HomeMy WebLinkAbout033198 CC MinutesMINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 31, 1998
CLOSFD SESSION
A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:30 P.M. It was
duly moved and seconded to adjourn to Closed Session, pursuant to Government Code
Sections:
1. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at the west side of Second
Street and Front Street (APN 922-46-022, APN 922-07-024). The negotiating parties are
the City of Temecula/Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and Cleveland
Investment Company, Temecula Investment Company, and William E. Fortner and Margaret
Ann Fortner. Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of the real property
interests proposed to be acquired.
2. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9(a) with respect to one matter of existing litigation involving the City and/or
the Agency. The following case will be discussed: Pratt vs. City of Temecula.
3. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at 28545 Front Street (APN
922-035-011). The negotiating parties are the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Temecula and Ladd Penfold and Barcena and Company. Under negotiation are the price and
terms of payment of the real property interests proposed to be acquired.
4. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8 concerning the acquisition of real property located at approximately .90 acres
westerly of Front Street and Santiago extension (Lots 10 and 11, Block 32 Town of
Temecula). The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula and Margarita Canyon LLC.
Under negotiation are the price and terms of payment of the real property interests proposed
to be acquired.
The Temecula City Council reconvened at 7:07 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, to consider regularly scheduled City Council business.
Mayor Roberts presiding.
Minutes\033198 1
Temecula Citv Council
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmembers:
and Roberts.
Comerchero, Ford,
ABSENT: Councilmember: None.
PRELUD!= MUSIC
The prelude and intermission music was provided by Eve Craig.
033198
Lindemans, Stone,
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Bill Rench, Calvary Baptist Church of Temecula.
PLEDGE OF ALLFGIANCF
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Councilman Comerchero.
PR!~S!=NTATIONS/PROC! AMATIONS
Agency Showcase Award presented by California Parks and Recreation Society
Presentation postponed to the April 14, 1998, City Council meeting.
Certificate of Ap, oreciation for John R. Harrison
Read into the record. Mr. Harrison was unable to attend the meeting.
Certificate of ADI;)reciation of Robert Majeski
Presented by Mayor Pro Tem Ford and accepted with much appreciation by Mr. Majeski.
National Public Health Week ~,
Read into the record. No one was in attendance to accept the proclamation.
PUBLIC COMM!=NTS
A. Ms. Pam Barret, 39897 Milkmaid Lane, Murrieta, commented on the success of the
afghan fundraiser for the Chaparral High School Baseball and noted that those afghans
ordered by the City Council have arrived. On behalf of Murrieta Councilmember Chuck
Washington, Ms. Barret presented an afghan to Mayor Roberts.
Minutes\033198 2
Temecula City Council 033198
B. Mr. John Green, 31070 Avenida Buena Suerte, Temecula, apprised the City Council
of a grievance he has against the City's Police Department; commented on what he
observed as misuse of the Police Department's power; and complained about some of the
Police Officers' conduct which he had personally observed.
CITY COUNCI! R!=PORTS
A. Having attended a recent California League of Cities meeting, Councilman Stone
commented on his opposition to the passage of AB 224 (State Engineers' Bill - which would
require the City to use a Caltrans' Engineer for any public projects); addressed the impacts
this passage would have on the City as well as local engineering firms; and requested that
a letter of opposition be forwarded to the State legislature.
B. In response to a letter he had received from a City resident with regard to the
resident's level of understanding of closed sessions, Councilman Comerchero advised that
closed sessions are a legal means to discuss issues of a sensitive nature; that the City
Attorney is present at all closed sessions; that all final action would be taken in open
session; and that if a resident wishes to further address this issue, to contact the City
Councilmembers and/or City staff.
C. Commenting on his recent trip to Washington, D.C., Councilman Comerchero noted
that he and Councilman Ford had met with several elected officials in an effort to lobby for
transportation funding for the City.
D. Echoing Councilman Comerchero's comments with regard to the trip to Washington,
D.C., Councilman Ford commented on the pertinent input he had received relative to
proceeding with Murrieta Creek, flood control issues, and traffic issues. Viewing the trip as
successful, Mr. Ford encouraged continued correspondence with the elected officials.
E. Councilman Ford requested that the discussion of the proposed El Sobrante landfill
expansion and potential funds, generated by this expansion, which may be available for
multi-species habitat conservation, be agendized for the April 14, 1998, City Council
meeting.
G. City Attorney Thorson advised that final action was taken with respect to the real
estate matters to the extent that negotiations were successfully concluded and that
purchase and sale agreements will be forwarded to the City Council for review and approval
in Open Session.
CONSFNT CA! !=NInAR
1. StAqd~rd Ordinance Adol)tion Proced,,re
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes\033198 3
Ternecula City Council 033198
2. Min,,tes
2.1
2.2
Approve the minutes of March 14, 1998.
Approve the minutes of March 17, 1998.
3. Resol,,fion Approving ! {st of hemAnds
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
4. Records nestr,,ctJon ADj)rovAI
4.1
Approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with
the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy.
5. Aw-rd of ContrAct for Remote Access Server
5.1
Award a contract for a Compaq ProLiant 850R 6/200H Server with Citrix
WinFrame Enterprise 1.7 Remote Access to Inacom Information Systems, San
Diego, California, in the amount of $14,481.02.
6. Sister City Associ-tion Student Trip to Voorb,,rg
6.1
Approve an expenditure of funds in the amount of $1,900 to provide the 19
students traveling to Voorburg, Netherlands, a check in the amount of $100
for each student.
7. ContrAct PI-q Checking Services
7.1
Approve an Agreement for Plan Check Services with J. A. S. Pacific Services
for the Building and Safety Department.
ReleAse Rond for Trnffic Sign~lizntion Mitig~tlon Fees in P,~rcel M~O No. 19850-1 =qd
Accept S,,bsfit,,te Bond for P-rcel 3 {West of hi-- Ro-d ,~qd North of R,,qcho
C,~lifomi, RoAd!
8.1
Authorize release of bond for Traffic Signal Mitigation Fees in Parcel Map No.
19580-1;
Minutes~033198 4
Temecula City Cour~il
8.2
10.
(Pulled
11.
O33198
Accept a Traffic Signal Mitigation bond and Traffic Signalization Mitigation
Agreement for the remaining parcel as submitted by the owner;
8.3 Direct the City Clerk to notify the developers and sureties.
Reimb-rsement Agreement - City of Temec,,IA Artd the PechAqg~ nevelopment
CorporAlion
9.1 Approve the Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Temecula and
the Pechanga Development Corporation in the amount of $77,220.00 for the
Pala Road Widening Project between Via Eduardo and Pechanga Road;
9.2 Authorize the Mayor to execute this Agreement.
AII-W~ty Stop - MArgpritR RoAd At Pio Pico RoA~I
10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING AN 'ALL-WAY STOP' AT THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA
ROAD AND PIO PICO ROAD
and separately discussed.)
Old Town -~treetsc~De Improvement Project
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-27
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STREETSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR OLD TOWN TEMECULA AND AUTHORIZING THE
SOLICITATION OF CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS
(Pulled end separately discussed.)
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. I through
9 (Item Nos. 10 and 1 1 were pulled). The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and
voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
Minutes\033198 5
Temecula City Council
10.
O33198
AIl-Wqy StoD - MArgpritA RO-d At Pio Pico RoAd
10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING AN 'ALL-WAY STOP' AT THE INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA
ROAD AND PIO PICO ROAD
Public Works Director Kicak presented the staff report (as per agenda material).
Ms. Susan Thornton (a crossing guard at Sparkman Elementary), 30395 Cupeno Lane, relayed
her and several parents' concerns with regard to the children's safety at this particular location.
She, therefore, encouraged the City Council to approve this All-Way Stop.
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to adopt Resolution No. 98-26. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
11. Old Town Rtreetsc~pe Improvement Project
11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-27
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STREETSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR OLD TOWN TEMECULA AND AUTHORIZING THE
SOLICITATION OF CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS
Public Works Director Kicak presented the staff report (of record).
In response to Councilman Linderoans, Housing and Redevelopment Manager Meyer advised
that because shuttle bus turnouts would reduce the number of on-street parking spaces, no
turnouts are being proposed.
Mr. Nell Cleveland, 28465 Front Street, spoke in support of this project.
Although he is in support of the project, Councilman Comerchero relayed his concern with the
construction completion date of November 15, 1998, and commented on the impact this
project would have on the Old Town merchants' Holiday Season business in the event the
construction were not completed on time. If the construction were not completed on time, Mr.
Comerchero questioned whether the City Council may suspend the project to ensure the normal
flow of traffic would not be disrupted. ~
Minutes\033198 6
Temecula City Council 033198
In response to Councilman Comerchero, Public Works Director Kicak advised that a majority of
the work should be completed by November 15, 1998, and that if any work were not
completed by this date, it would be items such as landscaping, furniture, etc., advising that the
City Council may opt to postpone the completion of this work until after the Holiday Season.
Concurring with Councilman Comerchero's concern, Mayor Pro Tem Ford noted that a portion
of this work, such as the work by Rancho Water, will be completed at night. Mr. Ford
requested that the promotion of the Old Town Summer Nights Program as well as the
promotion of the Holiday Season be agendized for a future Council meeting.
Commenting on the success of last year's Old Town Holiday promotions, Mayor Roberts
concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Ford's comment to address this matter in the near future to
ensure adequate promotion for this year.
Addressing the impact this project will have on the Old Town merchants, Councilman
Undemans as well commented on the additional support needed by the merchants during this
time.
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to adopt Resolution No. 98-27. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ford and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the
excel~tion of Councilman Stone who abstained.
At 7:42 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District, the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency, and the Winchester Hills Financing Authority. After · brief
recess, the City Council resumed with regularly scheduled City Council business at 8:08 P.M.
COUNCl! RUSIN;SS
12. F~,blic F-cility neposits for Non-Residenti.I nevelol;~ment
12.1
Review the information provided concerning the Public Facility Deposits which
have been collected for non-residential development since 1991 and provide
direction to staff to resolve.
Clarifying the attachments of record, Senior Management Analyst Kuhns presented the staff
report (as per agenda material) and noted the available options to the Council:
determining the amount still due based on the adopted fees and collecting
that amount (Attachment C);
applying a phased discount to the adopted fees based on the years the
deposits were collected -- giving greater discounts collected to those in the
earliest years (Attachment D);
Minutes~033198 7
Temecula City Council 033198
applying additional consideration for economic benefits derived from the
development such as property tax, sales tax, franchise fees, and number of
of employees of each company (Schedule submitted at the Council meeting).
In response to Councilmember Stone, City Attorney Thorson stated that the signed agreements
with the developers who paid the $10,000 deposits are enforceable; that the previously
mentioned options are viable; and that the City Council would have the discretion to make
discounts based on those options. With regard to collecting from those developers who are no
longer in business, Mr. Thorson noted that it would depend on the reason as to why the
developer is no longer in business, stating that the signed agreements have been recorded and
run with the land.
Mr. Lon Brusegard, 23766 Via Madrid, Murrieta, President of Southwest Riverside Manufactures
Council, urged the Council to accept the public facility deposits at $10,000 per developer; to
waive the balance of the fee; and to impose the standard Development Impact Fees (DIF) for
future improvements. Mr. Brusegard noted that those businesses that apply for a building
permit and paid fees prior to the effective date of an Ordinance should not be affected by the
new developmental impact fees and that these fees should not be retroactively collected.
In an attempt to create an equity among the various developers, Councilman Lindemans relayed
his difficulty in making such a decision.
Responding to Mr. Brusegards' support of lower fees, Councilmember Stone clarified the use
of the Development Impact Fees -- to build roads, bridges, and to mitigate the City's traffic
problems.
Being of the opinion that the reduction of Development Impact Fees will slow down the City's
desired accomplishments, Mr. Bill Dendy, 41975 Winchester Road, recommended that the City
retain the deposit monies and that the City negotiate a percentage of the amount due with each
developer.
On behalf of Wescon Properties, Marty Smith, 41790 Winchester Road, Business Real Estate,
requested that the Council grandfather in the development impact fees for those developers
who committed to build in the City.
Concurring with Councilman Undemans' comments to establish a sense of fairness, Councilman
Comerchero stated that the City does have an obligation to those businesses that pioneered in
the City. With regard to the Schedule submitted at this meeting (phased and based on 36%
of Fee Proposed in Study with Adjustments for Economic Impacts), Councilman Comerchero
noted that this schedule takes into account many available aspects such as sales tax generated,
property tax generated, and number of jobs generated.
Noting that the schedule submitted at this meeting had been completed by staff just prior to
the commencement of the Closed Session, City Manager Bradley further clarified the schedule,
Minutes\033198 8
Temecula City Council 033198
noting that it takes into account basically the same type of information utilized to consider
subsidies in the Redevelopment project with the addition of a step down methodology in order
to reduce the amount due.
Relaying his objection to the phased-in discount, Councilman Stone relayed his support of a
matrix which would provide credits to businesses for the economic benefit they have provided
to the City but as well charge them to offset the impacts they have created in the community.
Mr. Stone suggested the formation of a matrix encompassing the following categories with
each category representing a 15% discount with a total discount of 60%:
minimum number of jobs
minimum sales tax generation
minimum square footage
minimum property taxes
40 employees
$50,000 a year
20,000 square feet
10,000 square feet
Councilman Stone stated that, as per the schedule submitted this evening, the amount to
collect ($359,000) would not be sufficient to ensure the necessary infrastructure at build out
((1,763,345 as per General Plan).
Concurring with Councilman Stone's recommendation to devise a new matrix, Councilman
Lindemans recommended that the City return the amount due to those 38 businesses and that
a new matrix be formed, similar to Councilman Stone's suggestion, for those remaining 34
businesses which have an amount due the City. Mr. Lindemarts noted that by doing so, the
City would collect more than what staff has recommended ($359,000) but not as much as
$1,763,345.
Because Councilman Stone's ratios are higher than those recommended by staff, City Manager
Bradley clarified that the City would actually collect more money as per Councilman Stone's
recommended matrix.
Councilman Comerchero relayed his objection to penalizing a business for employing less than
40 employees (as per Councilman Stone's matrix) and stated that any business, no matter what
size, should be proportionately rewarded. Mr. Comerchero reiterated that the schedule
submitted this evening fairly takes into account all those factors.
Supporting the return of $137,000 to those 38 businesses and collecting $873,000 from the
remaining 34 developers, Councilman Lindemans recommended that a new matrix be devised
for those business with a balance due.
Reiterating the original intent of development impact fees, Councilman Ford stated that these
fees, as per the General Plan, are to be utilized for the beautification of medians and for
landscaping, not for the construction of roads.
Minutee~033198 9
Temecula City Council 033198
In response to Councilman Ford, City Attorney Thorson advised that if the City were to use
development impact fees for projects other than those reflected in the General Plan, it would
require an adjustment to the General Plan and Capital Improvement Plan prior to utilizing these
funds.
With regard to the schedule submitted this evening, Mayor Roberts advised that he had
requested the creation of such a schedule at the Mayor's meeting held earlier that day.
City Manager Bradley clarified Councilman Lindemans suggestion to impose the schedule based
on Adopted Fees with additional phased discounts applied by year (70% to 10%); to devise a
matrix for those developers with a remaining balance and to negotiate with those businesses
on an individual basis.
Senior Management Analyst Kuhns noted that the schedule submitted this evening takes into
account those businesses with less than 40 employees and that property credits were given to
each business.
In an effort to assure sufficient available funds, as required by the General Plan, to accomplish
the needed roadway improvements, Councilman Stone suggested to utilize Attachment D
(based on Adopted Fees with Additional Phased Discounts applied by year -- collecting
$739,000); to prorate each figure up to collect $1 million; and to devise a matrix, such as he
previously suggested, and, thereby collecting approximately $800,000, which would reflect a
midway of the desired $1.7 million.
In an effort to strike a balance of fairness between the citizens and the pioneer businesses,
Councilman Comerchero made the following motion:
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to adopt the revised schedule (as submitted this
evening). Mayor Roberts seconded the motion. Voice vote reflected denial of the motion as
follows:
AYES:
NOES:
Councilmembers Comerchero and Roberts.
Councilmembers Ford, Lindemans, and Stone.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to adopt Attachment D(based on Adopted Fees with
Additional Phased Discounts applied by Year) and to proportionately discount each of the 34
businesses based on a matrix pertaining to economic benefit, as recommended by Councilman
Stone. (This motion was ultimately rephrased; see below.)
Councilman Comerchero relayed his support of the motion as long as the newly devised matrix
will not limit the smaller businesses.
City Manager Bradley recommended that staff explore several scenarios to determine the actual
Minutes\033198 10
Temecula City Council 033198
impact; create a subcommittee to devise a matrix; and to forward subcommittee
recommendations to the Council for review and final approval.
It was the consensus of the Council that Councilmembers Comerchero and Stone serve on this
subcommittee.
Councilman Lindemans restated his motion as follows:
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve Attachment D(based on Adopted Fees with
Additional Phased Discounts applied by Year); to form a subcommittee comprised of
Councilmembers Comerchero and Stone; and to devise a matrix encompassing those economic
factors as mention by Councilman Stone but at a lower level. Councilman Comerchero
seconded the motion. Voice vote reflected unanimous approval of the motion with the
excel~tion of Councilman Ford who voted no.
13.
Reject ~11 Bids for the Installation of ~n Intedm TrAffic SignAl on pal. Ro.rl .t RAinbow
CRnyon RoRd. Pr~ect No. PW97-;~7
13.1 Reject all bids for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Pala
Road and Rainbow Canyon Road, Project No. PW97-27;
13.2 Deny a request for installation of a traffic signal or WAll-Way Stop" at the
intersection of Pala Road and Muirfield Road.
Public Works Director Kicak reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), noting that as
per Caltrans criteria, the traffic warrant study for a traffic signal on Pala Road at Muirfield Road
indicated that no signal would be warranted at this particular location. With respect to the
signal on Pala Road at Rainbow Canyon Road, Mr. Kicak advised that this signal would only be
in place for approximately eight months prior to it being removed due to upcoming roadway
improvements.
Ms. Marilyn Givens, 45526 Tournament Lane, reiterated her desire for a traffic signal to ensure
a safe ingress and egress into her development.
Public Works Director Kicak briefly elaborated on the determination of the calculations of a
traffic warrant study.
Reiterating Ms. Givens' comments, Ms. Stacy Ketter, 45352 Tournament Lane, requested the
installation of a signal in order to provide a safe egress and ingress for this particular
community.
MnTION: Councilman Stone moved to install a traffic signal at Muirfield Road. This motion died
for the lack of a second.
Minutes\033198 11
Teme~ula Citv Council 033198
For Councilman Stone, City Attorney Thorson advised that if the City Council were to install
a signal at a location where the traffic warrant study did not warrant for a signal, the City must
then ensure that no other safety issues are created as a result of this installation.
MOTION: Councilman Lindemans moved to approve the Construction Plan and Specifications
for the installation of a traffic signal on Pala Road at Rainbow Canyon Road; to award a
construction contract for installation of a traffic signal at this intersection to Transtech in the
amount of $60,000; to authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; and to authorize the City
Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $6,000.00 which
is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Mayor Roberts seconded the motion and voice vote
reflected unanimous approval.
At 9:51 P.M.. Mayor Roberts called a short recess and reconvened the meeting at 9:58 P.M.
14. C~olf Co,,rse Properties - Temec,,IA SpeciAl
14.1 Establish the amount of the Temecula Parks/Lighting Special Tax applied to golf
course properties within the City of Temecula.
By way of overheads, Community Services Director presented the staff report (as per agenda
material).
In an effort to obtain equity and because golf courses do provide open space, Councilman
Lindemans recommended that golf course property be rated at one-half Equivalent Dwelling Unit
(EDU) per acre.
Concurring with the comment that golf course properties do provide open space, Councilman
Stone noted that these properties still function as a commercial entity and, therefore, concurred
with the recommendation to reduce the EDUs per acre to 2.0 versus 6.0.
Echoing Councilman Stone's comments, Councilman Comerchero recommended that the EDU
rate only apply to the portion of property used as a commercial venture and suggested that a
golf course land use be created.
In order to review the potential impact of the 2.0 EDUs per acre, Mr. Larry Markham, 41701
Winchester Road, on behalf of Temecula Creek Inn, requested that this Item as well as Agenda
Item No. 15 be continued.
Mayor Roberts relayed his concurrence with those comments made by Councilmembers
Comerchero and Stone.
MOTION: Councilman Undemans moved that golf course properies be rated at one-half EDU per
acre. This motion died for the lack of a second.
MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to continue with the current tax rate of 2 EDUs per
acre for golf course properties; to form a new land use category titled "Golf Courses;" and to
Minutes\033198 12
Temecula City Council 033198
apply the EDU rate only to the portion of the golf course property which is utilized as the
commercial entity. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
15. App,~l of 1997-98 Temec, l, P-rks/Street lighting T-x: Temec,,I,, Creek Inn P..olf Co,,rse
15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
THE APPEAL BY REGENCY PROPERTIES OF FISCAL YEAR 1997-98
PARK/STREET LIGHTING TAX LEVIED AGAINST THE TEMECULA CREEK IN
In light of Mr. Markham's earlier request, Community Services Director Nelson spoke in support
of a continuance.
MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to continue Agenda Item No. 15 to the April 28, 1998, City
Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilman Uncleroans and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
16. !:1 Nino Update
Advising that the City has sustained no major damage during the El Nino season, Public Works
Director Kicak, in response to Mayor Pro Tern Ford, noted that a meeting would be scheduled
to discuss the proposed permit for the long-term annual maintenance for Murrieta Creek.
n!=PARTM!:NTA! R!:PORTS
None.
CITY MANA~!=R'-~ RFPORT
None.
CITY ATTORN!=Y'S R!:PORT
None.
Minutes\033198 13
Temecula C~ Council 033198
AnJOURNM;NT
At 10:22 P.M., Mayor Roberts formally adjourned the City Council meeting to Tuesday, April
14, 1998, at 7:00 P.M.
Ron Roberts, Mayor
ATTEST:
· Jones
A'eth~ City Clerk
Minutes\033198 14