -zoning
annexation of the property to the City.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 20
5. Open Space Requirements.
(a) Cluster Open Space Requirements: Cluster open space
shall be designed to save as much as the natural open
space feasible, but in no case shall the open space be less
than 90 percent of the gross site area.
(b) Cluster open space ownership and control shall be only:
(1) As part of and individual, private lot with recorded
open space covenants running with the land;
(2) By the City of Temecula, as legally dedicated to and
approved by the City Council;
(3) By the Western Riverside County Resource
Conservation Authority;
(4) By a qualified nonprofit conservation organization as
deemed acceptable by the City.
(c) Cluster open space shall not include public or private streets,
driveways, parking areas, channelized drainage ways, and
disturbed, unvegetated areas."
Section 8. A new subsection D is hereby added to Section 17.14.020 of
Chapter 17.14 (Open Space/Recreation/Conservation Zoning Districts) of Title 17
(Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows, with all other portions of
Section 17.14.020 remaining unchanged:
D. Conservation -Santa Margarita District (OS -C -SM). The conservation
zoning district is intended for those lands within the Santa Margarita Area
Annexation boundaries that are in public or quasi -public ownership for
open space purposes that should remain in a natural state as much as
feasible without intrusions from active uses. Improvements may be made
to these areas to allow for safe limited public access or for control of
erosion, geologic stability, or other public safety or utility purposes. The
construction of buildings or other structures is not permitted except for
flood control structures or public utility facilities, which may be permitted
with the approval of a conditional use permit."
Section 9. A new column entitled "OS -C -SM" immediately following the
column entitled "OS -C" is hereby added to Table 17.14.030 (Schedule of Permitted
Uses -Open Space) of Section 17.14.030 (Use Regulations) of Chapter 17.14 (Open
Space/Recreation/Conservation Zoning Districts) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula
Municipal Code to read as follows, with all other portions of the table remaining
unchanged:
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 21
17.14.030 USE REGULATIONS.
The primary uses permitted in the open space zoning districts is indicated in
Table 17.14.030.
Table 17.14.030
Schedule of Permitted Uses — Open Space
Schedule of Uses
...
"OS -C -SM
Agricultural uses
...
-
Athletic field
...
-
Bicycle paths
...
-
Campground
...
-
Caretakers quarters
...
-
Cemeteries, mausoleums and related uses
...
-
Flood control structures
...
C
Game courts, badminton, tennis, racquetball
...
-
Golf driving range not part of a golf course
...
-
Golf course and clubhouse
...
-
Golf course resort (including accessory visitor supporting
accommodations and commercial uses such as hotels,
fractional ownership units, day spa, restaurants, and
conference center.)
...
-
Government and public utility facilities
...
C
Gymnasium
...
Communications and microwave installations'
Nature centers/exhibits
...
-
Nurseries
...
-
Outdoor exhibits
...
-
Picnic group facilities
...
-
Private parks and recreation facilities
...
-
Parking areas
...
-
Public parks and recreation facilities
...
-
Recreational vehicle park
...
-
Riding stable, public or private
...
-
Shooting galleries, ranges, archery courses
...
-
Single-family dwellings (1 unit per 40 acres)
...
-
Tree farms
...
Note: All development subject to the standards set forth in Section 17.06.080.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 22
Section 10. A new column entitled "OS -C -SM" immediately following the
column entitled "OS -C" is hereby added to Section 17.14.040 (Development Standards)
of Chapter 17.14 (Open Space/Recreation/Conservation Zoning Districts) of Title 17
(Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows, with all other portions of
the table remaining unchanged:
The development standards for the open space zoning districts are as indicated
on Table 17.14.040.
Table 17.14.040
Open Space Development Standards — Open Space
Development Standards
...
"OS -C -SM
Minimum lot size
...
-
Maximum lot coverage
. . .
-
Maximum height
. . .
-
Floor area ratio
. . .
-
Setback from street RM/ line
. . .
-
Setback from adjoining property lines
. . .
-
Minimum open space
...
100%11
Section 11. Severability. If any portion, provision, section, paragraph,
sentence, or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared to be invalid by any final
court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive
legislation, the remaining portions, provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and
words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted by
the court so as to give effect to such remaining portions of the Ordinance.
Section 12. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days
after its adoption, but will not become effective unless and until the Annexation of the
Santa Margarita Area Annexation, or any territory within it including the Santa Margarita
Area Annexation No. 2, is approved by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation
Commission.
Section 13. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and
cause it to be published in the manner required by law.
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 23
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this day of ,
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 24
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 10-05 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading
at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 23rd day of February,
2010, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of by the following
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
R:/Ords 2010/Ords 10-05 25
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
Item No. 13
ACTION MINUTES
of
FEBRUARY 23, 2010
City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
The Temecula Redevelopment Agency Meeting convened at 7:42 PM.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Mike Naggar
ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Washington, Roberts,
Naggar
RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
RDA CONSENT CALENDAR
18 Action Minutes - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Agency Member
Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Washington and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Approve the action minutes of February 9, 2010.
19 Approval of the 2009-10 Mid -Year Budget Adjustments - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Agency Member Edwards made the motion; it was
seconded by Agency Member Washington and electronic vote reflected
unanimous approval
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 10-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2009-10 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGETS
RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
RDA ADJOURNMENT
At 7:43 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing
at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Michael S. Naggar, Chair Person
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
Item No. 14
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO: General Manager/Board of Directors
FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Innerstate Dance Project Grant
PREPARED BY: Bruce Beers, Theater Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
Approve the estimated grant Revenue in the Old Town Community Theater Budget
for the Innerstate Dance Project in the amount of $15,000;
2. Appropriate $15,000 in expenditures from the OTC Theater Grant Revenue for the
Innerstate Dance Project program;
3. Authorize the General Manager, on behalf of the Board of Directors, to take all
actions necessary and convenient to carry out and implement the Innerstate Dance
Project, and to administer the TCSD's obligations, responsibilities and duties to be
performed under the Project, including but not limited to, approval and execution on
behalf of the TCSD of the Innerstate Dance Project with the ODC Theater,
certificates and other similar agreements and documents as necessary and
convenient for the implementation of the project.
BACKGROUND: The Old Town Temecula Community Theater strives to provide a
diverse offering of performances on an annual basis. Dance has become an integral part of our
program offerings at the theater and attendance at dance performances at the theater have
continued to increase over the last few years. In late 2009, staff filed a request for funding from the
ODC Theater of San Francisco to provide funding to support and offset the cost of dance
performances in Temecula. The Irvine Foundation has committed to provide an Innerstate Dance
Project grant through the ODC Theater to support and develop the art of dance throughout the state
of California.
Staff was informed on February 25, 2010 that the ODC Theater would be willing to provide a grant in
the amount of $15,000 for the development of dance programs and performances in our community.
The Foundation will also assist in offsetting the cost of dance performances in Temecula, market
dance programs, and helping to facilitate dance organizers.
FISCAL IMPACT:
and the TCSD will receive
through the ODC Theater.
Expenditures from the Innerstate Dance Project Grant total $15,000
grant funding of $15,000 this fiscal year from the Irvine Foundation
FTHEATER
3/1/10
Bruce Beers, Theater Manager
Old Town Temecula Community Theater
42051 Main Street
Robert Bailis, Director Temecula, CA
Kathy Rose, Production Manager 92590
Catherine Clambaneva, Marketing Manager
Cori Crowley, Theater Administrator Dear Bruce,
Sean Dowdall President
We are thrilled to be working with the Old Town Temecula Community
Elizabeth J. Fisher, Co -Vice President
Theater, having invited your Temecula Presents program to join in our
Tom Delay, Co -Vice President
InnerState Project. InnerState is a three-year project, run by ODC
Michael Charlson, Treasurer
Theater and funded by the James Irvine Foundation. Over the course of
Heather Tay, Secretary
the project, we will bring together entrepreneurial and innovative
Neal Allen
presenters throughout California to collaborate on presenting schemes
Benjamin Bank
that will encourage deeper interaction between touring artists and the
Briony Bax
communities they serve. The goal of InnerState as a presence in
Richard Carlstrom
Temecula is to underwrite the expenses on any of the three following
Beverly Dale
categories of activity, with the long range goal of increasing dance
earner
Bart Deamer
fluency, activity, and audience numbers in your region: 1) longer artist
Alyce
visits, deeper and well-planned residency activities, public access to
Henry Erlich
Lynn Feintech
the lead artist as a teacher, even an audition or outreach project that is
Lisa Gerould
free or low cost to the public; 2) enhanced marketing schemes that will
Carolyn Hutchinson
help cultivate better audience for dance, or the development of
Lori Laqua
published educational tools, pod casts, or web site enhancements that
Alexandra Morehouse
may support this effort; 3) mitigating financial risk on producing less
-McReynolds
well known, emerging artists in innovative ways (such as an outdoor
Particia Kristof Moy
festival or in a community space other than the theater) who initially
KT Nelson
may be less of a name draw and could represent challenges to box
Kim! Okada
office revenue. InnerState is designed to enhance, not replace, funds
Jennifer saffo
that each presenter annually pursues. Partners are still required to
Tim Schroeder
bring their piece of the presenting budget to the table on each
Kamen Shorofsky
Martha
production. InnerState monies enhance your existing capacity,
Smolen
Emma Stewart
providing a rare opportunity to experiment with innovative presenting
Timothy Slreb
styles, and engage with new artists, particularly those seeking a long -
Monika Szamko
term foothold in your community. This visit with Backhaus Dance will
Brenda Way
be the first of three planned activities to take place between April 2010
Craig Zodikoff
and March 2011. This first activity will receive a $15,000 payment
ADVISORY BOARD
InnerState to support the activities listed in the budget and project
Simon Bax
proposal you supplied.
Eleanor Coppola
Sakurako Fisher
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
F. Warren Hellman
David Landis
Best regards,
S
Samuel Miller
Laurene Powell Jobs
Rob Bailis
Paula Powers
Director, ODC Theater
Lisa Stevens
Cindy Testa McCullagh
San Francisco
351 Shotwell Street ♦ San Francisco, California 94110
Business office phone 415/863.6606 x 111 ♦ Fax 415/863 9833 ♦ www.odetheater.org
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
Item No. 15
ACTION MINUTES
of
FEBRUARY 23, 2010
City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
The Temecula Redevelopment Agency Meeting convened at 7:42 PM.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Mike Naggar
ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Washington, Roberts,
Naggar
RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
RDA CONSENT CALENDAR
18 Action Minutes - Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) — Agency Member
Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Washington and
electronic vote reflected unanimous approval
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Approve the action minutes of February 9, 2010.
19 Approval of the 2009-10 Mid -Year Budget Adjustments - Approved Staff
Recommendation (5-0-0) — Agency Member Edwards made the motion; it was
seconded by Agency Member Washington and electronic vote reflected
unanimous approval
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 10-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2009-10 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGETS
RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
RDA ADJOURNMENT
At 7:43 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing
at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Michael S. Naggar, Chair Person
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
Item No. 16
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Executive Director/ Agency Board
FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Planning and Redevelopment
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Third Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Pelican Properties
LLC for the lease and development of Agency owned property.
PREPARED BY: Luke Watson, Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency approve the Third Amendment to the Exclusive
Negotiating Agreement ("ENA") between Pelican Properties LLC ("Pelican"), and the Temecula
Redevelopment Agency ("Agency").
BACKGROUND: On August 26, 2008 the Agency entered into an ENA with Pelican for
the development of the Town Square Marketplace which is located adjacent to the Town Square
and future Civic Center. The Agency issued a Request for Interest, interviewed, and selected
Pelican with the intent of entering into a long-term ground lease; in which Pelican would then
develop, own and operate the structures on the site.
Since the execution of the ENA, Pelican has worked in good faith with staff as well as the
community regarding the use and design of the project in order to fulfill its obligations required by
the ENA. In spite of these good faith efforts the economic climate collapsed and the project, in its
present iteration, has become economically infeasible. Considering these economic realities, and
with the hopes that the economy would improve, the exclusive negotiating term was extended three
(3) months per Section (1) of the ENA, and again via a second amendment to the ENA approved by
the Agency Board on May 26, 2009. The current ENA is scheduled to expire on March 1, 2010.
Staff and Pelican have continued to move forward throughout the term of the ENA but the difficulties
in the economic climate persist as of this date and severely weaken the feasibility of the project.
Staff continues to feel that Pelican is the right developer for this project as demonstrated by their
record of quality mixed-use in -fill projects in Southern California and strong commitment to the
completion of the Town Square Marketplace development.
ENA AMENDMENT
With the persistent difficulties in the commercial and residential development market staff believes
that it is necessary to allow for this extension to provide ample time for the industry to recover, thus
enabling the Agency's partnership with Pelican to produce the highest quality development possible.
Staff feels that the quality of this development is paramount as it will be adjacent, and complimentary
to the Civic Center project. Staff presented the following ENA extension terms to the RDA sub-
committee on February 22, 2010. Based on these proposed terms the RDA sub -committee
recommended that staff proceed and present the ENA amendment to the full Agency Board.
The proposed deal points for the ENA Amendment are as follows:
• Term extension of one (1) year.
• Possible one (1) year extension with administrative approval
• Developer is required to investigate the physical condition of the property
• Developer will pay for cost to prepare all environmental documents
Based upon Pelican's ability to perform, draft deal points for a subsequent Disposition and
Development Agreement ("DDA") would be formulated. No Agency commitment to develop or
lease the property can be made until a final DDA is approved following a public hearing.
If the Agency and Pelican fail to negotiate a DDA by the expiration of the ENA term then the ENA
will expire and negotiations between the Agency and Pelican will end.
FISCAL IMPACT: No Agency funding is proposed as part of this project. The intent is to determine
a fair market value for the lease of the property and enter into long-term ground lease. This
arrangement will provide the Agency with a revenue stream to support other redevelopment activity
in the redevelopment project area. Pelican Properties has developed a project on a ground lease
basis, and is comfortable with this arrangement. A detailed pro -forma analysis will be performed by
Keyser Marston Associates to determine the fair market value of the ground lease.
ATTACHMENTS: Third Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
Developer Extension Request Letter
THIRD AMENDMENT TO EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PELICAN VISTA, LLC
THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT is
dated as of March 9, 2010 and is entered into by and between the REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, a public body corporate and politic ("Agency") and
PELICAN VISTA, LLC, a California limit liability company ("Developer").
RECITALS
A. On August 26, 2008, the parties entered into that certain "Exclusive Negotiating
Agreement", and amended it by a First Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
dated January 22, 2009 and a Second Amendment to Exclusive Negotiating Agreement dated
May 26, 2009 (as so amended, said Exclusive Negotiating Agreement is hereinafter referred to as
the "Agreement").
B. The purpose of the Agreement is to set forth, among other things, the terms
pursuant to which the Agency will negotiate with the Developer on an exclusive basis for a
limited period regarding the Project and the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement.
C. The parties now desire to further amend the Agreement.
1. Extension of Term of Agreement. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to
read as follows:
"The term of this Agreement shall commence on August 26, 2008 and shall end
on the earlier of: (i) March 1, 2011 or (ii) the date on which the Agency or
Developer terminates this Agreement as provided in Section 2 below (the "ENA
Period"). Provided Developer is not in default under this Agreement as of March
1, 2011, the Executive Director may, in his sole and absolute discretion, extend
the term of this Agreement for up to an additional one (1) calendar year (after
March 1, 2011) by written notice to Developer."
2. No Other Changes. Except as otherwise provided in this Third Amendment, all other
terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect.
11087-0027A1201400v1.doc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Third Amendment as of the
day and year first written above.
DEVELOPER:
PELICAN VISTA, LLC,
a California limited liability company
M.
Daniel Howse
Co -Managing Member
CITY:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA,
a public body, corporate and politic
Mike Naggar
Agency Chair
ATTEST:
Susan Jones, MMC, Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter Thorson, Agency Counsel
11087-0027A1201400v1.doc 2
Pelican Properties
1300 Quail Street, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 263-9210 - hammrichard@sbcglobal.net
January 22, 2010
Luke Watson
Redevelopment Department of the City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RE: Town Square Marketplace ENA Extension Request
Dear Mr. Watson
Pelican Properties remains extremely interested and excited about the long term
potential of the Old Town Marketplace. We have a strong desire to work with the
City Staff and Old Town stakeholders to design, build and manage the project.
Unfortunately, the current economic conditions have slowed down the immediate
implementation of the project and there is a need to acquire an extension to our
Exclusive Negotiating Agreement ("ENA").
Pelican Properties has been diligently pursuing the planning, design and financial
performance of Town Square Market. Pelican has been working with City Staff
on three potential alternative design site plans and associated building elevations
for Town Square Marketplace. The three alternatives varied in the site intensity;
exploring a one story, two story and three story alternatives design solutions.
Pelican Properties strongly recommends pursuing the best long term design and
financial solution for the site; not just the solution that fits the current short term
economic conditions.
Pelican Properties respectfully request the Agency and the City to grant Pelican
a two year time extension to the ENA with the possibility of an additional one
year discretionary extension by the Agency Director. Thank you for your
consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
ick Hamm
COUNCIL BUSINESS
Item No. 17
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney
DATE: March 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Approval of Intergovernmental Agreements with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno
Indians for the Mitigation of Off -Reservation Impacts from the Pechanga Gaming
Center Pursuant to the Tribal State Compact Between the Pechanga Band of
Luiseno Indians and the State of California
PREPARED BY: Peter Thorson, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE "INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT" BETWEEN THE PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO
INDIANS AND THE CITY AND APPROVING THE "MEMORANDUM
OF UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT
SERVICES AT PECHANGA CASINO" BETWEEN THE PECHANGA
BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS, CITY, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
AND THE SHERIFF OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
BACKGROUND: The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians ("Tribe") is a federally -
recognized Indian Tribe located on federal Trust Lands just south of the City boundaries. The Tribe
has inhabited the Temecula Valley for more than 10,000 years (or according to Tribal history and
culture, since time immemorial). The Pechanga Indian Reservation was established by Executive
Order of the President of the United States on June 27, 1882, affirming the Tribe's sovereignty and
land -base.
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Intergovernmental Agreement 2 23 10
Under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act ("IGRA"), the Tribe may engage in gaming
as a means of promoting Tribal economic development, self-sufficiency and strong Tribal
government. IGRA generally requires that Class III gaming (Las Vegas style) be conducted
pursuant to a Tribal -State Class III gaming compact.
On September 10, 1999, and effective in May, 2000, the Tribe entered into a gaming
compact with the State of California, as contemplated under IGRA ("1999 Compact').
In August 2006, the Legislature amended the 1999 Compact. This amendment was
approved by the voters in the State of California at a referendum election in February 2008 and
effective in March 2008 (the Amended Compact').
The original 1999 Compact authorized the Tribe to have 2,000 of the Class III (Las Vegas
style) gaming devices in the Casino plus additional 1,600 Class II (bingo style) gaming devices.
Underthe 1999 Compact and the 2003 Tribal environmental study, the Tribe successfully developed
a gaming center that includes: (1) an approximately 200,000 square foot casino; (2) seven
restaurants and related amenities; (3) a thirteen story 522 -room hotel; (4) three parking structures
plus surface parking that in total can accommodate at least 8,567 cars, recreation vehicles (RVs),
buses; (5) administrative, regulatory, maintenance and service structures; and (6) common areas
related to these facilities.
The Tribe has assisted the City in obtaining approximately $6 million for the much needed
bridge improvements on Pechanga Parkway over Temecula Creek and has provided $8 million of its
own money toward off -reservation road improvements on Pechanga Parkway and Temecula
Parkway. The City used these road funds along with its developer impact fees and other funding
sources to widen Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway to the Casino.
The casino, hotel and restaurants has provided over 5,000 jobs to the Tribe and the
community as a whole. In addition to the casino, hotel and restaurants, which have become a major
tourist attraction and bring millions of dollars into the local community, the Tribe has successfully
developed on its lands other economic development or governmental projects that service the Tribe
and the community, including a convenience store, golf course, cultural center, museum, gas
station, car wash and RV park.
The Amended Compact authorizes the Tribe to provide up to 7,500 of the Class III gaming
devices. Recognizing the potential off -reservation impacts of an expansion of the gaming, Section
10.8.8 of the Amended Compact requires that the Tribe enter into "intergovernmental agreements"
with cities and counties affected by the gaming operations of the tribe. The Tribe now has
approximately 4,200 gaming machines in the casino. Staff has been working with Tribal
representatives to develop the mitigation measures described in the Intergovernmental Agreement
and the Law Enforcement MOU in order to fulfill the mandates of the Amended Compact.
SUMMARY OF TERMS OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT:
1. Term. The term of the agreementwould be 21 years, ending December31, 2030 (§
13.8)
2. Number of Slot Machines. The Tribe is authorized under the 2008 Amendment to
the Compact to have 7,500 gaming devices (slot machines) at the Casino. Under the
Intergovernmental Agreement, the Tribe agrees that the total number of gaming devices would not
be more than 5,000. If the Tribe wants to add more gaming devices, the Tribe would be required to
follow the Expansion/Tribal EIR procedures provided in the Agreement and explained in section 6 of
this Summary. (§§ 2.10; 2.12; and 3.4.b.).
R:/Agenda Re ports/Pech an ga Intergovernmental Agreement 2 23 10
3. Mitigation Fee. The Tribe agrees to pay $2 million per fiscal year to the City for 5
years to mitigate traffic, public safety or any other impacts as determined by the City (§ 3.4.a.).
Beginning in year 6, the Tribe will pay $2 million perfiscal year plus a CPI annual adjustment for the
remainder of the 21 year term (§ 3.4.a.i.B.).
A. Any SDF Payment to the City would be credited against this amount. "SDF
Payment" means monies received by the City from the State Distribution Fund that was created
under State law pursuant to the Original Compact and into which the Tribe made contributions prior
to the Compact's amendment in 2008 or other tribal gaming funds distributed to the cities by the
Legislature.
B. As part of this Mitigation Fee, the City will agree to cover the County's public
safety responsibilities at the casino and hotel. The County will still respond to calls on the
Reservation. The City agrees to fund the Sheriff's response to calls for law enforcement service at
the Gaming Center and the patrol of the zones of the City closest to the Gaming Center. The public
safety responsibilities will be documented in Section 3.6 of the Intergovernmental Agreement and in
Section 3.5 of the Law Enforcement MOU between the City, Tribe, County and the Sheriff.
C. Payment of the Mitigation Fee and the 1-15/SR-79 South Interchange fee will
be the full amount of mitigation the City is entitled to for the impacts of the existing casino and hotel
and up to 5,000 slot machines.
4. Special Fee for Interchange. Further, the Tribe will commit to pay $10 million to the
City within the next five years for the ultimate 1-15/SR-79 South Interchange. If the Tribe is
instrumental in obtaining federal or state grant funds to pay for this project, it will receive a credit
equal to the amount they are able to obtain. If the Tribe is unsuccessful in obtaining grant funds by
the end of the 5th year, they will pay City $10 million for this project. If the Tribe is successful in
obtaining only portion of the $10 million through grant funding, they will pay the City the difference
between whatever grants are received and the $10 million. (§ 3.4.a.iv.)
5. Baseline Traffic Study. A Baseline Traffic Study will be conducted at the beginning
of the contract period to determine the current traffic impacts of the casino and hotel (§ 4.1). No
other traffic studies will be made until either the Tribe proposes an Expansion or five years, which
ever is earlier, but only if the City or the Tribe can demonstrate a 10% change from the Baseline
Traffic Study. (§ 4.1.d.).
6. Expansion and Future Tribal EIR/Mitigation Measures. In the event the Tribe
desires to undertake an Expansion of the casino or hotel or both (as specifically defined), the Tribe
will be required to: (1) prepare a Tribal EIR; (2) provide notice to the City of the preparation of the
Tribal EIR; (3) provide an opportunity for the City to comment on the Tribal EIR and the proposed
mitigation measures; and (4) negotiate appropriate mitigation measures with the City (§ 4.2).
A. The City and the Tribe are specifically required to negotiate in good faith as
to: (1) whether the Mitigation Fees are adequate to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Expansion;
(2) determine whether additional mitigation measures are needed to mitigate the impacts of the
proposed Expansion; and (3) reasonably adjust the future Mitigation Fees remaining during the
Term to or add additional measures to mitigate the proposed Expansion (§ 3.4.b).
B. Any additional mitigation fees would be consistent with mitigation
requirements imposed on developers to the extent they are based on the actual generation of
comparable increases in traffic over that described in the Baseline Traffic Study (§ 4.1.g).
R:/Agenda Re ports/Pech an ga Intergovernmental Agreement 2 23 10
C. Any failure to reach agreement following such good faith negotiations shall be
subject to the arbitration provisions of the Agreement (§§ 3.4.b., 4.6 and 4.5).
D. The term "Expansion" is defined in Section 2.10 to mean: ".. any increase
in the number of Gaming Devices within the existing footprint of the Gaming Center beyond five
thousand (5,000), or any increase exceeding ten percent (10 %) or more of the existing footprint or
height of the buildings or structures within the Gaming Center, provided that alterations, renovations,
maintenance, refurbishments, improvements, changes in configurations or uses, construction, or
reconstruction, within the footprint or height of the Gaming Center, or improvements to the spa,
porte cochere, surface parking, walkways, pool and common areas that serve or are within the
Gaming Center, shall not be deemed to be an Expansion."
E. The term "Gaming Center" is defined in Section 2.12 to mean: "... the
present gaming facility and hotel located on the Reservation and consisting of approximately two
hundred thousand (200,000+) square feet of gaming space plus back of the house and
administrative offices and facilities that can accommodate various gaming and casino activities,
including up to five thousand (5,000) Gaming Devices, employee rooms, offices and related space;
a thirteen story hotel with five hundred twenty-two (522) guest rooms and supporting kitchens,
offices, retail, housekeeping, telecommunications and other utility facilities; maintenance and
storage spaces; convention, ballroom, classroom and meeting spaces; restaurants, bars, food
courts, night clubs, retail spaces, lounges, regulatory, public safety, surveillance and guest services
amenities and facilities; a one thousand two hundred (1200) seat theater; swimming and Jacuzzi
pools, porte cocheres, and spa facilities and related areas located outside the hotel; surface parking
and three parking structures for buses, trucks, SUVs and similar vehicles and automobiles, that can
accommodate approximately eight thousand six hundred (8600) vehicles; and related common
areas, roadways, sidewalks, storage and administrative facilities; all of which primarily serve the
Gaming Center."
7. Government to Government Cooperation. The City and Tribe agree to promote a
strong government -to -government agreement that commits each government to maintain open lines
of communication (§ 3.7).
8. Dispute Resolution. The City and Tribe agree to resolve any disputes that arise
under the Agreement through a two step process: 1) meet and confer in good faith in an effort to
resolve the dispute, using a mediator if agreed to by the parties; and 2)if the dispute is not resolved
through the meet and confer process, then it would be resolved by binding arbitration before a
retired federal or state court judge. If the dispute concerns a Tribal EIR the arbitrator shall be a
retired judge with experience in California Environmental Quality Act matters. The arbitrator would
have authority to impose such mitigation measures as are described in the TEIR, the comments of
the City or other persons concerning the TEIR, and such other mitigation measures as are
reasonably necessary and feasible to mitigate the significant effects on the environment, but in
accordance with the limitations in the Agreement. An award or order could be appealed to an
appellate panel of arbitrators (§§ 7 and 8).
9. Sovereign Immunity. The City and the Tribe agree to waive governmental
immunities, including the Tribe's sovereign immunity, in connection with any claims arising from the
Agreement (§ 11).
SUMMARY OF TERMS OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING
LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AT PECHANGA CASINO:
1. Parties. The Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Law Enforcement
Services at Pechanga Casino ("Law Enforcement MOU") is an agreement between the Tribe, City,
County of Riverside ("County" and the Sheriff of Riverside County ("Sheriff").
R:/Agenda Re ports/Pech an ga Intergovernmental Agreement 2 23 10
2. Duties of Law Enforcement Parties. The Law Enforcement MOU recognizes the
respective law enforcement duties of the Sheriff and the Tribe's public safety officers and their
respective duties and authority under federal and state law. The MOU continues the cooperation of
the respective law enforcement organizations and provide the framework for on-going cooperative
law enforcement efforts (§ 1.A.).
3. Mitigation Fees to Fund Law Enforcement. Inconsideration of the Mitigation Fee
described in the Intergovernmental Agreement, the City agrees to fund the Sheriffs response to
calls for law enforcement service at the Gaming Center and the patrol of the zones of the City
closest to the Gaming Center (§ 1.13.).
4. Assignment of Deputy. The Sheriff will assign one Sheriff's deputy on each shift to
patrol in the patrol zone of the City closest to the Gaming Center and to be the deputy assigned to
respond to calls for law enforcement services at the Gaming Center and to patrol the zones closest
to the Gaming Center (§ 1.C.).
A. The assigned deputy and other deputies shall not engage in random self -
initiated patrols at the Gaming Center or on the Reservation but will only respond to calls for service
at the Gaming Center as well as such further law enforcement actions as are required for these calls
for service, such as active investigation and follow-up investigation of crimes reported to the Sheriff
or other law enforcement agencies, searches for suspects and similar actions necessary for carrying
out its law enforcement responsibilities with respect to such calls for service (§ 1.C.1)).
B. The assigned deputy shall wear a "Riverside County Sheriffs" patch and drive
a marked police vehicle with the "Riverside County Sheriffs" seal, provided that if an emergency
response is required, any other deputies or Sheriff's vehicles may provide service (§ 1.C.3)).
C. The Sheriff shall not be expected to provide gaming security or enforce
tribal laws (§ 1.G.).
5. Dispute Resolution and Sovereign Immunity. The Law Enforcement MOU
contains the same dispute resolution and sovereign immunity provisions as are in the
Intergovernmental Agreement (§§ 2 and 4).
6. Indemnification. The parties each agree to defend, indemnify and hold the others
harmless from liabilities arising from their activities under the Law Enforcement MOU (§ 5).
DISCUSSION
The Intergovernmental Agreement is an important and mutually beneficial means for
furthering the government -to -government relationship between the Parties and in building trust,
mutual respect, good will and cooperation for the benefit of the entire community.
The mitigation funding described in the Intergovernmental Agreementwill enable the Cityto
provide additional traffic improvements for the southwestern portion of the City to accommodate
traffic from the Gaming Center and to provide necessary law enforcement services in this area.
The Intergovernmental Agreement also provides the final funding link for the I-15/SR-79
South Interchange. This interchange will substantially improve the flow of vehicles on and off of the
I-15 to the Gaming Center.
Further, the Intergovernmental Agreement is intended to provide the Tribe and City with
R:/Agenda Re ports/Pech an ga Intergovernmental Agreement 2 23 10
greater certainty concerning future planning and development activities. The Intergovernmental
Agreement clearly spells out the processes forthe review any Expansion of the casino, restaurants
and hotel and the framework for development of appropriate mitigation measures that would be
needed for an Expansion.
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed Mitigation Fee will generate a minimum of $42
million over the term of the Intergovernmental Agreement, less anySDF money received bythe City
from the state, but with CPI increases each year beginning in the sixth year. Additionally, the City
will receive $10 million towards the 1-15/SR79 South Interchange either from grants secured bythe
Tribe or from Tribal funds. The total funds available to the City over the term of the
Intergovernmental Agreement would be $52 million with a rough estimate of an additional $13
million in CPI increases for years six to 21.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 10 -
Intergovernmental Agreement
Law Enforcement MOU
R:/Agenda Re ports/Pech an ga Intergovernmental Agreement 2 23 10
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE
"INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT" BETWEEN THE
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS AND THE CITY
AND APPROVING THE "MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT
SERVICES AT PECHANGA CASINO" BETWEEN THE
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS, CITY,
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE SHERIFF OF THE
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find,
determine and declare as follows:
(a) The Pechanga Band of Luiseho Indians ("Tribe") is a federally -
recognized Indian Tribe located on federal Trust Lands which are located just south of
the City boundaries.
(b) Under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act ("IGRA"), the Tribe
may engage in gaming as a means of promoting Tribal economic development, self-
sufficiency and strong Tribal government. IGRA generally requires that Class III gaming
(Las Vegas style) be conducted pursuant to a Tribal -State Class III gaming compact.
(c) On September 10, 1999, and effective in May, 2000, the Tribe
entered into a gaming compact with the State of California, as contemplated under
IGRA.
(d) In August 2006 the 1999 Compact was amended by the Legislature
and approved by a vote of the people of California at a referendum election in February,
2008 and effective in March 2008 ("2008 Amended Compact').
(e) The original 1999 Compact authorized the Tribe to have 2,000 of
the Class III (Las Vegas style) gaming devices in the Casino plus an additional 1,600
Class II (bingo style gaming devices.
(f) The 2008 Amended Compact authorizes the Tribe to provide up to
7,500 of the Class III gaming devices. Recognizing the potential off -reservation impacts
of an expansion of the gaming, Section 10.8.8 of the 2008 Amended Compact requires
that the Tribe enter into "intergovernmental agreements" with cities and counties
affected by the gaming operations of the tribe. The Tribe now has approximately 4,200
gaming devices in the Casino. Staff has been working with Tribal representatives to
develop the mitigation measures described in the Intergovernmental Agreement and the
Law Enforcement MOU in order to fulfill the mandates of the 2008 Amended Compact
and to enable the Tribe to continue is existing gaming operations.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves that
certain agreement entitled "Intergovernmental Agreement" between the Pechanga
Band of Luiseno Indians and the City of Temecula ("Intergovernmental Agreement")
with such changes in such Intergovernmental Agreement as may be mutually agreed
upon by the Tribe and the City Manager as are in substantial conformance with the form
of such Intergovernmental Agreement on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
1) The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the
Intergovernmental Agreement on behalf of the City in said form.
2) A duplicate original of the final Intergovernmental Agreement
when executed by the Mayor and the Tribe shall be placed on file in the Office of the
City Clerk.
3) The City Manager (or his designee), is hereby authorized, on
behalf of the City, to take all actions necessary and appropriate to carry out and
implement the Intergovernmental Agreement and to administer the City's obligations,
responsibilities and duties to be performed under the Intergovernmental Agreement and
related documents, including, but not limited to, the approval and execution on behalf of
the City of such certifications, approvals of traffic data collection and traffic studies and
such other operating agreements and documents as contemplated in the
Intergovernmental Agreement or as otherwise necessary and convenient for the
implementation of the City's right and obligations under the Intergovernmental
Agreement.
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves that
certain agreement entitled "Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Law
Enforcement Services at Pechanga Casino" between the Pechanga Band of Luiseno
Indians, City of Temecula, County of Riverside and the Sheriff of the County of
Riverside ("Law Enforcement MOU") with such changes in such Law Enforcement MOU
as may be mutually agreed upon by the Tribe and the City Manager as are in
substantial conformance with the form of such Law Enforcement MOU on file in the
Office of the City Clerk.
1) The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Law
Enforcement MOU on behalf of the City in said form.
2) A duplicate original of the final Law Enforcement MOU when
executed by the Mayor and the other parties shall be placed on file in the Office of the
City Clerk.
3) The City Manager (or his designee), is hereby authorized, on
behalf of the City, to take all actions necessary and appropriate to carry out and
implement the Law Enforcement MOU and to administer the City's obligations,
responsibilities and duties to be performed under the Law Enforcement MOU and
related documents, including, but not limited to, the approval and execution on behalf of
the City of such certifications, approvals of traffic data collection and traffic studies and
such other operating agreements and documents as contemplated in the Law
Enforcement MOU or as otherwise necessary and convenient for the implementation of
the City's right and obligations under the Law Enforcement MOU.
R:/Resos 2010/Resos 10- 2
Section 4. 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 March, 2010.
Jeff Comerchero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
R:/Resos 2010/Resos 10- 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the gth day of March, 2010, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
IG1:i..11FG11►�Ko1l1►[MIN diIAdil:l:4:& 1
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
R:/Resos 2010/Resos 10- 4
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
This Intergovernmental Agreement ("Agreement") is dated and effective as of,
by and between the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, a federally
recognized Indian tribe (the "Tribe"), and the City of Temecula, California (the "City"), which
are referred to herein collectively as "the Parties" and as to each as a "Party". The terms "City"
and "Tribe" as used herein shall include the Parties' governmental entities, departments and
officials unless otherwise stated.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Tribe is afederally-recognized Indian Tribe located on federal Trust
Lands which are located within the geographic boundaries of Riverside County (the "County")
and abut or are near City boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the Tribe has inhabited the Temecula Valley for more than 10,000 years (or
according to Tribal history and culture, since time immemorial); and
WHEREAS, the Pechanga Indian Reservation was established by Executive Order of the
President of the United States on June 27, 1882, affirming the Tribe's sovereignty and land -base;
and
WHEREAS, under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq.
("IGRA"), the Tribe may engage in gaming as a means of promoting Tribal economic
development, self-sufficiency and strong Tribal government; and
WHEREAS, IGRA generally requires that Class III gaming be conducted pursuant to a
Tribal -State Class III gaming compact; and
WHEREAS, on or about September 10, 1999, and effective in May, 2000, the Tribe
entered into a gaming compact with the State of California, as contemplated under IGRA, which
compact was amended effective March, 2008, and which compact and amendment is referred to
herein as the "Compact;" and
WHEREAS, the Tribe desires to operate Tribal economic development projects in a
manner that benefits the Tribe, its members, and the community as a whole, and the City
recognizes the mutual benefit that can be derived if those goals are achieved; and
WHEREAS, the Tribe determined that a casino featuring Class II and Class III gaming
activities, as authorized under IGRA and, with respect to Class III activities, the Compact, and a
hotel and related parking, common areas and amenities (the "Gaming Center" as more
specifically defined in Section 2.8) would be a way in which to generate independent Tribal
resources to provide for the health, education, employment, government, general welfare, safety,
and cultural needs of the Tribe and, accordingly, the Tribe has successfully developed and now
operates and maintains the Gaming Center, which consists of an approximately 200,000 square
foot casino, which includes seven restaurants and related amenities; a thirteen story 522 -room
hotel; three parking structures plus surface parking that in total can accommodate at least 8,567
cars, recreation vehicles (RVs), buses; administrative, regulatory, maintenance and service
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
structures; and common areas related thereto. The Gaming Center has provided over 5,000 jobs
to the Tribe and the community as a whole and has enabled the Tribe to assist the City in
obtaining approximately $6 million for the much needed bridge improvements on Pechanga
Parkway over Temecula Creek, has provided $8 million of its own money toward off -reservation
road improvements and, over the last alone, has contributed over $ to local
charities; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the Gaming Center, which has become a major tourist
attraction and brings millions of dollars into the local community, the Tribe has successfully
developed on its lands other economic development or governmental projects that service the
Tribe and the community, including a convenience store, golf course, cultural center, museum,
gas station, car wash and RV park; and
WHEREAS, the Tribe enacted an off -reservation environmental impact ordinance
pursuant to the Compact to address any such off -reservation impacts from the Gaming Center
and the possible mitigation of their effects, which ordinance makes a good faith effort to
incorporate the policies and purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
and the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"); and
WHEREAS, the Compact requires that for future "Projects" as defined in the Compact
the Tribe must engage in certain specified environmental review processes and further provides
for the Tribe and any impacted city and county to enter into enforceable written
"Intergovernmental Agreements" for mitigation of Off -Reservation Environmental Impacts,
public safety services, and other specified programs; and
WHEREAS, the Parties recognize that this Agreement therefore is an important and
mutually beneficial means for furthering the government -to -government relationship between the
Parties and in building trust, mutual respect, good will and cooperation for the benefit of the
entire community. Further, this Agreement is intended to provide the Tribe and City with greater
certainty concerning future planning and development activities. Accordingly, this not only
addresses the current Gaming Center, but anticipates how issues that might arise in the future
regarding its further development will be guided, and serves as the Intergovernmental Agreement
provided for in the Compact so as to ensure cooperation and understanding between the Parties
for generations to come.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
SECTION 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
1.1. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth certain agreements of the parties that
are intended to:
a. Assure the implementation of measures for mitigating the Off -Reservation
impacts of the Gaming Center, as set forth in this Agreement;
2
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
b. Establish a mutually agreeable process to identify and mitigate potential
Off -Reservation environmental impacts of future Gaming Center development, including a
process that meets or exceeds the processes required under the Compact;
C. Create a process to resolve future disputes that may arise between the City
and the Tribe under the Compact and this Agreement;
d. Create a framework for continuing to build and maintain a mutually
beneficial government -to -government relationship between the Tribe and the City; and
e. Identify ways for the Tribe and the City to work together to provide
services and benefits to the Tribal community and the residents of the City of Temecula.
Provide certainty with respect to future planning and development
activities.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall be defined in this Agreement as set
forth in this Section:
2.1. "Agreement' means this agreement, which shall be deemed to be the
Intergovernmental Agreement between the Parties as required under Section 10.8.8 of the
Compact.
2.2. "Anniversary Date" means the date defined as such in Section 3.4 below.
2.3. "Baseline Traffic Study" mean the traffic study defined as such in Section 4.1 a.
2.4. "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.
2.5. "City" means the City of Temecula, an incorporated California city that is located
within the boundaries of the County.
2.6. "Compact' means the Tribal -State Compact between the State of California and
the Tribe entered into on or about September 10, 1999, and effective in May, 2000, and amended
effective March, 2008.
2 7 "County" means Riverside County, California.
2.8. "Effective Date" means the date this Agreement is executed by both Parties and
so designated above in the introduction to this Agreement.
2.9. "Exempt Project' means any activity which, although initially defined as a
"Project" herein or in the Compact, would be exempt under CEQA.
2.10. "Expansion" shall mean any increase in the number of Gaming Devices within the
existing footprint of the Gaming Center beyond five thousand (5,000), or any increase exceeding
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
ten percent (10 %) or more of the existing footprint or height of the buildings or structures within
the Gaming Center, provided that alterations, renovations, maintenance, refurbishments,
improvements, changes in configurations or uses, construction, or reconstruction, within the
footprint or height of the Gaming Center, or improvements to the spa, Porte cochere, surface
parking, walkways, pool and common areas that serve or are within the Gaming Center, shall not
be deemed to be an Expansion.
2.11. [This section intentionally omitted.]
2.12. "Gaming Center" means the present gaming facility and hotel located on the
Reservation and consisting of approximately two hundred thousand (200,000 square feet of
gaming space plus back of the house and administrative offices and facilities that can
accommodate various gaming and casino activities, including up to five thousand (5,000)
Gaming Devices, employee rooms, offices and related space; a thirteen story hotel with five
hundred twenty-two (522) guest rooms and supporting kitchens, offices, retail, housekeeping,
telecommunications and other utility facilities; maintenance and storage spaces; convention,
ballroom, classroom and meeting spaces; restaurants, bars, food courts, night clubs, retail spaces,
lounges, regulatory, public safety, surveillance and guest services amenities and facilities; a one
thousand two hundred (1200) seat theater; swimming and Jacuzzi pools, Porte cocheres, and spa
facilities and related areas located outside the hotel; surface parking and three parking structures
for buses, trucks, SUVs and similar vehicles and automobiles, that can accommodate
approximately eight thousand six hundred (8600) vehicles; and related common areas, roadways,
sidewalks, storage and administrative facilities; all of which primarily serve the Gaming Center.
2.13. "Gaming Device" means a Gaming Device as defined in Section 2.6 of the
Compact.
2.14. "IGRA" means the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2701 et sec.
2.15. "Mitigation Fee" means the fee or fees referred to as such in Section 3.4 below,
and is intended to provide further and final mitigation with respect to the Gaming Center (i) in
accordance with subsection 3.4.a. so long as there has been no Expansion, and (ii) in accordance
with Subsection 3.4.b. if there has been an Expansion.
2.16. "Original Compact" means the compact between the State of California and the
Tribe executed in 1999 (and effective in 2000), and similar to compacts entered into between the
State and approximately 57 other tribes at the time.
2.17. "Reservation" means those lands held intrust by the federal government for the
benefit of the Tribe, including but not limited to the lands on which the Gaming Center is
located.
2.18. "Project" means an activity defined as a "Project" in Section 10.8.7 of the
Compact and shall not include an Exempt Project.
2.19. "SDF Payment" means monies received by the City from the State Distribution
Fund ("SDF") that was created under State law pursuant to the Original Compact and into which
the Tribe made contributions prior to the Compact's amendment in 2008. Although payments by
4
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
the Tribe to the State under the amended Compact are not required to be allocated to the SDF,
those payments to the State are far in excess of what the Tribe was paying to the State for the
SDF under the Original Compact, and the State may continue to appropriate some of such money
to the SDF or similar uses that benefit the City. In addition, the State has some funds remaining
in the original SDF that have not yet been paid to the City. Any payment received by the City
from or through the State related to Indian gaming revenues therefore shall be included within
the term "SDF Payment."
2.20. "Significant Effect on the Environment' shall be as defined in Section 10.8.7 (b)
of the Compact as a Significant Effect on the Off -Reservation Environment.
2.21. "Tribal Environmental Impact Report" or "TEIR" is the report described in, and
subject to, Section 10.8.1 of the Compact.
2.22. "Tribe" means the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, a federally recognized
Indian tribe.
2.23. "Term" means the period from the Effective Date through December 31, 2030 as
further described in Section 13.8 of this Agreement.
2.24. Capitalized words not otherwise specifically defined in this Agreement shall have
the definitions of such words as may be set forth in the Compact.
SECTION 3. GAMING CENTER MITIGATION MEASURES.
3.1. Review of Existing Gaming Center Environmental Reports.
a. Prior to the construction of the facilities for the Gaming Center, the Tribe
conducted and completed an environmental study and process under the Original Compact,
which included the adoption of mitigation measures designed to address the facilities anticipated
in the study. Commencing with the legislative approval of the Amended Compact in August
2006, and on a government -to -government voluntary basis, the Parties have met periodically to
review the off -reservation impacts of the Gaming Center.
b. The Parties acknowledge that the establishment of the Gaming Center may
create off -reservation impacts, including but not limited to the generation of vehicle traffic and
traffic -related events, law enforcement services, fire and emergency medical services, noise and
light and related factors, and other effects. The parties also acknowledge that the Gaming Center
has provided substantial benefits to the Tribal, City and surrounding communities, including
increased employment, an important market for local vendors, and an attraction for patrons,
tourists and revenues from out of the area.
3.2. Intergovernmental Agreement.
3.3. The Parties recognize that both the positive and negative effects of the Gaming
Center on the interests of the Parties may be difficult to quantify, but in the government -to -
government spirit that underlies this Agreement, and in order to address any off -reservation
effects of the Gaming Center and resolve differences of opinions between the Tribe and City as
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
to the extent and materiality of any such effects, the Parties have agreed to add certain mitigation
measures that take all of those positive and negative effects into account. The mitigation
measures embodied in this Agreement, including but not limited to the Mitigation Fee, and this
Agreement itself, are intended to constitute the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Tribe
and the City to the extent required under Section 10.8.8 of the Compact with respect to the
Gaming Center.
a. The Tribe and the City agree that any Significant Effects on the
Environment from the Gaming Center will be adequately mitigated by the Tribe as required by
the Compact through its mitigation efforts completed prior to the adoption of this Agreement and
through the Mitigation Fee provided in Section 3.4 of this Agreement.
b. The Tribe and the City agree that this Agreement provides a fair process
for determining whether any Expansion will have a Significant Effect on the Environment and, if
so, the measures, if any, that will be required to adequately mitigated those effects as required by
the Compact.
3.4. Mitigation Fees.
a. The Tribe shall pay Mitigation Fees to the City on an annual basis during
the Term in the following amounts, each of which shall be subject to the credit for SDF
Payments described in Section 3.4.a.iii:
i. On or before June 30, 2010 (June 30 of each year shall be known
as the "Anniversary Date"), the sum of Two Million dollars ($2,000,000).
ii. For each succeeding year, the following amounts:
A. The sum of Two Million dollars ($2,000,000) on or before
the second, third, fourth and fifth Anniversary Dates;
B. On or before the sixth Anniversary Date, the sum of Two
Million dollars ($2,000,000) adjusted upward or downward
in accordance with the direction and percentage of change
from the prior year in the annual Consumer Price Index for
the metropolitan area closest to the City of Temecula last
published prior to the date such payment is due ("CPP'), by
multiplying such percentage change in the CPI by
$2,000,000 and adding or subtracting such amount, as the
direction of the change may dictate, and
C. On or before each Anniversary Date thereafter during the
Term, the amount due with respect to the last Anniversary
Date, adjusted upward or downward in accordance with the
direction and percentage of change from the prior year in
the CPI, by multiplying such percentage change in the CPI
by the amount of such prior amount due and adding or
6
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
subtracting such amount, as the direction of the change may
dictate; and
D. A last and final Mitigation Fee payment under this
Agreement, which shall be paid on or before the
Anniversary Date that falls within the year 2030, adjusted
as in the preceding subparagraph C.
iii. Each total of $2 million due annually under subsection i. or ii. shall
be reduced by the amount of any SDF Payments received by the City in the same
year such Mitigation Fee payment is due (or if received after payment of the
Mitigation Fee in that year, shall so reduce the following year's payment), except
that any SDF Payment received by the City after the last and final Mitigation Fee
payment was received by it shall be refunded to the Tribe on or before the next
June 30th.
iv. In addition to the Mitigation Fee payments set forth in subsections
i through iii above, on or before the fifth Anniversary Date, the Tribe shall pay to
the City a Mitigation Fee in the amount of Ten Million dollars ($10,000,000).
Such Mitigation Fee shall be reduced by the amount of any federal or state grant
or other funding (including but not limited to a grant or funding with respect to
improvements related to any I-15/SR-79 interchange) received by or committed to
the City or for the City's benefit during that or the following year through the
efforts in whole or in part of the Tribe. Funding or grants under such
circumstances may be in installments, as such State or federal grant or funding
shall be authorized, provided that if it is finally determined in good faith that such
funding, although in process will not in fact occur, such Mitigation Fee (or such
portion thereof as will not be funded) shall be paid by the Tribe on or before June
30ffi following such final determination. The Mitigation Fee in this subsection iv
shall not be subject to a CPI adjustment.
b. The foregoing Mitigation Fees shall be deemed to be mitigation provided
in connection with any Expansion during the Term, provided that within sixty (60) days
following the issuance of a Final TEIR in connection with an Expansion, either Party may
request to reopen this Section 3.4 for the limited purpose of negotiating and reaching agreement
with the other party in good faith as to: (1) whether these Mitigation Fees are adequate to
mitigate the identified off -reservation impacts of the proposed Expansion; (2) determine whether
additional mitigation measures are needed to mitigate the identified off -reservation impacts of
the proposed expansion; and (3) reasonably adjust the future Mitigation Fees remaining during
the Term or add additional mitigation measures, in accordance with this agreement, in order to
mitigate the proposed Expansion. Any failure to reach agreement following such good faith
negotiations shall be subject to the arbitration provisions set forth in Section 9.
3.5. Law Enforcement Services Generally. Both the City and the County rely on the
services of the Riverside County Sheriffs Department ("Sheriffs Department") to meet the law
enforcement needs that arise within their respective jurisdictions, including the Public Law 280
duties of the County and State with respect to the Tribe, the reservation and the Gaming Center.
7
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
In addition, the Tribe has its own force of public safety and security officers that are assigned to
the Reservation and the Gaming Center. There is a good working relationship between and
among the Tribe, the City, the County and the Sheriffs Department with respect to meeting law
enforcement needs that arise on or in connection with activities at the Gaming Center and on the
reservation.
a. The Parties have determined that the Mitigation Fees agreed to in Section
3.4 above are sufficient to ensure that the City and County law enforcement needs that are
directly related to the Gaming Center can be adequately met, subject to any adjustment up or
down per Section 3.4. The City, through contractual agreements with the County, provides law
enforcement to the areas surrounding the Gaming Center. Concurrently with the approval of this
Agreement, the Tribe, City, County of Riverside and the Sheriff of Riverside County have
entered into that certain "Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Law Enforcement
Services at Pechanga Casino," a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A (the Law
Enforcement MOU" ). The Law Enforcement MOU provides that the City will ensure that the
cost of law enforcement directly or indirectly related to the Gaming Center will be met, and
agrees to apply sufficient funds from the Mitigation Fees and SDF Credits to meet such needs.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the specific allocation of such Mitigation Fees for such purposes
shall be at the discretion of the City (except as the SDF Credits may be controlled by law).
b. The assignment of law enforcement officers to the extent necessary to
make arrests under State law and fulfill PL 280 functions with respect to the Gaming Center or
the reservation (except in emergencies) shall be made in cooperation and through ongoing
dialogue between Tribal and City/County law enforcement. Nothing in this Agreement or any
other contract with the City or the Sheriff is intended or shall be construed to expand or limit the
jurisdiction of the City, the County or the Sheriff beyond that which would be exercised pursuant
to Public Law 280. Nothing in this Agreement or other contract with the County or Sheriff is
intended, or shall be construed, to expand or limit the jurisdiction of any Tribal law enforcement
agency beyond that which would be exercised pursuant to applicable law.
3.6. Fire And Emergency Services.
a. The Parties acknowledge that the Tribe's development, construction,
operation and maintenance of the Gaming Center require fire protection and emergency response
services. Much of that need is fulfilled by the construction and operation of the Tribe's own fire
department on the Reservation. Nevertheless, from time to time the fire protection and
emergency response services available from the Tribe's own departments may require
supplemental services from the County.
b. The Tribe and the City shall cooperate on a government -to -government
basis to promote public safety and to provide the Tribe with such mutual aid and automatic aid
for supplemental fire and emergency services, on a cooperative basis, as is offered to
neighboring cities and unincorporated County areas. At present, a mutual aid agreement exists
between the Tribe and the appropriate agencies concerning fire and emergency services. If
necessary, the parties agree to diligently and in good faith negotiate a more detailed mutual aid
and automatic aid agreement, similar in its terms to those between the Tribe and other
jurisdictions, to further implement the intent of this Section that the City and the Tribe cooperate
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
in providing effective and efficient fire and emergency services to the Gaming Center and the
surrounding community.
C. The Tribe has in place an emergency preparedness plan that addresses
evacuation and access issues. The City and Tribe shall consult and coordinate services to
further develop the plan and to prepare to respond to any emergency at the Gaming Center.
d. The Tribe shall consult with the City, and the City shall cooperate with the
Tribe, regarding the use, storage, disposal, and transportation on roads within the City of any and
all hazardous materials to be used by the Gaming Center. Nothing in this Agreement shall
expand the City's jurisdiction regarding regulation of hazardous materials.
3.7. Regular Meetings of the Parties. In an effort to maintain and promote good
government to government relations between the Tribe and the City, the parties' designated
representatives shall meet on a regular basis every six (6) months to discuss issues of mutual
interest.
SECTION 4. FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND MEASURES
4.1. Traffic Studies. In addition to the promises and covenants otherwise contained in
this Agreement, the Parties acknowledge that it is uncertain whether an Expansion of the Gaming
Center will create Off -Reservation impacts on the City. In particular, the Parties recognize and
acknowledge that an Expansion, depending on its nature and extent, could create certain
increased demand and resulting costs for public services to be provided by the City and increased
traffic in the area of the Gaming Center and roads leading to Interstate 15. Additionally, the
Parties acknowledge and recognize that given the improvements made to the area of the Gaming
Center by the Tribe and City through this Agreement, through any Expansion, or otherwise, the
updated Baseline Traffic Studies provided in this section and the TEIR might conclude that an
Expansion may not require additional mitigation measures to mitigate its off -reservation impacts.
The City has further identified the Temecula Parkway/Interstate 15 Interchange as a possible
interchange improvement in the area and the parties agree that such an improvement will need to
be carefully reviewed. Because any potential increase in traffic is a measurable method of
determining an Expansion's Off -Reservation impacts, the Parties have agreed that in the event of
an Expansion, it is necessary to provide for a method acceptable to the parties to measure the
relative increase of traffic attributable to the Expansion of the Gaming Center. Accordingly, in
the event of an Expansion, the parties agree to proceed in good faith to mitigate resulting Off -
Reservation created by an Expansion as follows:
a. Baseline Traffic Study. Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date, the
Tribe and the City shall meet and confer on a traffic study that is mutually acceptable, including
giving good faith consideration as a preference to the possible use of traffic studies that have
already been conducted by the Tribe, but if the parties cannot agree, to determine the most
feasible and economic way to jointly conduct a traffic study, paid for in equal shares by the
Parties. The traffic study agreed upon (the "Baseline Traffic Study") shall serve as a baseline to
objectively measure the actual current traffic conditions resulting from the Gaming Center
separately from all other users of the key roadways and intersections.
9
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
b. The parties agree to meet in good faith to review and approve the use of
the data set collected in June 2008 by the Tribe for the Baseline Traffic Study and neither party
shall unreasonably reject the use of the June 2008 data.
C. The Baseline Traffic Study shall measure and identify the total traffic
along Pechanga Parkway between Temecula Parkway (SR 79) and Pechanga Road and at the
Gaming Center driveways on a daily basis (ADT's) and at the key intersections along Pechanga
Parkway during the AM, PM, evening peak hours on a typical weekday and a typical Saturday.
d. No other traffic studies shall be referred to or used under this Agreement,
until and unless an Expansion is undertaken in accordance with the TEIR process in the
Amended Compact, or at or after the fifth Anniversary Date, whichever first occurs, but only if
one of the Parties can demonstrate an increase or decrease of ten percent (10%) or more from the
Baseline Traffic Study's weekday evening peak hour ADTs attributable to the Gaming Center.
To demonstrate an increase, a Party must submit prima facie documentation complying with
industry standards for measurement of off -reservation traffic impacts, such as a traffic mitigation
study or some similar type of traffic count study. Any submissions of prima facie documents for
an additional traffic study must be submitted to the other party within 60 days of the fifth
Anniversary Date or the issuance of the final TEIR, depending on whether the event used to
justify the timing for considering an update is the fifth Anniversary Date or an Expansion.
e. If the prima facie documentation shows a substantial increase or decrease
in traffic attributable to the Gaming Center from that set forth in the Baseline Traffic Study, then
the Parties agree to conduct a traffic study for the purpose of comparing the data to the Baseline
Study in order to objectively measure the actual off -reservation traffic impacts attributable to the
Expansion and to update the Baseline Traffic Study.
f The parties agree to utilize the measurements in an updated Baseline
Traffic Study for the purposes of determining whether any additional mitigation fees are
reasonably necessary with respect to the increased off -reservation traffic impacts from the
Expansion or the Gaming Center.
g. The additional mitigation fees, if any, shall not exceed an amount that is
(1) necessary to mitigate off -reservation traffic impacts related to the Expansion as identified in
the updated Baseline Traffic Study and TEIR and (2) proportional to the traffic generated by the
Gaming Center and Expansion when compared to the traffic in the area analyzed in the Baseline
Traffic Studies that is generated from sources other than the Gaming Center. The additional
mitigation fees for off -reservation traffic impacts shall be consistent with mitigation
requirements imposed on developers of projects within the City to the extent they are based on
the actual generation of a comparable increase in traffic over that set forth in the Baseline Traffic
Study. While the Tribe acknowledges and recognizes that such comparisons can be difficult
because the development agreement process of Government Code Section 65864 authorizes the
City to require mitigation that may exceed a developer's proportional share of traffic generation,
the parties agree to cooperate in determining what the actual fees would be if they were lowered
to reflect a developer's actual proportional share of traffic generation.
10
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
4.2. TEIR. In the event that an Expansion is undertaken, the Tribe shall prepare a
TEIR pursuant to Section 10.8.1 of the Compact and shall follow the processes required in
Sections 10.8.2, 10.8.3, 10.8.4 and 10.8.5. The Tribe shall notify the City of the filing of the
Notice of Preparation of the Draft TEIR and provide the City with a copy of the Notice of
Preparation at the time the Notice of Preparation is filed with the State Clearinghouse in the State
Department of Planning and Research ("State Clearinghouse"). The Tribe shall notify the City
of the filing of the Notice of Completion of the TEIR and provide the City with a copy of the
TEIR at the time the Notice of Completion is filed with the State Clearinghouse. The Tribe shall
maintain an administrative record of the TEIR process, the documents cited in the TEIR, the
comments received on the TEIR during the public comment periods, and such other studies and
documents relied on in the preparation of the TEIR and the Final TEIR so as to provide an
adequate basis for the resolution of any disputes pursuant to Sections 7, 8 and 9 of this
Agreement.
4.3. Existing Off -Reservation Impacts. The Parties agree that any existing off -
reservation environmental impacts from the Gaming Center, including future additional traffic
impacts from the Gaming Center, but not an Expansion, will not be the subject of any additional
Mitigation Fee or mitigation plan, including any mitigation plan under the TEIR process in the
Amended Compact, except as set forth in this Agreement.
4.4. Meet and Confer Requirements Regarding the TEIR and Intergovernmental
Agreement.
a. Not later than fifteen (15) days following the filing of the Notice of
Completion of the Draft TEIR with the State Clearinghouse, the Parties shall commence diligent
and good faith negotiations, to discuss and reach agreement on the contents of the Draft TEIR,
the primary objective of which is to provide for the timely mitigation of Significant Adverse
Impacts, where such off -reservation impacts:
Are primarily attributable to the Expansion being proposed;
ii. Occur outside of the geographic boundaries of the Tribe's existing
or proposed Trust Lands and within the geographic boundaries of the City; and;
iii. Are within the jurisdiction or responsibility of the City.
b. Not later than fifteen (15) days after the filing of the Notice of Preparation
with the State Clearinghouse, the Parties shall commence diligent and good faith negotiations, to
discuss and reach agreement on an amendment to this Intergovernmental Agreement to
implement additional mitigations measures, modified mitigation measures described in this
Agreement or a combination of both, to the extent the parties agree that such measures are
reasonably required to address the environmental impacts described in the TEIR or the
comments thereto.
4.5. Binding Arbitration. If the Parties, after meeting and conferring consistent with
Section c. above, have not approved, executed and delivered an Amended Intergovernmental
Agreement for the Expansion, within fifty-five (55) days after the date of the publication of the
Final TEIR, or such other date as the Parties may mutually agree in writing, either party may
11
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
initiate the binding arbitration dispute resolution processes contained in Section 8 of this
Agreement and 10. 8.9 of the Compact. The Parties may extend this time by mutual written
agreement.
SECTION 5. EFFECT OF FEDERAL LAWS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS.
5.1. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, the Parties acknowledge that the
Tribe is subject to federal laws and regulations regarding the environment and health and safety,
including but not limited to the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Endangered Species
Act, Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, and Occupational Safety and Health Act, and permit
conditions including but not limited to conditions in any NPDES permits. Except as provided
below, the Parties agree that the matters regulated by these laws, regulations, and permits shall
be matters that are between the Tribe and the federal agency having jurisdiction over such
statutes, regulations, and permits, and a violation of such statutes, regulations, and permits shall
not be considered in conflict with this Agreement or a required part of it. Consistent with the
above, the City shall retain whatever rights it may have with respect to participation in the
matters regulated by these laws, regulations, and permits, including without limitation, the rights
to take such administrative or legal actions as may be necessary to protect is rights in accordance
with the statutes and regulations applicable to the federal agency conducting the proceedings,
shall be deemed to have waived any right it might otherwise have under this Agreement to
compel arbitration or meet the City's concerns about that aspect of the Project under this
Agreement.
5.2. Any dispute or disagreement the City has with a federal process or its outcome
thus shall only be subject to the remedies available in such process and not through the dispute
resolution or other provisions of this Agreement.
5.3. Nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the Parties' respective rights to
reach agreement on a voluntary basis with each other over such matters outside such federal
process, subject to applicable law and the sole discretion of each party as to whether or not to
negotiate or agree on such matters outside the context of the federal process itself.
SECTION 6. CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
6.1. To the extent authorized by the California Public Records Act (Government Code
Section 6250 et seq.), and subject to all provisions of such Act, the Parties agree that proprietary
and confidential operational and financial information concerning the Gaming Center shall be
deemed confidential and shall not be shared with any third party. The Parties acknowledge and
agree that such proprietary information includes found documents obtained, observations made,
or conclusions drawn directly or indirectly under this Agreement concerning the proprietary
operation or financial information concerning the Gaming Center including without limitation,
where the source or information comes from, inspection reports, plan reviews, and all
documents related to examinations of financial information, negotiations, consultations, disputes
or other activities under this Agreement.
12
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
6.2. Prior to providing such information to the City, or permitting City access to such
information, but without implying that providing such access or information is necessarily
required, the Tribe shall notify the City in writing that such information is confidential or
proprietary.
6.3. The City shall promptly provide the Tribe notice of any Public Records Act
request related to this Agreement and shall afford the Tribe, within the time limits allowed under
the Act, an opportunity to seek an injunction by the Court against any such disclosure.
SECTION 7. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
7.1. Meet and Confer Process
a. In recognition of the government -to -government relationship between the
Tribe and City, the Parties shall make their best efforts to resolve disputes that occur under this
Agreement by good faith negotiations whenever possible. Therefore, the Parties hereby establish
a threshold requirement that disputes arising under this Agreement shall first be subject to a good
faith meet and confer procedure to give the Parties an opportunity to work together to solve
identified issues.
b. Disputes arising between the Parties regarding a party's alleged failure to
meet its obligations imposed by this Agreement, including a refusal to meet and confer, shall be
addressed through the following process:
C. The Parties may meet and confer informally to discuss their concerns.
This stage may include an informal exchange of views among Tribal and City personnel and may
remain confidential in accordance with applicable law.
d. A party desirous of invoking the meet and confer provisions of this
Agreement shall provide written notice to the other party, identifying with specificity the alleged
issue or issues and the actions requested to resolve the dispute. Within seven (7) business days
after receipt of the notice, the recipient shall provide a written response agreeing or disagreeing
with the complaint. If the party agrees it will set forth detailed steps to address the alleged
breach of the Agreement. If the Parties disagree, they shall proceed in accordance with the next
subsection.
e. The Parties shall formally meet and confer in good faith within ten (10)
business days of receipt of such notice, or at such other time as the Parties may agree in writing,
to attempt to resolve the dispute. If both Parties agree, a mediator may be used to help resolve
the dispute at this stage. The Parties and mediator, if any, shall ensure that any disputed issues
are clearly and directly communicated according to any agreed upon process and timeline.
Multiple meetings under this step may be reasonably required depending upon the nature of the
dispute, provided that the meet and confer process shall be completed within thirty (30) days of
formal initiation unless extended in writing by mutual agreement of the Parties. Failure to
substantially comply with the procedures and timelines contained in this Section with respect to
an Expansion shall entitle the complaining party to proceed directly to arbitration.
13
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
f To the extent allowed by law, such writings as may be prepared and
transmitted between the Parties pursuant to this subsection 8.1 shall be confidential.
SECTION 8. BINDING ARBITRATION PROCEDURE
8.1. Subject to compliance with the meet and confer process stated above and the
limitations herein as to the scope of any order, either party may initiate binding arbitration to
resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement regarding the interpretation of any the
Agreement's provisions and/or rights and obligations of the Parties under the Agreement.
8.2. The arbitration shall be conducted by arbitrator(s) in accordance with the JAMS
Comprehensive Arbitration Rules & Procedures (the "Rules") then in effect at the time of the
initiation of arbitration. The arbitration shall take place in or near Temecula, including any
location on the Reservation, or at another location mutually agreed upon by the Parties. The
arbitrator shall be a retired federal or California superior court judge selected pursuant to the
following terms:
a. The arbitrator shall be from the list of prior approved arbitrators with
experience in matters concerning the California Environmental Quality Act.
b. In the event the Parties cannot agree upon an arbitrator, the Parties agree
that Rule 15 of the Rules shall govern the selection of the arbitrator.
C. Subject to the terms of this Section, the arbitrator shall have jurisdiction to
interpret and apply the terms of the Compact and this Agreement, but shall lack jurisdiction to
modify the Agreement or relieve a party of its obligations, or add to those obligations under the
Agreement, except in the event that material terms of this Agreement are determined to be void
or that the provisions of the Compact are in material conflict with the terms of this Agreement.
In the latter instance the arbitrator may order the Agreement modified to conform to the
Compact, with the least change necessary in order to maintain the relative positions of the Parties
at the time the Agreement was entered into.
d. This Agreement does not provide for, and the arbitrator shall not have
jurisdiction to order, remedies with respect to federal, state, or City laws, regulations, ordinances,
codes or other laws against the City, including its government entities, officials, members or
employees or its real property, and shall only consider or evaluate such laws and issue such
orders as expressly permitted under this Agreement.
e. In the event the dispute concerns the failure to prepare a TEIR or the
adequacy of a TEIR for an Expansion, the Arbitrator shall have the authority to order the Tribe to
comply with the requirements of this Agreement with respect to the TEIR, including, without
limitation, the revision and recirculation of the TEIR.
f In the event the dispute concerns the adequacy or extent of measures
necessary to mitigate Significant Effects on the Environment, the Arbitrator shall have the
authority to impose such mitigation measures as are described in the TEIR, the comments of the
City or other persons commenting on the TEIR, the Final FIR and such other mitigation
14
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
measures as are reasonably necessary and feasible to mitigate the Significant Effects on the
Environment, but in accordance with the limitations in this Agreement.
g. Except as provided above with respect to the impact of an Expansion,
arbitration orders and awards may not include monetary awards, and such monetary awards
related to an Expansion shall be limited to the amount the Arbitrator determines as necessary to
mitigate a Significant Effect on the Environment on the basis of the information contained in the
administrative record of the Tribe's proceedings to approve the TEIR and adopt mitigation
measures, and shall not exceed the limits in this Agreement.
h. Equitable relief shall be limited to compelling some actual performance
that is expressly described in this Agreement or preventing a party from failing to take such
action.
i. Any controversy regarding whether an issue is subject to arbitration shall
be determined by the arbitrator, but the arbitrator's jurisdiction shall be limited to ordering forms
of relief agreed to in this Agreement.
j. The Arbitrator shall render an award consistent with Rule 30 of the Rules.
The Parties agree to be bound by the provisions of Rule 17 of the Rules relating to informal and
formal discovery rights and obligations, subject to the agreement of the Parties or order of the
Arbitrator otherwise. In any event, any discovery conducted shall be subject to the
confidentiality provisions of this Agreement to the extent such provisions may be lawfully
enforced, and the Arbitrator shall make such orders as are necessary to enforce such provisions.
k. Following an arbitration order or award, either Party may appeal pursuant
to the JAMS Rules [re appeals of arbitration]. In the event appeal is sought, no order of the
arbitrator shall be considered to be final until the appeal is concluded, including any matters that
may be pending as to such order by a reviewing court under Section 9.
SECTION 9. JUDICIAL REVIEW AND ENFORCEMENT
9.1. The Parties agree that the prevailing party in any arbitration contemplated under
Section 8 hereof may seek to confirm and enforce any arbitration award that has become final by
filing a petition with any Superior Court in the State of California, pursuant to the provisions of
California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1285 et seq. In any arbitration or court action, each
party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees in any court action or arbitration proceeding
brought pursuant to this Agreement.
9.2. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude or restrict the ability of Parties to
voluntarily pursue, by mutual agreement, any other method of dispute resolution.
SECTION 10. NOTICES
10.1. Notices pursuant to this Agreement and service of process in any judicial or
arbitration proceeding is waived in favor of delivery of documents by (i) delivery by a reputable
document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt
15
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
showing date and time of delivery or (ii) by Certified Mail — Return Receipt Requested to the
following:
10.2. For the Tribe:
Tribal Chairperson
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
12705 Pechanga Road
Temecula, CA 92592
Tel: 951-676-2768
With a copy simultaneously delivered to:
Jerome L. Levine
Holland & Knight, LLP
633 W. 5th Street, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: 213 896 2565
10.3. For the City:
City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Tel: 951-694-6444
Office of Legal Counsel
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
12705 Pechanga Road
Temecula, CA 92592
Tel: 951-676-2768
With copy simultaneously delivered to:
Peter M. Thorson
Richards, Watson & Gershon
355 South Grand Ave., 40th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: 213-626-8484
10.4. Either Party may change the names and address to which notices and service of
process may be delivered by written notice to such persons as listed in the subsection or by
subsequent notice of changes.
SECTION 11. MUTUAL LIMITED WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
11.1. The Parties agree that the Parties' waiver of immunity from arbitration or suit, or
the enforcement of any order or judgment related thereto, is limited to the express provisions of
Sections 8 and 9 of this Agreement, and neither the agreement to arbitrate nor any other
provision of this Agreement shall be construed as creating any implied waiver of such immunity.
11.2. The Parties each expressly covenant and agree that they may each sue and be
sued, including the resolution of disputes in arbitration and the judicial enforcement thereof, as
16
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
provided in Sections 8 and 9 above, to resolve any controversy arising from this Agreement or to
enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this Agreement, as provided for in this
Agreement. The Parties, their officers and agents expressly agree to waive governmental
immunities, including sovereign immunity, in connection with any claims arising from this
Agreement, as provided for herein for the enforcement of any arbitration award, or judgment to
enforce such an award as a result of this Agreement. The Parties further consent to the
jurisdiction of an arbitrator and/or specified court under this Agreement including the consent to
be sued and bound by a lawful order or judgment, to the extent provided for herein. Each of the
Parties represent that its agreement to such dispute resolution processes and waivers has been
effectively and lawfully granted and that nothing further needs to be done to effectuate those
processes.
11.3. With respect to any action arising out of the Agreement for which there is a
waiver of sovereign immunity, the Tribe and City expressly consent to the jurisdiction of the
United States District Court for the Central District of California and, as limited herein to, the
Superior Court of the State of California for Riverside County and all related appellate courts,
and/or an arbitrator selected pursuant to this Agreement and specifically waive sovereign
immunity for that purpose. The Parties specifically agree that the applicable court shall have
jurisdiction to enter judgments enforcing rights and remedies provided for in this Agreement
which shall be binding and enforceable on the Parties, subject to the limitations set forth in this
Agreement. No party to this Agreement shall contest jurisdiction or venue of the above -
referenced courts, provided their jurisdiction and venue are invoked in the order specified, but
only for disputes or claims arising out of this Agreement. Neither the Tribe nor the City shall
plead or invoke the doctrine of exhaustion of Tribal or other administrative remedies, defenses of
immunity or indispensable Parties beyond those contemplated in this Agreement.
11.4. The City and the Tribe may not join or consent to the joinder of any third party to
any action (including but not limited to any arbitration) contemplated herein, unless failure to
join such party would deprive the court or arbitration tribunal of jurisdiction; provided that
nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to constitute a waiver of the sovereign immunity or
other protection from lawsuit (or other dispute resolution process), or the effect, orders or
judgments thereof, of either the Tribe or the City with respect to any claim of any kind by any
such third party. In the event of intervention by any third party into any such action without the
consent of the Tribe and the City, nothing herein shall be construed to constitute a waiver of any
immunity with respect to such third party, and no arbitrator or court shall have jurisdiction to
award any relief or issue any order as against the City or Tribe with respect to such third party in
that or any other proceeding.
SECTION 12. CEQA REVIEW
12.1. Pursuant to Government Code Section 12012.49, and in deference to tribal
sovereignty, the approval and execution of this Agreement by the Parties is not a project within
the meaning of CEQA because this Agreement has been negotiated pursuant to the express
authority of the Compact, and specifically Section 10. 8.8 of the Compact.
12.2. By approving, executing and performing this Agreement the City has not, and is
not, making any commitment to (a) issue a lease, permit, license, certificate or other entitlement
17
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
for use, or (b) develop, construct or improve any facilities or cause any other physical changes in
the environment.
12.3. This Agreement is intended to, and shall be construed, to be a government
payment and funding mechanism that does not commit the City to make any specific physical
changes in the environment.
12.4. Pursuant to Government Code Section 12012.49, if the City determines that it is
required to comply with CEQA with respect to any construction of any public improvements or
other projects subject to CEQA related to this Agreement, the City shall comply with CEQA at
such time, but other than as specifically authorized under this Agreement, such compliance shall
not in and of itself preclude or delay commencement or completion of the Project by the Tribe..
SECTION 13. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
13.1. No Authority Over Tribal Activities. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to
confer or expand the jurisdiction of any local, state or federal agency or other governmental
body, nor is this Agreement intended to infringe or otherwise usurp the authority of any
regulatory body including local, state, federal or Tribal agencies that may have jurisdiction over
or related to Tribal activities, development or Projects. Further, nothing in this Agreement shall
be construed to relieve the Tribe's obligation to comply with the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) as may be required as part of any trust application or any other Project requirement.
13.2. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is not intended to, and shall not be
construed to, create any right on the part of a third party including, without limitation, no rights
in any Interested Persons, nor does it create any private right of action for any third party nor
permit any third party to bring an action to enforce any of its terms.
13.3. Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by mutual and
written agreement of the Parties.
13.4. Final Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Intergovernmental
Agreement of the Parties as to the subject matter herein and supersedes any other agreements of
the Parties to the contrary except for the following agreements between the City and the Tribe:
(1) Pechanga Parkway signal maintenance agreements; and (2) fiber-optic right of way
agreements. The Agreement is intended both as the final expression of the agreement between
the Parties with respect to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the
terms of the Agreement consistent with California Code of Civil Procedure section 1856. No
modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until such modification is evidenced
by a writing approved and signed by the Parties.
13.5. Severability of Provisions. The invalidity of any provisions or portion of this
Agreement as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or any State or federal agency
having jurisdiction and thereof and the authority to do so, shall not affect the validity of any
other provisions of this Agreement or the remaining portions of the applicable provisions, unless
such provision is material to the reasonable expectation of the Parties. Without limiting the
foregoing, if any provision of the Agreement is declared invalid as aforesaid, then the Parties
shall use their best efforts to renegotiate the terms of the invalid provisions.
18
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
13.6. Force Majeure. The Parties shall not be liable for any failure to perform, or for
delay in performance of a party's obligations, and such performance shall be excused for the
period of the delay and the period of the performance shall be extended when a force majeure
event occurs; provided however that the party whose performance is prevented or delayed by
such event of force majeure shall give prompt written notice (i.e., within seventy-two (72) hours
of the event) of such event to the other party. For purposes of this Section, the term "force
majeure" shall include, without limitation, war, epidemic, rebellion, riot, civil disturbance,
earthquake, fire, flood, acts of governmental authorities(other than the City or Tribe), acts of
God, acts of terrorism (whether actual or threatened), acts of the public enemy and in general,
any other severe causes or conditions beyond the reasonable control of the Parties, the
consequences of which in each case, by exercise of due foresight such party could not reasonably
have been expected to avoid, and which by the exercise of due diligence it would not have been
able to overcome, when such an event prevents the Tribe from meeting its obligations under this
Agreement due to Gaming Activities ceasing operations for an extended period or prevents the
City from meeting its obligations under this Agreement due to an interruption of City
government operations. An interruption of performance, or the delayed occurrence of any event,
under this Agreement caused by an event of force majeure shall as far as practical be remedied
with all reasonable dispatch. During any period in which a party is excused from performance
by reason of the occurrence of an event of force majeure, the party so excused shall promptly,
diligently, and in good faith take all reasonable action required in order for it to be able to
commence or resume performance of its obligations under this Agreement.
13.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed according to applicable
federal and California substantive law to the extent not inconsistent with the express provisions
of this Agreement, unless federal law as to the Tribe or the City, or California law as to the City,
prohibits such Parties from abiding by such express provision, in which case the provision will
be deemed to be invalid and resolved, if possible, under the severability provisions in Section
13.5. Notwithstanding the foregoing, California rules of construction shall be applied in
interpreting this Agreement. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been drafted jointly by the
Parties and shall not be construed as having been drafted by, or construed against, one party
against another.
13.8. Term: Obligations to Continue. The term of this Agreement shall be from the
Effective Date until December 31, 2030, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the term of this
Agreement or extended by mutual agreement of the Parties. Unless specifically designated
otherwise, all of the Parties' obligations under this Agreement shall continue through the Term,
including any extensions thereof. Notwithstanding the end of the Term, any covenant, term or
provision of this Agreement which, in order to be effective, or is necessary to enforce an
unfulfilled material term of this Agreement or obligation that may continue beyond the end of
the Term shall survive termination.
13.9. Payments. Unless otherwise indicated, all payments made pursuant to this
Agreement shall be made payable to the City of Temecula on the schedule set out above.
13.10. Representations. By entering into this Agreement each signatory represents that,
as of the Effective Date, the undersigned has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf
of their respective governing bodies.
19
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
13.11. Duplicate Originals. At least two copies of this Agreement shall be signed and
exchanged by the Parties, each of which shall be considered an original document.
13.12. Approval. Each Party's execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement
shall be approved by resolution or motion duly adopted by each Party's respective governing
body, which resolution or motion shall provide that the Party shall not enact a law impairing the
rights and obligations under this Agreement.. The Parties intend that Intergovernmental
Agreements under the Compact, between the Tribe and the City and the Tribe and the County,
the latter of which will be the Law Enforcement MOU as described in Section 3.5, shall be
concluded in conjunction with one another. Because the Law Enforcement MOU is in the
process of being concluded between the Tribe, County, City and Sheriff of Riverside County,
and may not be finalized before this Agreement has been approved by its Parties, any resolution
or motion approving this Agreement may include a condition that this Agreement shall not be
deemed to be final or enforceable unless and until the Law Enforcement MOU has been formally
concluded.
13.13. Obligation on Related Entities. This Agreement binds the Parties and their
departments, affiliates, agents, representatives, successors, contractors, officials and related
entities, which such Agreement shall also be reflected in a resolution or certification of a motion
duly adopted by each Party's respective governing body approving the Agreement.
13.14. Authority/Authorization
a. The City and Tribe each represent and warrant that each has performed all
acts precedent to adoption of this Agreement, including but not limited to matters of procedure
and notice and each has the full power and authority to execute this Agreement and perform its
obligations in accordance with the above terms and conditions, and that the representative(s)
executing this Agreement on behalf of each party is duly authorized to so execute and deliver the
Agreement.
b. In evidence of the above, each governing body shall execute formal
resolutions or certifications indicating approval of this Agreement and these resolutions or
certifications are attached in Exhibits
20
Final Version 3/4/10 2:15 pm
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereby execute and enter into this Agreement with
the intent to be bound thereby through their authorized representatives whose signatures are
affixed below.
Dated:
Dated:
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
C
Mark Macarro, Tribal Chairperson
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
CITY OF TEMECULA
Jeff Comerchero
Mayor
Attest
Susan Jones
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
21
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING
LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AT PECHANGA
CASINO
This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is dated and effective as of
March 2010, by and between the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, a
federally recognized Indian tribe (the "Tribe"), the City of Temecula, California
(the "City"), the County of Riverside, California ("County") and the Sheriff of
Riverside County ("Sheriff'), which are referred to herein collectively as "the
Parties" and as to each as a "Party". The terms "Tribe," "City" "County" and
"Sheriff' as used herein shall include the Parties' governmental entities,
departments and officials unless otherwise stated.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Tribe is a federally -recognized Indian Tribe located on
federal Trust Lands which are located within the geographic boundaries of
Riverside County and abut or are near City boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the Tribe has inhabited the Temecula Valley for more than
10,000 years (or according to Tribal history and culture, since time immemorial);
and
WHEREAS, the Pechanga Indian Reservation was established by
Executive Order of the President of the United States on June 27, 1882, affirming
the Tribe's sovereignty and land -base (the "Reservation"); and
WHEREAS, under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2701,
et seq. ("IGRA"), the Tribe may engage in gaming as a means of promoting
Tribal economic development, self-sufficiency and strong Tribal government; and
WHEREAS, IGRA generally requires that Class III gaming be conducted
pursuant to a Tribal -State Class III gaming compact; and
WHEREAS, on or about September 10, 1999, and effective in May, 2000,
the Tribe entered into a gaming compact with the State of California, as
contemplated under IGRA, which compact was amended effective March, 2008,
and which compact and amendment is referred to herein as the "Compact;" and
WHEREAS, the Tribe desires to operate Tribal economic development
projects in a manner that benefits the Tribe, its members, and the community as a
whole, and the City recognizes the mutual benefit that can be derived if those
goals are achieved; and
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
WHEREAS, the Tribe determined that a casino gaming center featuring
Class II and Class III gaming activities, as authorized under IGRA and, with
respect to Class III activities, the Compact, and a hotel and related parking,
common areas and amenities would be a way in which to generate independent
Tribal resources to provide for the health, education, employment, government,
general welfare, safety, and cultural needs of the Tribe; and
WHEREAS, the term "Gaming Center" as used in this MOU shall have
the same definition as it does in Section of the Intergovernmental Agreement
which Section reads as follows:
"'Gaming Center' means the present gaming facility and hotel
located on the Reservation and consisting of approximately two
hundred thousand (200,000) square feet of gaming space plus back
of the house and administrative offices and facilities that can
accommodate various gaming and casino activities, including up to
five thousand (5,000) Gaming Devices, employee rooms, offices
and related space; a thirteen story hotel with five hundred twenty-
two (522) guest rooms and supporting kitchens, offices, retail,
housekeeping, telecommunications and other utility facilities;
maintenance and storage spaces; convention, ballroom, classroom
and meeting spaces; restaurants, bars, food courts, night clubs,
retail spaces, lounges, regulatory, public safety, surveillance and
guest services amenities and facilities; a one thousand two hundred
(1200) seat theater; swimming and Jacuzzi pools, Porte cocheres,
and spa facilities and related areas located outside the hotel;
surface parking and three parking structures for buses, trucks,
SUVs and similar vehicles, and automobiles that accommodate
approximately eight thousand six hundred (8600) vehicles; and
related common areas, roadways, sidewalks, storage and
administrative facilities that serve the Gaming Center."; and
WHEREAS, the Compact requires that for "Projects" as defined in the
Compact the Tribe must prepare a Tribal Environmental Impact Report and
further provides for the Tribe and any impacted city or county to enter into
enforceable written "Intergovernmental Agreements" for mitigation of Off -
Reservation Environmental Impacts, public safety services, and other specified
programs; and
WHEREAS, concurrently with the adoption of this MOU, the Tribe and
the City entered into that certain "Intergovernmental Agreement" dated as of
, 2008 pursuant to the Compact providing for the mitigation
of Off -Reservation Environment Impacts, including enhancement of law
enforcement services to the City and the Gaming Center; and
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Agreement provides for the City to
receive a Mitigation Fee from the Tribe which fee includes a component for the
funding of law enforcement services to the Gaming Center; and
WHEREAS, concurrently with the adoption of this MOU by the Parties,
the City and the County have amended that certain "Agreement for Law
Enforcement Services Between the City of Temecula and the County of
Riverside," effective as of July 1, 2005, as amended, ("City/County Law
Enforcement Agreement") to provide for the Riverside County Sheriffs
Department ("Sheriff' or "Sheriffs Department") to provide law enforcement
services to the Gaming Center; and
WHEREAS, in order to implement the provisions of the
Intergovernmental Agreement relating to law enforcement services, it is necessary
and convenient for the Parties to enter into this MOU for the purposes of (1)
confirm the law enforcement responsibilities of the Tribe and the Sheriff at the
Gaming Center; (2) establish the responsibility of the City to fixed the Sheriffs
law enforcement responsibility at the Gaming Center with the Mitigation Fee
received from the Tribe pursuant to the Intergovernmental Agreement; (3)
confirm and document the law enforcement protocols for the Sheriffs response to
calls for service at the Gaming Center; and (4) continue the government to
government cooperation of the Tribe, City, County and Sheriff in providing law
enforcement services to the Gaming Center and the southern areas of the City of
Temecula; and
WHEREAS, the Parties recognize that the Intergovernmental Agreement
and this MOU is an important and mutually beneficial means for furthering the
government -to -government relationship between the Parties and in building trust,
mutual respect, good will and cooperation for the benefit of the entire community.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Recitals set forth above
and incorporated herein, the Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FOR THE GAMING CENTER
A. Existing Law Enforcement Structure. The City contracts with the
County for law enforcement services to be provided with in the boundaries of the
City of Temecula by the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The County
relies on the Sheriffs Department to provide law enforcement services to the
unincorporated areas of Riverside County. Both the City by contract and the
County rely on the law enforcement services of the Sheriffs Department to meet
the law enforcement needs that arise under Public Law 280 with respect to the
Tribe, the Reservation and the Gaming Center. In addition, the Tribe has its own
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
force of public safety and security officers that are assigned to the Reservation
and the Gaming Center. There is a good working relationship between and
among the Tribe, the City, the County and the Sheriffs Department with respect
to meeting law enforcement needs that arise on or in connection with activities at
the Gaming Center and the Reservation that the Parties intend to maintain and
strengthen by this MOU.
B. Use of Mitigation Fees for Gaming Center Law Enforcement
Responses. The Parties have determined that the Mitigation Fees agreed to in
Section 3.3 of the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Tribe and the City
are sufficient to ensure that the law enforcement needs of the City that are directly
correlated to the Gaming Center can be adequately met. The Parties agree that it
would be a more efficient use of such funds and would provide better law
enforcement services to the Gaming Center to have the City fundthe Sheriffs
Department response to calls for law enforcement services at the Gaming Center
with deputies designated for service within the City than for the County to
provide such services with deputies designed for service in the unincorporated
County areas.
C. Assigned Deputy for Law Enforcement Responses to Gaming
Center. The City shall apply sufficient funds from the Mitigation Fee and take
such other actions as are necessary to provide for one Sheriffs deputy on each
shift to be specifically designated to patrol in the patrol zone of the City closest to
the Gaming Center and to be the deputy to respond to calls for law enforcement
services or assistance at the Gaming Center ("Assigned Deputy"). This
arrangement shall be subject to the following protocols:
1) The Assigned Deputy and other Sheriffs deputies shall not
engage in random self -initiated patrol activities at the Gaming Center or the
Reservation. The Assigned Deputy and other Sheriffs deputies shall only
respond to calls for law enforcement services or assistance at the Gaming Center
or the Reservation, provided that such deputies shall be authorized to engage in
such further law enforcement actions as are required for these calls for service,
such as active investigation and follow-up investigation of crimes reported to the
Sheriff or other law enforcement agencies, searches for suspects and similar
actions necessary for carrying out its law enforcement responsibilities with
respect to such calls for service.
2) Sheriffs personnel responding to calls for service at the
Gaming Center or the Reservation shall be subject to and shall follow the Sheriffs
Chain of Command and Sheriffs Policies. The Sheriff shall be responsible for the
command of deputies in responding to calls for service at the Gaming Center or
the Reservation.
3) The Assigned Deputy shall wear a "Riverside County
Sheriffs Department" uniform patch, rather than a "Temecula Police Department"
uniform patch.
4
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
4) The Assigned Deputy shall drive a marked patrol car
bearing the seal/logo of the Riverside County Sheriffs Department and not the
seal/logo of the City of Temecula or the Temecula Police Department.
5) In the event of an emergency response to the Gaming
Center or the Reservation requiring deputies other than the Assigned Deputy, the
Sheriff may dispatch additional deputies wearing the "Temecula Police
Department" uniform patch or vehicles with the seal/logo of the "City of
Temecula" or "Temecula Police Department."
D. Regular Meetings of the Parties for Law Enforcement.
Representatives of the Tribe, City, County and Sheriff shall meet on a regular
basis and not less than quarterly, to discuss issues of common law enforcement
interest to the Parties with respect to the Gaming Center as well as the
Reservation and work on a cooperative, good faith, government to government
basis to address such issues as may arise and to provide for coordination between
Tribal public safety officers and the Sheriffs Department. The Parties shall
negotiate in good faith to reach such additional protocols as may be desired
regarding coordination between Tribal public safety officers and the Sheriff with
respect to mailers occurring at the Gaming Center and the Reservation that might
involve Sheriffs deputies under applicable law.
E. City Responsible for Costs of Sheriffs Services to Gaming Center.
City shall be responsible for all payments to the County for services rendered by
the Sheriff to the Gaming Center. The Tribe shall not be liable for the direct
payment of any salaries, wages, or other compensation to any City or Sheriffs
personnel performing services for the City except as may be provided for the
reimbursement of special event services under separate contract.
F. Negotiation of Extra Law Enforcement Agreements. At the Tribe'e
request the Sheriff shall meet and confer with the Tribe for extra law enforcement
services to the Tribe for special events and functions, at rates and on terms
consistent with those established by the Sheriff for special events security.
G. Limited Scope of Law Enforcement Activities. Except as
otherwise provided herein, by separate agreement, or under law, the Sheriff
deputies assigned to the City shall not be expected to provide gaming security or
enforce Tribal laws, provided that nothing herein is intended to diminish, and in
fact is intended to reinforce, the apprehension, arrest and prosecution of anyone
engaged in criminal conduct, such as theft, embezzlement and fraud, or any other
criminal offense, that may occur within the City's jurisdiction or at the Gaming
Center
H. Scope of Public Law 280 Not Modified. Nothing in this
Agreement or any other contract between the City and the Sheriff is intended or
shall be construed to expand or limit the jurisdiction of the City, the County or the
Sheriff beyond that which would be exercised pursuant to Public Law 280.
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
Nothing in this Agreement or other contract with the County or Sheriff is
intended, or shall be construed, to expand or limit the jurisdiction of any Tribal
law enforcement agency beyond that which would be exercised pursuant to
applicable law.
L County Law Enforcement Mitigation Requirements Satisfied.
County acknowledges and agrees that by entering into this MOU, that the impacts
of the Gaming Center on the Sheriffs Department for the unincorporated areas of
the County surrounding the Gaming Center have been fully mitigated within the
meaning of Section 10.8 of the Compact. Therefore, the County agrees not to
request a separate Intergovernmental Agreement or Special Distribution Funds
under existing or future legislation to pay for impacts from the Gaming Center
affecting the Sheriffs Department, provided however, that the County shall not be
precluded from asserting any of its other rights under Section 10.8 of the Compact
for an expansion of the Gaming Center.
J. Termination of City Agreement with County for Law Enforcement
Services. In the event that City or County should ever terminate the City/County
Law Enforcement Agreement or said Agreement is allowed to expire, this MOU
shall terminate as of the date of termination or expiration of the City County Law
Enforcement Agreement. In such event, the Sheriff shall provide such law
enforcement services to the Gaming Center as are authorized by law.
2. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A. Meet and Confer Process
1) In recognition of the government -to -government
relationship between the Tribe, the City, and the County, the Parties shall make
their best efforts to resolve disputes that occur under this MOU by good faith
negotiations whenever possible. Therefore, the Parties hereby establish a
threshold requirement that disputes arising under this MOU shall first be subject
to a good faith meet and confer procedure to give the Parties an opportunity to
work together to solve identified issues.
2) Disputes arising between the Parties regarding a party's
alleged failure to meet its obligations imposed by this MOU, including a refusal to
meet and confer, shall be addressed through the following process:
a) The Parties may meet and confer informally to
discuss their concerns. This stage may include an informal exchange of
views among Tribal, City and County personnel and may remain
confidential in accordance with applicable law.
b) A party desirous of invoking the meet and confer
provisions of this MOU shall provide written notice to the other parties,
identifying with specificity the alleged issue or issues and the actions
requested to resolve the dispute. Within seven (7) business days after
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
receipt of the notice, the recipients shall provide a written response
agreeing or disagreeing with the complaint. If the parties agrees they will
set forth detailed steps to address the alleged breach of the MOU. If the
Parties disagree, they shall proceed in accordance with the next
subsection.
C) The Parties shall formally meet and confer in good
faith within ten (10) business days of receipt of such notice, or at such
other time as the Parties may agree in writing, to attempt to resolve the
dispute. If all Parties agree, a mediator may be used to help resolve the
dispute at this stage. The Parties and mediator, if any, shall ensure that
any disputed issues are clearly and directly communicated according to
any agreed upon process and timeline. Multiple meetings under this step
may be reasonably required depending upon the nature of the dispute,
provided that the meet and confer process shall be completed within thirty
(30) days of formal initiation unless extended in writing by mutual MOU
of the Parties. Failure to substantially comply with the procedures and
timelines contained in this Section with respect to an dispute shall entitle
the complaining party to proceed directly to arbitration.
d) To the extent allowed by law, such writings as may
be prepared and transmitted between the Parties pursuant to this
subsection shall be confidential.
B. Binding Arbitration Procedure
1) Subject to compliance with the meet and confer process
stated above and the limitations herein as to the scope of any order, a party may
initiate binding arbitration to resolve any dispute arising out of this MOU,
regarding the interpretation of any the MOU's provisions, and/or rights and
obligations of the Parties under the MOU.
2) The arbitration shall be conducted by arbitrator in
accordance with the JAMS Comprehensive Arbitration Rules & Procedures (the
"Rules") then in effect at the time of the initiation of arbitration. The arbitration
shall take place in or near Temecula, including any location on The Reservation,
or at another location mutually agreed upon by the Parties. The arbitrator shall be
a retired judge ("Arbitrator") selected pursuant to the following terms. In the
event the Parties cannot agree upon the Arbitrator, the Parties agree that Rule 15
of the Rules shall govern the selection of the Arbitrator. Subject to the terms of
this Section, the Arbitrator shall have jurisdiction to interpret and apply the terms
of the this MOU, but shall lack jurisdiction to modify the MOU or relieve a party
of its obligations, or add to those obligations under the MOU, except in the event
that material terms of this MOU are determined to be void or that the provisions
of the Compact are in material conflict with the terms of this MOU. In such an
instance the Arbitrator may order the MOU modified, terminated or rescinded to
maintain the relative positions of the Parties at the time the MOU was entered.
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
This MOU does not provide for, and the arbitrator shall not have jurisdiction to
order remedies with respect to federal, state, County, City or Tribal laws,
regulations, ordinances, codes or other laws against the Tribe, including its
government entities, officials, members or employees or its Trust Lands, and shall
only consider or evaluate such laws and issue such orders as expressly permitted
under this MOU. This MOU does not provide for, and the arbitrator shall not
have jurisdiction to order remedies with respect to federal, state, or City laws,
regulations, ordinances, codes or other laws against the City, including its
government entities, officials, members or employees or its real property.
3) Arbitration orders and awards may not include monetary
awards.
4) Equitable relief shall be limited to compelling some actual
performance that is expressly described in this MOU or preventing a party from
failing to take such action.
5) Any controversy regarding whether an issue is subject to
arbitration shall be determined by the Arbitrator, but the Arbitrator's jurisdiction
shall be limited to ordering forms of relief agreed to in this MOU.
6) In arbitrating disputes under this MOU, the Arbitrator shall
apply applicable law and the terms of the Compact.
7) The Arbitrator shall render an award consistent with Rule
30 of the Rules. The Parties agree to be bound by the provisions of Rule 17 of the
Rules relating to informal and formal discovery rights and obligations, subject to
the MOU of the Parties or order of the Arbitrator otherwise. In any event, any
discovery conducted shall be subject to the confidentiality provisions of this
MOU to the extent such provisions may be lawfully enforced, and the Arbitrator
shall make such orders as are necessary to enforce such provisions.
3. JUDICIAL REVIEW AND ENFORCEMENT
A. The Parties agree that the prevailing party in any arbitration
contemplated under this section may seek to confirm and enforce any arbitration
award by filing a petition with any Superior Court in the State of California,
pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1285 et
seq. However, the Parties expressly waive any rights under California Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1285 et seq. to correct or vacate any such award. In any
arbitration or court action, each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees
in any court action or arbitration proceeding brought pursuant to this MOU.
B. Nothing in this MOU shall preclude or restrict the ability of Parties
to voluntarily pursue, by mutual MOU, any other method of dispute resolution.
4. MUTUAL LIMITED WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
A. The Parties agree that the Parties' waiver of immunity from
arbitration or suit, or the enforcement of any order or judgment related thereto, is
limited to the express provisions of Section 3 of this MOU, and neither the MOU
to arbitrate nor any other provision of this MOU shall be construed as creating
any implied waiver of such immunity.
B. The Parties each expressly covenant and agree that they may each
sue and be sued, including the resolution of disputes in arbitration and the judicial
enforcement thereof, as provided in Section 3 of this MOU, to resolve any
controversy arising from this MOU or to enforce or interpret the terms and
conditions of this MOU, as provided for in this MOU. The Parties, their officers
and agents expressly agree to waive governmental immunities, including
sovereign immunity, in connection with any claims arising from this MOU, as
provided for herein for the enforcement of any arbitration award, or judgment to
enforce such an award, or enforcement of any easement created as a result of this
MOU. The Parties further consent to the jurisdiction of an arbitrator and/or
specified court under this MOU including the consent to be sued and bound by a
lawful order or judgment, to the extent provided for herein. Each of the Parties
represent that its MOU to such dispute resolution processes and waivers has been
effectively and lawfully granted and that nothing further needs to be done to
effectuate those processes.
C. With respect to any action arising out of the MOU for which there
is a waiver of sovereign immunity, the Tribe, City, County and Sheriff expressly
consent to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Central
District of California and, as limited herein to, the Superior Court of the State of
California for Riverside County and all related appellate courts, and/or an
arbitrator selected pursuant to this MOU and specifically waive sovereign
immunity for that purpose. The Parties specifically agree that the applicable court
shall have jurisdiction to enter judgments enforcing rights and remedies provided
for in this MOU which shall be binding and enforceable on the Parties, subject to
the limitations set forth in this MOU. No party to this MOU shall contest
jurisdiction or venue of the above -referenced courts, provided their jurisdiction
and venue are invoked in the order specified, but only for disputes or claims
arising out of this MOU. Neither the Tribe, City, County nor Sheriff shall plead
or invoke the doctrine of exhaustion of Tribal or other administrative remedies,
defenses of immunity or indispensable Parties beyond those contemplated in this
MOU.
D. The Tribe, City, County, or Sheriff may not join or consent to the
joinder of any third party to any action (including but not limited to any
arbitration) contemplated herein, unless failure to join such party would deprive
the court or arbitration tribunal of jurisdiction; provided that nothing in this MOU
shall be construed to constitute a waiver of the sovereign immunity or other
protection from lawsuit (or other dispute resolution process), or the effect, orders
or judgments thereof, of either the Tribe or the City with respect to any claim of
any kind by any such third party. In the event of intervention by any third party
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
into any such action without the consent of the Tribe, City, County or Sheriff
nothing herein shall be construed to constitute a waiver of any immunity with
respect to such third party, and no arbitrator or court shall have jurisdiction to
award any relief or issue any order as against the Tribe, City, County or Sheriff
with respect to such third party in that or any other proceeding.
5. INDEMNIFICATION
A. Indemnification by County. County shall indemnify and hold the
City and Tribe, their officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free
and harmless from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any
act or omission of County, its officers, agents, employees, volunteers
subcontractors, or independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or
death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature arising out of the
performance of this Agreement to the extent that such liability is imposed on the
City or Tribe or both, and County shall defend at its expense, including attorney
fees, the City or Tribe or both, its officers, agents and employees and independent
contractors in any legal action or claim of any kind based upon such alleged acts
or omissions. All immunities available to County as a government entity under
the laws of the State of California shall apply in performing the services under
this Agreement. As between the City and County, this indemnification obligation
shall also extend to any such liability imposed on the City by the provisions of
Government Code Section 895.2 or other applicable law.
B. Indemnification by City. City shall indemnify and hold the
County and Tribe, their officers, agents, employees and independent contractors
free and harmless from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon
any act or omission of City, its officers, agents, employees, volunteers
subcontractors, or independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or
death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature arising out of the
performance of this Agreement to the extent that such liability is imposed on the
County or Tribe or both, and City shall defend at its expense, including attorney
fees, the County or Tribe or both, its officers, agents and employees and
independent contractors in any legal action or claim of any kind based upon such
alleged acts or omissions. All immunities available to City as a government entity
under the laws of the State of California shall apply in performing the services
under this Agreement. As between the City and County, this indemnification
obligation shall also extend to any such liability imposed on the County by the
provisions of Government Code Section 895.2 or other applicable law.
C. Indemnification by Tribe. Tribe shall indemnify and hold the City
and County, their officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free
and harmless from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any
act or omission of Tribe, its officers, agents, employees, volunteers
subcontractors, or independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or
death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature arising out of the
10
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
performance of this Agreement to the extent that such liability is imposed on the
City or County or both, and Tribe shall defend at its expense, including attorney
fees, the City or County or both, its officers, agents and employees and
independent contractors in any legal action or claim of any kind based upon such
alleged acts or omissions. In addition, when liability arises by reason of a
dangerous condition of the Bands property, the Tribe shall assume defense of and
indemnify County in respect to any dangerous condition of the Bands property
pursuant to this section. This shall apply regardless of County's knowledge of or
duty to warn of such condition.
6. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
A. No Authority Over Tribal Activities. Nothing in this MOU is
intended to confer or expand the jurisdiction of any local, state or federal agency
or other governmental body, nor is this MOU intended to infringe or otherwise
usurp the authority of any regulatory body including local, state, federal or Tribal
agencies that may have jurisdiction over or related to Tribal activities,
development or Projects.
B. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This MOU is not intended to, and
shall not be construed to, create any right on the part of any person not a party to
this MOU, nor does it create any private right of action for any person not a party
to this MOU nor permit any person not a party to this MOU to bring an action to
enforce any of its terms.
C. Amendments. This MOU may be modified or amended only by
mutual and written MOU of the Parties.
D. Final MOU. This MOU contains the entire agreement of the
Parties as to the limited subject matter herein and supersedes any other
agreements of the parties with respect to law enforcement services for the Gaming
Center except for the Intergovernmental Agreement. The terms of the MOU is
intended both as the final expression of the agreements between the Parties with
respect to law enforcement services for the Gaming Center consistent with
California Code of Civil Procedure section 1856.
E. Severability of Provisions. The invalidity of any provisions or
portion of this MOU as determined by an arbitrator pursuant to this MOU or a
court of competent jurisdiction or any State or federal agency having jurisdiction
and thereof and the authority to do so, shall not affect the validity of any other
provisions of this MOU or the remaining portions of the applicable provisions,
unless such provision is material to the reasonable expectation of the Parties.
Without limiting the foregoing, if any provision of the MOU is declared invalid as
aforesaid, then the Parties shall use their best efforts to renegotiate the terms of
the invalid provisions.
11
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
F. Force Maieure. The Parties shall not be liable for any failure to
perform, or for delay in performance of a party's obligations, and such
performance shall be excused for the period of the delay and the period of the
performance shall be extended when a force majeure event occurs; provided
however that the party whose performance is prevented or delayed by such event
of force majeure shall give prompt written notice (i.e., within seventy-two (72)
hours of the event) of such event to the other party. For purposes of this Section,
the term "force majeure" shall include, without limitation, war, epidemic,
rebellion, riot, civil disturbance, earthquake, fire, flood, acts of governmental
authorities(other than the City, County or Tribe), acts of God, acts of terrorism
(whether actual or threatened), acts of the public enemy and in general, any other
severe causes or conditions beyond the reasonable control of the Parties, the
consequences of which in each case, by exercise of due foresight such party could
not reasonably have been expected to avoid, and which by the exercise of due
diligence it would not have been able to overcome, when such an event prevents
the Tribe from meeting its obligations under this MOU due to Gaming Activities
ceasing operations for an extended period or prevents the City or County from
meeting its obligations under this MOU due to an interruption of City government
operations. An interruption of performance, or the delayed occurrence of any
event, under this MOU caused by an event of force majeure shall as far as
practical be remedied with all reasonable dispatch. During any period in which a
party is excused from performance by reason of the occurrence of an event of
force majeure, the party so excused shall promptly, diligently, and in good faith
take all reasonable action required in order for it to be able to commence or
resume performance of its obligations under this MOU.
G. Governing Law. This MOU shall be construed according to
applicable federal and California substantive law to the extent not inconsistent
with the express provisions of this MOU, unless federal law as to the Tribe or the
City, or California law as to the City and County, prohibits such Parties from
abiding by such express provision, in which case the provision will be deemed to
be invalid and resolved, if possible, under the severability provisions in Section.
H. Rules of Construction/Joint Drafting. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, California rules of construction shall be applied in interpreting this
MOU. This MOU shall be deemed to have been drafted jointly by the Parties and
shall not be construed as having been drafted by, or construed against, one party
against another.
I. Term; Obligations to Continue.
1) The term of this MOU shall be from the Effective Date
until December 31, 2030 unless sooner terminated by one of the following events:
(1) the termination or expiration of the Intergovernmental Agreement; (2) the
termination or expiration of the City/County Law Enforcement Agreement; or (3)
the mutual agreement of the parties to terminate or extend the MOU.
12
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
2) The Effective date shall be the date first written above or
such later date as the Intergovernmental Agreement and the Amendment to the
Agreement for Law Enforcement Services Between the City of Temecula and the
County of Riverside implementing the terms of this MOU become effective.
3) Unless specifically designated otherwise, all of the Parties'
obligations under this MOU shall continue through the Term, including any
extensions thereof. Notwithstanding the end of the Term, any covenant, term or
provision of this MOU which, in order to be effective, or is necessary to enforce
an unfulfilled material term of this MOU or obligation that may continue beyond
the end of the Term shall survive termination.
J. Duplicate Originals. At least three copies of this MOU shall be
signed and exchanged by the Parties each of which shall be considered an original
document.
K. Obligation on Related Entities. This MOU binds the Parties and
their departments, affiliates, agents, representatives, successors, contractors,
officials and related entities, which such MOU shall also be reflected in a
resolution of each Party's respective governing body approving the MOU.
L. Authority/Authorization.
1) The City, County and Tribe each represent and warrant that
each has performed all acts precedent to adoption of this MOU, including but not
limited to matters of procedure and notice and each has the full power and
authority to execute this MOU and perform its obligations in accordance with the
above terms and conditions, and that the representative(s) executing this MOU on
behalf of each party is duly authorized to so execute and deliver the MOU.
2) In evidence of the above, each governing body shall
execute formal resolutions indicating approval of this MOU and these resolutions
are attached in Exhibits
M. Notices.
1) Notices pursuant to this MOU and service of process in any
judicial or arbitration proceeding is waived in favor of delivery of documents by
(i) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to,
Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery or (ii)
by Certified Mail — Return Receipt Requested to the following:
2) For the Tribe:
Tribal Chairperson
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
12705 Pechanga Road
Temecula, CA 92592
13
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
Tel: 951-676-2768
With a copy simultaneously delivered to:
Office of Legal Counsel
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
12705 Pechanga Road
Temecula, CA 92592
Tel: 951-676-2768
Jerome L. Levine, Esq.
Holland & Knight
633 W. 5th Street, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: 213 896-2565
3) For the City:
City Manager
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Tel: 951-694-6444
With copy simultaneously delivered to:
Peter M. Thorson, Esq.
Richards, Watson & Gershon
355 South Grand Ave., 40th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: 213-626-8484
4) For the County:
County Executive Officer
Bill Luna
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street - 4th Floor
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 955-1100
With copy simultaneously delivered to:
Sheriff Stanley Sniff
Riverside County Sheriffs Department
14
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
4095 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
Captain Gerald Williams
Southwest Station
Riverside County Sheriffs Department
30755-A Auld Road
Murrieta, CA 92563
Pamela Walls, Esq.
Minh Tran, Esq.
County Counsel
County of Riverside
3535 10th Street, Suite 300
Riverside CA, 92501-3674
5) Each Party may change the names and address to which
notices and service of process may be delivered by written notice to the such
persons as listed in the subsection or by subsequent notice of changes.
15
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereby execute and enter
into this Agreement with the intent to be bound thereby through their authorized
representatives whose signatures are affixed below.
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
C
Mark Macarro, Tribal Chairperson
Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
16
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
CITY OF TEMECULA
Attest:
Jeff Comerchero
Mayor
Susan Jones
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
17
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
Attest:
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Approved as to Form:
Minh Tran
Deputy County Counsel
18
11086-0146\1 124936v4
February 28, 2010 Final Draft
SHERIFF OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Stanley Sniff
Sheriff of Riverside County
19
11086-0146\1 124936v4