Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout030690 CC Agenda&~END& TEMECUL~ CITY COUNCIL AN]~D~OURNEDREGUL~RMEETING · anoho Cali£ornia Water District, tomunity Room 2S061 Dial Road, Te~ocula, Cali£ornia X~%.RCH 6, ~990 Next in Order Numbers CALL TO ORDER: Ordinance 90-05 Resolution 90-25 Invocation Pastor Lyle Peterson Hope Lutheran Church ROLL CALL: Flag Salute Birdsall, Parks Lindemans, Moore, Muhoz, PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS Proclamation declaring April 1990 as California Earthquake Preparedness Month in Temecula. PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT 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 to be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve minutes of the meeting of February 6, 1990 as mailed. 1.2 Approve minutes of the meeting of February 12, 1990 as mailed. 2/agenda/030690 1 03./02/90 COUNCIL BUBIHBBB 2. Approval of pa-cel Map 23426 and Yinal Tract Map 23160 Report by City Attorney Scott Field RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 2.2 2.3 Motion to reconsider action of February 27, 1990. Motion to approve Parcel Map 23426 Motion to approve Final Tract Map 23160 o County Plauninq Directors Report on Status of Hiring Planninq Consultant. SFAP. WRAG. and Traffic Issues Presentation by Planning Director Joe Richards RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Direct Staff to prepare documents and to notice Public Hearings necessary to adopt the Southwest Area Community Plan as the City*s General Plan o Me110 Roos Committee Report Report on Negotiations CITY NAH~GER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT CITY COUNCIL REPORTS ~DJOURHHBNT Next meeting: March 13, 1990, 7:00 p.m., Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujo1 Street, Temecula, California 2/agenda/D30690 2 03/02/90 PROCLAMATION A PROCLAI'IATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C~TY OF TENECULA. W~mEREAS, the State of California continues to experience significant seismic activity, as evidenced by the October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, which killed 62 persons, injured more than 3,000, and caused an estimated $5.6 billion in damage, and WHEREAS, the loss of life and property can be greatly reduced if appropriate earthquake preparedness measures are taken before, during and after a damaging earthquake; and WHEREAS, these lifesaving procedures will be highlighted during the month of April as the Governor's Office of Emergency Services, with the assistance of city and county emergency services offices and other governmental agencies, service organizations, educational institutions, businesses, and Neighborhood Watch groups, provides earthquake safety information to citizens throughout the state; and WHEREAS, the measures presented in the "BEAT THE QUAKE" campaign should increase public awareness regarding proper procedures to follow during a tremor; and WHEREAS, this important earthquake safety information should be studied and observed throughout the year in order to reduce injuries, loss of life, and property damage during an earthquake; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEHECULA, hereby proclaims April 1990 as California Earthquake Preparedness Month and encourage all citizens to enhance their knowledge and awareness of proper safety measures to follow before, during, and after an earthquake. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Temecula to be affixed this 6th day of March, 1990. ATTEST: Ronald J. Parks, Mayor F. D. Aleshire, City Clerk [SEAL1 OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR State of California December 14, 1989 Dear Earthquake Preparedness Campaign Supporter: The recent earthquake which struck Northern California was a tragic reminder of the potential devastation caused by earthquakes and of the vital need for government, business and personal preparedness. Our 1990 earthquake campaign efforts now take on a special urgency as Californians throughout the state recognize the need to be properly prepared. As a first step in assisting Californians to learn the actions that can protect lives and property during an earth- quake, I have proclaimed April 1990 as California Earthquake Preparedness Month. You will soon be receiving a "Campaign Planner" to assist you in conducting your own earthquake pre- paredness campaign during California Earthquake Preparedness Month. Please join in this commitment to earthquake safety. Your active participation will help contribute to the safety of all Californians by helping them to "BEAT THE QUAKE." Most cordially, George Deukmej Jan OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICF~ ~ MEADOWVIEW ROAD GEORGE DEUKMP_21AN. Oo~rnor OES CA[ IFOI~NIA January 18, 1990 Dear Earthquake Preparedness Month Campaign Organizer: As we continue the recovery process from the October 17 Loma Prieta Earthquake, planning activities are well underway for the April 1990 California Earthquake Preparedness Month Campaign. The statewide campaign organizers--the Governor's Office of Emergency Services (OES) and our two earthquake preparedness projects, the Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project (SCEPP) and the Bay Area Regional Earthquake Preparedness Project (BAREPP)-- are redoubling our efforts to make up for delays necessitated by response to the October disaster. In line with the campaign plan, this marks the second year of the "Beat the Quake" campaign, utilizing the "animated California" earthquake preparedness logo. This approach proved effective in last April's campaign in encouraging Californians to learn and take the simple steps that can be crucial when earthquakes strike. The campaign has been nationally recognized for its attention-getting quality. It's safe to say that earthquake awareness is at an all time high due to the still-vivid images of the October 17 quake. This is a time when the citizens of California should be particularly receptive and motivated to prepare. Your efforts in the past have been key to making the campaign a success. The importance of your task has been graphically emphasized by the October quake. We strongly encourage local governments to join Governor Deukmejian in proclaiming April 1990 as California Earthquake Preparedness Month. Please send us your proclamation for display in the State Capitol. Once again, each week of the month will have a particular theme to direct activities toward specific target audiences. They are: April 1-7 April 8-14 April 15-21 April 22-30 Campaign Kick-Off and Government and Emergency Services Preparedness Week Business & Industry Preparedness Week School Preparedness Week Family and Community Preparedness Week Campaign kits similar to last year's are being prepared. As this year's campaign is a continuation of the 1989 effort, feel free to use the camera-ready materials, logo, and other materials distributed last year. We are revising some of the materials, and adding: (1) a short supply list to the two-color and one- color camera-ready master for the "Before, During, and After" safety brochure; (2) new camera-ready masters for "Survival Supplies," "Earthquake Safety Actions: How to Duck, Cover, and Hold," and "What Causes Earthquakes?"; (3) a new full-color poster highlighting earthquake "duck, cover, and hold" actions and featuring the animated California Earthquake Preparedness figure. Campaign kits will be mailed in February. Brochures and posters will be distributed in the same quantities as last year to county Offices of Emergency Services for redistribution to cities, organizations, and the public. Additional brochures and posters will be available on a cost-recovery basis. Order forms will be included with the campaign kits. The April campaign will feature a major statewide earthquake preparedness event. A statewide "Earthquake: Duck, Cover, and Hold Drill" will take place on Tuesday, April 3 at 10:00 a.m. Our ultimate goal is to have every person in the state take appropriate safety actions as if a major earthquake were occurring at that time. We are preparing special materials and enlisting the aid of the news media to publicize the drill. We strongly encourage you to participate in this important undertaking, which we expect to become an annual event. Local drills will be organized by community groups, schools, government agencies, and businesses. With your help this event can be a major success in educating the public and in focusing attention on overall earthquake preparedness. A special information kit on this event will be provided to you at workshops conducted by SCEPP, BAREPP, and OES (dates and locations to be announced shortly). Materials will also be mailed to you. A booklet containing a list of important earthquake preparedness supplies and discount coupons for some products will be mailed to 4 million households in the state, representing about half the state's population. Several major grocery and drug retailers in the state will participate in this aspect of the campaign. People visiting the stores will receive copies of earthquake safety information developed by OES, SCEPP, and BAREPP, and reprinted by the retailers. Since most Californians will go into one of these stores at some time during the month, we are very optimistic about this method of getting safety information into the hands of many citizens. OES will again coordinate a full schedule of media contacts and interviews. A media kit will be mailed to more than 1,000 California radio, TV, and print media outlets to encourage media coverage of local and state Earthquake Preparedness Month activities. Public Service Announcements will be distributed to the broadcast media. A special focused effort to involve media in planning for the April 3 "Earthquake: Duck, Cover, and Hold Drill" is underway. As you know, about 200 different earthquake preparedness events took place last April, and we anticipate at least as many this year. Please let us know about any events you are scheduling. The enclosed "Event Listing Form" is provided for your convenience. Please return completed forms to the address listed on the form as soon as possible for inclusion in the Statewide Calendar of Events that is distributed to all news media in the state. Although the calendar will be updated regularly, we must receive your form by March i for it to be included in the media kit. We expect April 1990 to be a very intense period of earthquake preparedness activities, continuing the momentum from last year's campaign. The success of the campaign is due directly to the effort and creativity that you, the campaign organizers, invest in it. The importance was underscored for all of us by last October's earthquake. If you have any questions or need additional assistance, please call one of the following: State Office of Emergency Services, Information and Public Affairs, (916) 427-6659; SCEPP, (818) 795-9055; or BAREPP, (415) 540-2713. Thank you for your past efforts and best wishes for a highly successful April 1990 California Earthquake Preparedness Month Campaign. Sincerely, WILLIAM M/MEDI~OVIC}~ Director -- TOM MULLINS, Director Information and Public Affairs Enclosures MINUTES OF AN ~DJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD FEBRUARY 6 , 1990 An adjourned regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:38 p.m. in the Rancho California Water District Community Room, 28061 Diaz Road, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Parks presiding. PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Muhoz, Parks ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager Frank Aleshire, City Attorney Scott F. Field, and Acting Deputy City Clerk June S. Greek. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor George Horton of the First Baptist Church of Temecula. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Pat Birdsall. ~NNOUNCEMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS John Dedovesh, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, addressed the Council, objecting to the proliferation of temporary signs along Jefferson Avenue and in other locations within the City. City Manager Frank Aleshire, responding to a question from Mayor Parks advised that the County Sign Ordinance covers the sign nuisance problem but getting the needed enforcement is still proving difficult. The Mayor requested that this matter be placed on a future agenda for action. CONSENT C~LEND&R Councilmember Muhoz requested the removal of Item 2 from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Moore noted a correction to the minutes of January 17, 1990 on page 3, last paragraph, and a correction to the minutes of January 20, 1990 on page 3, item 1, third paragraph. In both cases the motions were made by Councilmember Moore. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to approve Consent Calendar items 1 and 3 as follows: 1. &pproval of Ninutes 1.1 Approved the minutes of the meeting of January 17, 1990 as amended. 1.2 Approved the minutes of the meeting of January 20, 1990 as amended. Application for Alcoholic Beveraqe License 3.1 Approved motion to receive and file application filed by Dong S. Kim, et. al. - 37885 Highway 79 South, Suite B, Temecula. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore Muhoz, Parks COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None Plot Plan No. 11191, Amended No. i Councilmember Muhoz questioned condition number 2 of the conditions of approval and suggested that the City should also be named in all hold harmless clauses which currently name the County of Riverside. City Attorney Field stated that in his opinion the City, as the successor agency, would be automatically covered. Councilmember Lindemans questioned if there is a vehicle to grant blanket coverage to the City. The City Attorney responded that this is implicit in the law because of the successor status of the City. 2/# i nutes \1~\6\90 - 2- 03 / 01/90 City Council Minutes February 6, 1990 Councilmember Muhoz asked why the Temecula Unified School District is involved in the issuance of building permits. The City Attorney answered that all developments, even commercial and industrial uses, impact school districts because they have the potential to generate additional residents. It was moved by Councilmember Muhoz, seconded by Councilmember Moore, to receive and file the application for Plot Plan No. 11191, Amended No. 1. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore Muhoz, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None RECEBB Mayor Parks declared a recess at 8:00 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:12 p.m. with all members present. The Mayor recessed the meeting to a meeting of the Community Services District set for 8:00 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:47 p.m. with all members present COUNCIL BUSINESS Report on Traffic Control at 1-15 Overcrosslngs· Mayor Parks announced that this item was being continued at the request of David Lowry. He also announced that the employees of Rancon and Pamco had submitted a petition expressing their gratitude for the CHP traffic control efforts which were funded by Mr. Lowry. e City Ampointment to the County Free Library Advisory Committee City Manager Aleshire recommended that this position be advertised with the commission positions and that it be referred to an Ad Hoc committee of the City Council for selection. The City Council, by consensus, agreed to refer this matter to the Parks and Recreation Ad Hoc committee for selection. nutes\2\6\90 -3- 03/01/90 city Council Minutes February 6, 1990 ® Relocation of KRTM-FM Radio Antenna Tower City Manager Aleshire gave a staff report outlining the reasons for granting an exception to the moratorium (Ordinance No 90-01), which would allow consideration of relocation of the KRTM-FM antenna tower. Mayor Parks asked if the City could be held responsible for any liability arising from the fact that the tower was built without benefit of a building permit. City Attorney Scott Field stated that this could be a problem since, in effect, the existing moratorium was preventing the removal of the structure. Ladd Penfold, the applicant, addressed the Council and pointed out the suggested new location for erecting the tower. He explained that the proposal was to paint the structure green to blend into the hillside in a more harmonious way. Councilmember Muhoz questioned if the applicant had paid any fine for the building code violation. Mr. Penfold responded that he has not paid any fees since the City's moratorium has not allowed him to proceed with obtaining a permit. Mayor Parks asked if the applicant would be willing to name the City as additional insured on his liability insurance policy. Mr. Penfold said he would agree to have his policy amended to name the City additional insured in the amount of $1,000,000. Councilmember Muhoz asked the City Attorney if there is a way for the City Council to assess a penalty for the building violation. City Attorney Scott Field advised that a Notice of Pendency is recorded on the property to notify all potential future landowners that there is a pending violation which needs to be remedied. If the present landowner does not respond to the order to remove the tower criminal or civil prosecution could be initiated. City Manager Aleshire stated that the City Council is only allowing the applicant to continue with the process of applying for the necessary permits to relocate the tower. This action does not commit the City Council to approve the new location. 2/#i nutes\2\6\90 -4- 03/02/90 City Council Minutes February 6, 1990 Mayor Parks suggested that the applicant personally show the members of the Council the suggested location. Councilmember Lindemans asked if the applicant would voluntarily agree to accept a fine in the amount of $1,000. Mr. Penfold responded that he would make a donation in that amount to the Parks District. The City Attorney read a suggested wording change to the ordinance as follows, in Section 2, page 2, "The City Council further directs staff to suspend all abatement action directed at the present antenna, so long as a Plot Plan application to relocate the antenna is pursued in good faith and the City is named as an additional insured on the applicants liability policy in an amount not less than $1,000,000. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to adopt a resolution, as amended by the city Attorney in section 2, page 2, as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 90-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA GRANTINGANEXEMPTION FROM ORDINANCE NO. 90-01 TO PERMIT PROCESSING OF A PLOT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A RADIO ANTENNA (AP# 9922-22-013). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore Parks NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Muhoz ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans The City Attorney, Scott Field advised the Council that if the staff has not received word of the matter being pursued in good faith within two weeks, it will be returned to the City Council for amendment. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to extend the hour of adjournment to 11:00 p.m. The motion was unanimously carried. 2/#i nutes\2\6\90 -5- 03/02/90 City Council Minutes February 6, 1990 Recruitment of Permanent City Manager City Manager Frank Aleshire referred the councilmembers to the proposals submitted for consideration and recommended that the City Council accept the low bid from Kay Jimno. Mayor Parks advised the Council that he had researched this matter with other cities and found that all reports he received were highly supportive of the firm of Hughes, Heiss and Associates. Councilmember Muhoz recommended that the recruiting consultant be retained to secure the position of City Manager and that the City Staff conduct the recruitment for the positions of Assistant City Manager and Director of Finance. Mayor Parks questioned if the consultant with Moreland and Associates is currently acting as Director of Finance for the City. City Manager Aleshire advised that in a consulting capacity this is the case, but because of the approximate three month period it will take to recruit and hire a Director of Finance, an interim Director of Finance is needed. Mr. Aleshire stated that the City can do the advertising for an Assistant City Manager and Director of Finance in response to a question from Mayor Parks. He also stated that a neighboring City is presently going through a recruitment for a Director of Finance and he was sure the City of Temecula could get some very helpful information from them. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Muhoz to adopt a resolution, amending Section 1 to read "The proposal of Hughes, Heiss and Associates for recruitment of a City Manager for a fee of $12,000 plus expenses is hereby accepted." as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 90-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECUL~ APPROVING THE PROPOSAL OF HUGHES, HEISSANDASSOCIATES FOR PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT SERVICES FOR CITY MANAGER. 2/N i ~te$\2\6\90 - 6 - 03/02/90 City Council Minutes February 6, 1990 The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore Muhoz, Parks COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None ® Excess Liability Insurance Coverage The City Manager gave a staff report recommending authorizing the purchase of excess liability coverage in the amount of four million ($4,000,000) to supplement existing coverage. He also recommended that the City Council authorize him to file an application with the Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority. Mr. Bob Hemme, the City's insurance broker responding to a question from Councilmember Muhoz stated that a municipality really couldn't have too much liability insurance. It was moved by Councilmember Muhoz, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall, to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract to obtain an additional $4,000,000 of coverage for excess liability. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Muhoz, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore It was moved by Councilmember Muhoz, seconded by Councilmember Moore to direct the City Manager to file application for membership in the Joint Powers Insurance Agency. The motion was unanimously carried. 10. Consideration of Contract for Law Enforcement with County of Riverside Sheriffs Department (Continued from the meeting of January 30, 1990. nut es\2\6\90 - 7- 03/01 / 90 City Council Minutes February 6, 1990 11. Consiaer&tion of Supplementing Existing Police Services Councilmember Birdsall suggested that items 10 and 11 be considered at a separate meeting. The mayor called for public comments on this items. All members of the audience who had indicated a desire to speak to these items, agreed to defer their comments to the workshop meeting. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to schedule a workshop on Monday, February 12, at 7:00 p.m. City staff was directed to arrange for a meeting place. The motion was unanimously carried. 12. Consiaeration of Proposal for Planninq Consultant City Manager Aleshire recommended that the City Council look at other proposals for Planning Consultants. He advised the City Council that the proposal submitted by Inland Planning Service was very expensive. Sydney Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, spoke in opposition to retaining Inland Planning Service as a consultant. Mayor Parks suggested hiring an in-house staff member for the planning counter. City Manager Aleshire advised that action should not be taken until after the City Council considers the Personnel Consultant's recommendations on the agenda of the next meeting. It was moved by Councilmember Muhoz and seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to extend the meeting to 11:15 p.m. The motion was unanimously carried. Consi4eration of Computer Systems Report City Manager Aleshire introduced Mr. Joseph Hreha who presented a video presentation which analyzed the City's current needs for computerization and defined future anticipated need. Mr. Hreha also outlined for the Council the role of a Manager of Information Systems in implementing a total program in an orderly phased manner. 2/H i nutes\:~\6\90 - 8 - 03 / 01/90 City Council Minutes February 6, 1990 The City Manager recommended that the Council approve Phase One of the report, authorizing purchase of the first three systems. He also advised that this proposal offers an opportunity to start the City's data management program in a very organized manner. Jimmy Moore, 41747 Borealis Drive, Temecula, spoke in favor of the proposal as presented and urged the Council to create a position of Manager of Information Systems. Dick Birdsall, 41840 Avenida Barca, also spoke in favor of the proposal, stating the City Council would be making a "hallmark" decision. He also encouraged the City Council to hire Mr. Hreha as the Manager of Information Systems. It was moved by Councilmember Muhoz, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to authorize the City Manager to purchase the initial three computer systems as described in Phase One of the report. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to instruct the City Manager to establish a position of Manager of Information Systems and an appropriate salary range to be considered along with the other recommended positions at the next meeting to be held on February 13, 1990. The motion was unanimously carried. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Birdsall requested the staff look into the possibility of reserving the Temecula Community Center each Tuesday of the month, due to the need to have a larger meeting place to accommodate the high number of citizens attending the meetings. Mayor Parks declared the meeting adjourned at 11:27 PM to a meeting to be held at 7:00 PM on February 12, 1990 at a location to be announced by staff. ATTEST: F. D. ALESHIRE, CITY CLERK RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR 2/# i nutes\2\6\90 -9- 03/01/90 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD FEBRUARY lZ, 1990 A special meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:02 p.m. in the Temecula Unified School District Board Room, 31350 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, presiding. PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: California. Mayor Ron Parks Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Muhoz, Parks ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager Frank Aleshire and Acting Deputy City Clerk June S. Greek. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Councilmember J. Sal Muffoz. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Karel Lindemans. ANNOUNCEMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS John Dedovesh, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, spoke regarding the funds from confiscations made in drug cases by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. He suggested the City investigate whether they were eligible for a portion of those funds. CONSENT CALENDAR COUNCIL BUSINESS Mayor Parks suggested that the agenda be reordered to allow item number two to be considered first. There being no objection, reordering the agenda was so ordered. 2. Consideration of 8uDplementin~ Existing Police Services Ted G. Goudy, 31077 Corte Arroyo Vista, addressed the City Council with regard to the Proposed Budget for a Temecula Police Department, which he submitted for the Council's Hinutes 2/12/90 -1- 03/02/90 -- City Council Minutes February 12, 1990 consideration. He stated that he was available for any questions from the Council. In response to a question from Mayor Parks, Mr. Goudy stated that the proposed budget was for a start-up City. Councilmember Birdsall questioned if the salaries outlined in the proposed budget included various extra expenses such as Worker's Compensation and State Disability Insurance. Mr. Goudy responded that he had included those costs in his estimate. Councilmember Muhoz questioned the amount of time required to properly set-up a police department. Mr. Goudy stated that he couldn't estimate the exact time period until a decision was made by the Council/ Councilmember Lindemans asked if the community couldn't be better served by utilizing a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and having citizen's input via a Police Commission. Councilmember Moore questioned the City's liability position should they consider using retired officers as proposed by Mr. Goudy. She also wondered if the back-up services such as Special Weapons Teams, etc. would be included in this proposal. Mr. Goudy responded that he had figured the insurance costs for into his total budget amount and he stated that the special back-up services from the County must be provided by them when requested by another law enforcement agency. Councilmember Muhoz asked what would the status of the police department be by July 1, 1990, if given the go-ahead for this proposal. Mr. Goudy stated he could have from 10 to 12 officers available at that time. Warren Franks, 18475 Avenida de Camelia, Murrieta, representing Excaliber Security Service, addressed the City Council and advised them that his firm provides unarmed security forces. He proposed that he could provide back-up personnel to supplement whatever police services the Council selects. He also suggested that the personnel he would provide could do intersection control, park security, code enforcement, etc. He stated that the hourly rate which is included in his proposal would be $13.33 per hour for unarmed security officers. He also stated that he felt that Ninutes 2/12/90 -2- 03/02/90 City Council Minutes February 12. 1990 commercial burglaries could be significantly reduced at a cost of $25.00 per hour for each patrol vehicle. Councilmember Muhoz questioned the cost for a six month period of time for 16 hours nightly by each patrol vehicle. Mr. Franks responded that the cost would be approximately $35,000 for a six month time period. He added that the recommended coverage of five patrol vehicles, two night shifts and three vehicles each day shift would cost just over two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). Mayor Parks asked if this type of program had been tried in other cities. Mr. Franks replied that this particular program has not been tried, but that tandem patrols have been done in some Los Angeles County cities. City Manager F. D. Aleshire requested a description of what the supplemental personnel would be doing. Mr. Franks replied that the activities they would be engaged in would be "observe and report". He stressed that there would be no involvement in arrest situations. Councilmember Lindemans questioned if the personnel would in any situation carry arms. Mr. Franks advised that he does not recommend this initially. Councilmember Muhoz stated that he would like to point out the burglary and theft incidents, outlined in the Sheriff's report, are on the increase. He stated that he felt a real need for some form of additional police protection to be implemented until June 30th. Mr. Franks summarized that a good police officer is "action oriented" and therefore is often off the streets, making arrests, etc., and that the surveillance he is recommending would be by personnel who would provide a presence at all times. Councilmember Lindemans stated that the Sheriff's Department report shows that 30% of their work does not require armed officers. He further stated that the Cities of Indian Wells and Palm Desert have contracts for additional protection with the Sheriff's Department. He recommended that the City continue their contract with the California Highway Patrol and he also recommended favorable consideration of using unarmed personnel and consideration of a City-appointed Chief of Police in addition to the Sheriff's Department Captain. Ninutes Z/1~/90 -~- 02/26/90 City Council Minutes February 12, 1990 Councilmember Muhoz questioned if the Council was intending to deal with the matter of additional services at this meeting. By consensus it was agreed to table this consideration until after hearing item one. Consideration of Contract for Law Enforcement with County of city Manager Aleshire gave a staff report advising that the City Council has the same material provided earlier at the meeting of February 6, 1990. Mr. Aleshire stated that the City Council should consider additional methods for providing "non-sworn" personnel. He also suggested a trial program might be considered for the time period between now and the 30th of June. Sheriff John Jones stated that he was available for any Council questions. Gilbert Aguilar, 41348 Yuba Circle, recommended that the City look to the County for providing the needed services. He pointed to the success of the Los Angeles County program. Frank Klein, 30180 Santiago Road, commented that the City Council should be commended on their zero drug tolerance stance but he suggested that the City Council adopt a zero crime tolerance policy. He also stated that the City does not have a security personnel presence. Mr. Klein further read from a document authored by Steven Blumberg, citing figures to suggest that contract service is the most economical approach for cities in securing law enforcement, but he questioned the Riverside Sheriff's Department figures as being too high. Jimmy Moore, 41747 Borealis Drive, stated that the primary goal of the incorporation was to improve the police protection for the City and he encouraged the Council to act on this immediately. Councilmember Birdsall stated that she was concerned about the ability of the County to staff their proposal. She also questioned the estimated vehicle costs, suggesting the City ownthese vehicles and have the Sheriff's Department use them. #inutes 2/12/90 -&- City Council Minutes February 12. 1990 Councilmember Mufioz also expressed his feeling that the Sheriff needs to be more specific on the availability of the proposed staff. Councilmember Lindemans stated that he felt the Council should send a letter of intent to the Sheriff's Department and then work on a contract with the help of the Police Commission. He also invited the private sector to submit their proposal for supplemental services. Mayor Parks stressed his feelings that the City Council ad hoc committee members for the Public Safety Commission should be the negotiating members of the Council with the Sheriff's Department. He also stated that it was his feeling a reporting program needs to be set up by the Sheriff's Department to relay the necessary statistics to the City on a monthly rather than annual basis. Councilmember Birdsall stated that the City Council should deal with the establishment of a committee to negotiate the contract with the $heriff's Department and that a letter of intent should be prepared. She also questioned Sheriff Jones on the cost of additional coverage. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to direct the City Manager to issue a letter of intent to enter into a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department for police services. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to establish a committee, composed of seven members, to review the proposed contract and meet with the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department for negotiating the contract. Two members of the City Council would be assigned to be a part of this committee. The motion was unanimously carried. Mayor Parks questioned that methods to be used to establish a qualified committee. City Manager Aleshire suggested asking for cover letters with references from the public and also suggested designating the two councilmembers who have already been appointed as the ad hoc committee for the Public Safety Commission to review these letters of application. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to appoint Councilmembers Moore and #inutes 2/12/90 -5- 0~/26/90 - city Council Minutes February 12. 1990 Muhoz as the Council's representatives on the negotiating committee. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Councilmember Munoz, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to instruct the City Manager to solicit bids for some additional protection in the form of patrolling activities. Mayor Parks suggested that $50,000 be allocated to be used for supplemental protection from the best source, either the Sheriff's Department or from a private source. Councilmember Moore stated her concern with the City's liability when using private sector personnel. Councilmember Birdsall stated that she also had concerns that the difference between the Sheriff's Department non-sworn personnel and private non-sworn personnel could be a problem from the liability standpoint. Sheriff John Jones in response to an earlier question from Councilmember Birdsall stated that to add one additional car for 12 hours a day for the remainder of this fiscal year would be approximately $50,000. He also replied that additional personnel required, would need to be from existing staff on an overtime basis, but that this could be done through the Sheriff's network if the City Council so should desire. The motion to instruct the City Manager to solicit additional bids for additional protection in the form of patrolling activities failed by the following vote. AYES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Muhoz NOES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Parks ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Parks to authorize the sum of $50,000 to the Sheriff's Department to augment the existing protection in the form of sworn and/or non-sworn officers. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore Muhoz, Parks #inutes 2/12/90 -6- 02/26/90 City Council Minutes February 12. 1990 NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY MANAGER REPORTS No report given. None None CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS Mayor Parks announced that he had excused City Attorney Fields from attending this meeting due to a scheduling conflict. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Parks announced that he had been approached about establishing an ad hoc committee of the City Council to meet and re-prioritize the Mello-Roos proposal. Councilmember Birdsall requested that the press define the various committees and commissions properly when reporting on the Council actions. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Mufioz, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to adjourn at 8:58 p.m. to a meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. on February 13, 1990 in the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried. ATTEST: RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR F. D. ALESHIRE, CITY CLERK #inutes 2/12/90 -?- 02/26/90 March 2, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Temecula 43172 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 Re: APPRQVAL OF_FINAL TRACT MAPS Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: The purpose of this letter is to explain the City Council's authority in the approval of final tract maps. As a matter of background, the first step necessary in order to subdivide property is for the owner to file a tentative map application. Depending on local procedure, the tentative map is approved by either the Planning Commission or the city Council, subject to conditions setting forth the requirements to which the owner must conform in developing the property. These conditions may address such matters as street, bicycle path and transit facility dedications, solar access easements, parkland dedication, school dedication, drainage and sewer facilities, £ees for bridges and major thoroughfares, fees for ground-water recharge, and various other public and off- site improvements. The next step after approval of the tentative map is approval of the final map. Approval of the final map creates the legal lots of the subdivision. Prior to the approval of a final map, all tentative map conditions must be complied with, either through constructing the improvements, or entering into an improvement agreement with the City. The city must approve the final map if the subdivider has substantially complied with the terms and Honorable Mayor and Members of the city Council March 2, 1990 Page 2 conditions attached to the tentative map approval. The City Engineer or County surveyor determines whether there is substantial compliance with the tentative map by executing a certificate stating: that the subdivision is substantially the same as it appeared on the tentative map, that all Subdivision Map Act provisions and local ordinances applicable at the time of approval of the tentative map have been complied with, and that the map is technically correct. Once the Engineer or Surveyor executes the final map certificate, formal approval of the final map is a ministerial act, and the City Council has no discretion to disapprove the final map i;] the absence of fraud. In one court case, the Court stated that the city Council i~ not to make the technical determination on whether the requirements and conditions of the tentative map have been satisfied, and that the submission of the final map does not authorize the city COuncil to redetermine matters that are primarily technical in nature. Rather, the purpose of submitting the final map to the city Council ~ ~s to ensure that the Council and the public remain informed about development in the city's jurisdiction. (Great W~tern Savings & Loan ~ociation v. City of Los Angeles (1973) 31Cal.App.3d 403, These same rules generally apply in the case of newly incorporated cities. The recently adopted statute appearing at Government Code § 66413.5 applies to any new city with an effective incorporation date on or after January 1, 1989. In such new cities, final maps that meet the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the County Subdivision Ordinance, and that substantially comply with the applicable tentative map must be approved by the Council. However, a newly incorporated city may condition or deny final map approval when a failure to do so would create a "dangerous health and safety" condition, or when the condition or denial is required to comply with State or Federal law. It should be noted that a dangerous health and safety condition is a very narrow exception and the Council would need to make a specific finding as to the danger that would result in approval of the final map. Finally, it should be noted 'that Section 66413.5 applies only if the developer's tentative map application was submitted to the Cou~]ty before the first signature was Honorable Mayor and ~!embers of the City Council March 2, 1990 Page 3 placed on the incorporation petition, and the County approved the tentative map before the incorporation election. In the case of Temecula, the incorporation election was November 7, 1989. We are still determining the date of the firs~ signature on the incorporation petition, but we believe it was in the Spring of 1988. Please feel free to call me should you have any questions. Sincerely, Scott F. P!eld City Attorney CITY OF TEMECULA sff/LTR15002:bjj cc: F. D. Aleshire, City Manager OPPICE OP ~ ROAD COMHISSIOHE~I AND COUNTY SURVEYOR CO~NT~ OF itIVgRSIDE LeRoy D. Smoot Road Commissioner and County Surveyor Mailin9 Address~ PO Box 1090 Rivers[de, CA 92502 Telephone (714) 787-6554 February 21, 1990 SUBblITTAL TO FRANK ALESHIRE, CITY MAHAGER OF THE CITY OF T~ FRO~ Acting C~t¥ Engineer [or the City o£ Te~ecula SUBJECT: Parcel ~lap 23426 in the First SupervisorlaX District SPECIFIC REQUEST: Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act and local.o~dinance ~t is REQUESTED that ~he City Council approve said map. All required certificata~ and documents have been filed and the map is ready for recordation. ~van F, Termant Acting City Engineer IFT:GAS:MSB:rdb The City of Temecu]a Re: Parcel Map 23426 Februazy 14, 1990 The developer wishes to enter into the following agreements to cover the improvements within this subdivision for: I~4~ROVE~4ENT OF STREETS (Bond No. 1203075) SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM (Service to be provided by Eastern Municipal Water District) (Bond NO. 1203076) SETTING OF LOT STAKES AND SUBDIVISION MONUMENTS (Bond No. 1203077) MATERIALS AND LABOR (Bonds No. 1203075 and 1203076) in the amounts of $54,500 and $3,750 are also attached. The above referenced bonds are issued by Amwest Surety Insurance Company. This map complies in all respects with the provisions cf Division 2 of Title 7 of the G©vernment Code and applicable local ordinances. The dedications made on said map are fer: Lots "A" and "B" and the abutters right~ ef access for public road and public utility purposes, and as part of the City Maintained Road System. OFFICE OF ~HE ROAD CONIqlSSIONER AND COUNTY SURVEYOR COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE LeRoy D. Smoot Road Commissioner and County Surveyor County Administrative Center Mailing Address: PO Box 1090 Riverside, CA 92502 Telephone (714) 787-6554 February 21, 1990 SUB~!ITTAL ~O FRANK ALESHIRE, CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM: Acting City Engineer for the City of Temecula SUBJECT: Tract Map 23160 in the First Supervisorial District SPECIFIC REQUEST: Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act and local ordinance it is REQUESTED that the City Council approve said map. All required certificates and documents have been filed and the map is ready for recordation. Acting City Engineer IFT:GAS:MSB:rdb The City Counsel of the City of Temecula Re: Tract 23160 2 February 13, 1990 The developer wishes to enter into the following agreements to cover the improvements within this subdivision for: IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS (Bond No. 1203078) WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (Water to be supplied by Rancho California Water District) (Bond No. 1203079) SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM (Service to be provided by Eastern Municipal Water District) (Cash security posted) SETTING OF LOT STAKES AND SUBDIVISION MONUMENTS (Cash security posted) MATERIALS AND LABOR (Bonds Nos. 1203078, 1203078 and 1203080 in the amounts of $52,500, $51,750 and $1,000 are also attached. The above referenced Bonds are issued by Amwest Surety Insurance Company. This map complies in all respects with the provisions of Division 2 of Title 7 of the Government Code and applicable local ordinances. The dedications made on said map are for: Lot "A" and the abutters rights of access for public road and public utility purposes and as part of the City Maintained Road System. 2. Drainage easements are dedicated to public use. WESTERN RIVERSIDE ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS AGENDA March 5, 1990 4:00 p.m. Moreno Valley Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER .................. Chairman MacGregor II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT TRANSIT FUNDING ................ Councilman Dick Kelly City of Palm Desert V. ROLE OF WRAG - MEASURE "A" SALES. TAX POUCY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Mayor Richard MacGregor VI. REPORT ON REGIONAL GOVERNANCE ..... Supervisor Kay Ceniceros MEETING VII. PROPOSED BY-LAWS ........... Councilmember Gaila Jennings VIII. STATUS REPORT - RECRUITMENT OF ........ City of Moreno Valley EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IX. NEW BUSINESS -- X. NEXT MEETING WESTERN RIVERSIDE ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Minutes of Meeting February 5, 1990 WRAG Members Present: Mayor Terry Frizzel, City of Riverside Mayor Pro Tem Larry Higgins, City of Banning Councilmember Gaila Jennings, City of Hemet Mayor Denise V. Lanning, City of Moreno Valley Mayor Richard MacGregor, City of Norco Mayor Ron Parks, City of Temecula Mayor Pro Tem Thelma Wilson, City of Perris Mayor Jim Winkler, City of Lake Elsinore Supervisor Norton Younglove, County of Riverside Staff and Guests: Gary Cottrell, CAO, County of Riverside Pamela Easter, Assistant City Manager, City of Moreno Valley Bob Fliehmann, Councilmember, City of Perris Bill Franklin, Councilmember, City of Corona Dave Gunderman, City of Lake Elsinore Joe Guzzetta, City Manager, City of Hemet John Johnson, County of Riverside Jerry Jollife, Planning Department, County of Riverside Richard Lashbrook, Deputy CAO, County of Riverside Donna Linton-Goss, Deputy CAO, County of Riverside Ron Loveridge, Councilmember, City of Riverside Jessie Myers, Administrative Assistant, County of Riverside Joe Richards, Planning Director, County of Riverside Eleanore Stone, Secretary, County of Riverside Lydia Stone, P.R. Director, Inland Disposal Thomas P. Tenorio, Department of Community Action, County of Riverside Rod Watkins, Assistant City Mgr., City of Hemet A. J. Wilson, Interim City Manager, City of Norco Mischelle Zimmerman, Assistant CAO, County of Riverside The meeting was called to order at 4:20 p.m. by Chairman Richard MacGregor. He called for self-introductions by all present. The minutes of the January 8th meeting were approved. The Chairman asked if anyone from the public had any comments to make. Joe Richards, Riverside County Planning Director, presented the Proposed County Growth Management Plan. The Growth Management Plan is viewed as a policy that binds all the elements of the General Plan together. There is heavy emphasis on capital facility planning and fiscal responsibilities. The County is also drafting an air quality element, as well as an open space plan, a capital facilities plan and a transportation plan. All of these relate to the growth management element. Jerry Joliffe discussed the process involved in preparation of the Growth Management Plan. When you look at the policies in terms of the long-term commitment that the County would be undertaking, it is a very significant and strategic agenda. The committee felt that the growth management element map is something that needs to be updated on a five-year basis to make sure that it is current with whatever the emerging trends are. Planning Commission hearings on the Growth Management Plan will probably be held in August 1990. The draft has been presented to the County Board of Supervisors along with both the policies and map. The Board directed Planning to prepare an Environmental Impact Report and then conduct the process of public review leading to public hearings. Probably during May a series of public workshops will be held around the County to assess the alternatives in terms of the map as well as the policies as to whether or not this strategy gets us where we want to go. If one looks at the policies, roughly half of them specifically refer to or imply that the County needs to sit down with the cities and talk about issues that affect them both. The policies are broken down into land use policies, socio-economic policies and financial policies. The land use policies are those that either directly indicate how the county should be allocated in terms of land use and development and what kinds of activities are directly linked to that which have an effect on land use. The committee came to the conclusion that the concept of clustering and mixing land uses is extremely important. Also considered to be very important was the phasing of public services and facilities, recognizing the actual demographic trends that are seen emerging in various areas of the County. The committee felt it was important to focus on five-year time periods. The County would sit down with the cities and look at developing joint plans for public facilities and services within those areas to match the needs foreseen over a five-year period. In terms of so¢io-economic policies, some of the things considered to be very important are providing for adequate housing opportunities and the ability to meet social needs relative to the criminal justice system. In order to do that, one must start with the demographic characteristics of the population and look at subregions within the county. The Cities and County need to sit down and evaluate trends in their particular areas. -2- The committee felt that the most important thing is to decide what we need to accomplish and then develop an implementation strategy. Richard Lashbrook gave a summary of the financial policies. The financial policies are a carry-through of some of the land use and socio-economic policies. These include the concept of establishing service levels, preparing a comprehensive capital improvement plan as well as a fiscal impact analysis to assess the dollar impact of new development, looking at new sources of revenue and ways to share revenue based upon the services provided and maintaining a reasonable level of debt within the county. The committee felt the financial policies should reflect a relationship between the other policies being proposed and some basic statements on financial issues that related to new development; but they should not be a comprehensive proposal for the financial health of the county. Mr. Lashbrook said that the County is moving ahead with a master plan for parks and trails, a master plan for habitat conservation and would like to move forward with a comprehensive transportation plan that could involve the County, the Cities, SCAG and other various entities involved with transportation on a regional basis. Mayor Winkler commented that the establishment of levels of service and the revenue aspect seemed to go hand in hand. He spoke about a variety of issues involving county contracts with cities for code enforcement, and even planning review. He cited an example at the intersection of Highway 74 and Interstate 15 where a development went through the City of Lake Elsinore's Planning Commission and the architecture was upgraded. Across the corner is an AM/PM Mart in the County area which does not come close to meeting the standards of the City of Lake Elsinore. He suggested that in an area where a city and the county have different standards, the higher standards should apply. Referring to level of services, he said that he would not be in favor of increased services by the County, because that means the County is competing with the cities for revenue. Councilmember Gaila Jennings expressed concern about implementation. She asked what would be the involvement of cities during implementation, and what would be the involvement of the committee that put the plan together. Joe Richards replied that this was an issue yet to be resolved. It will be an element of the County General Plan so the County will be responsible. Richard Lashbrook added that in the committee meetings a great deal of discussion centered on the need for cooperation among the groups. The proposal is that the plan be reviewed through public hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. Joe Richards stated that joint planning can be done within spheres of influence. There are some differences between a doing a joint plan and having a project within that sphere approved by a city council and city planning commission. Mayor Winkler said that although it might be more time consuming it would be more fruitful to have a study session with each individual city and then come to WRAG. -3- Supervisor Younglove pointed out that for many years the County has notified cities regarding projects in the unincorporated area within the sphere of influence. Speaking to the issue of higher standards, he stated that County standards are typically in the top one-third of city standards in terms of strictness. He urged that the Association take a lead role in addressing the matter of standards. Mayor Winkler suggested that perhaps certain areas, not the whole sphere, could be contracted for by the City and County, for example the special intersection of Highway 74 and Interstate 15. Another example would be the master plan for the perimeter of Lake Elsinore, and the development surrounding it. Joe Richards suggested a joint community plan within the sphere of influence. Policies and standards that would apply within the sphere area would be adopted and accepted by the City and the County. Then the individual Cities and the County would be using the same rules. Mayor Ron Parks asked how the Growth Management Element interrelates with community projects such as the Southwest Area Plan. Joe Richards replied that the relationship is that the community plans would be one of the implementation tools. If this plan is adopted with something different from the community plans, then the community plans will have to be amended. Councilmember Gaila Jennings said that if the County wanted the Cities' input in the process of approving these policies, then the cities have to be involved in the implementation. Mayor MacGregor summarized the discussion as a recommendation to the County to take the time and effort to approach individual cities and review the plan with them in detail. Supervisor Younglove suggested that the two subregional councils be used. Mayor MacGregor replied that the County might talk to two or three cities at a time. Mayor Denise Lanning and Councilmember Thelma Wilson urged that the County meet with the cities individually. It was suggested that the meetings be held in the evening. The City Managers should be contacted to set up the meetings. Councilmember Ron Loveridge presented the proposed FY 1990-91 WRAG budget. He pointed out the differences between the budget recommended by the Technical Advisory Committee and that proposed by the Budget Committee. In terms of the cost by jurisdiction based on population and assessed valuation, there is no expectation for any money from the cities until the start of the next budget year. Supervisor Younglove asked if the committee had discussed which agency's fringe benefit package would be used. A. J. Wilson recommended that the Association remain flexible on fringe benefits until it was determined what mix of benefits was most desirable in recruiting the Executive Director. Mayor Lanning suggested that if a city is in the position to donate leased space, that the donation be a credit toward their dues. -4- It wes moved by Supervisor Younglove, seconded by Mayor Lanning and carried unanimously that the proposed budget be approved. It was moved by Supervisor Younglove, seconded and carried unanimously 'that the job description for the Executive Director be accepted as presented. Mayor MacGregor requested that a more detailed explanation of the selection process be presented at the next meeting. Councilmember Gaila Jennings gave the report of the By-Laws Committee. Supervisor Younglove suggested that "by majority vote" be added to sentence under Amendments "may be amended by General Assembly." He also suggested inclusion of an additional sentence stating that any amendment must be first proposed and mailed to all members not less than "x" days before the General Assembly meeting. Referring to page 3, sentence stating that officers shall be elected by the General Assembly, he suggested that something should be added to explain how first officers were elected without a General Assembly meeting. It wes moved by Supervisor Younglove, seconded by Mayor Lanning, and carried unanimously that the Proposed By-Laws be continued for one month. Councilmember Jennings requested that at the next meeting each city be allowed to make proposals regarding different projects they are involved in. Mayor MacGregor esked that these items be sent to him for the agenda or to Mischelle Zimmerman. Councilmember Jennings pointed out that we do need to include a section for public comment and suggested that this be at the beginning of the meeting. The next meeting was set for Monday, March 5, 1990, 4:00 p.m. at Moreno Valley City Hall. The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eleanore Stone Secretary -5- TRANSIT FUNDING The Transportation Development Act (TDA) was passed in 1972 to provide a source of funding transit projects. It came into place when tax was levied on gasoline sales. The source is one-quarter cent of the basic six percent sales tax and it is collected at the source of generation. The money is then redistributed based upon population within the Western County, the Coachella Valley and the Eastern County areas. Due to the fact that the SunLine Transit Agency has committed 100% of its funding to transit and because on the redistribution of the funds that are collected, the Coachella Valley does not receive equitable redistribution based upon population. Discussion with the SunLine Transit Agency and Riverside County Transportation Commission has evolved to an approach whereby funds would be distributed based upon generation predicated on the redistributed funds being used 100% for transit projects. Clearly, the above approach is consistent and mechanically the same as Measure A is being funded. SunUne will present an overview of the recommended approach. WESTERN RIVERSIDE ASSOCIATION OFVERNMENTS TO: FROM: SUBJECT: February 23, 1990 Executive Committee Mayor Richard MacGregor, Chair POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX MEASURE Prior to establishment of the Western Riverside Council of Govemments, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) had an immediate need after the passage of Measure "A" to receive policy recommendations on the use of this sales tax revenue for transportation. In the Eastern County, CVAG serves as the Policy Advisory Committee to RCTC. Now that the COG has been established, consideration should be given to the policy role the COG should assume in implementing Measure "A" and working closely with RCTC. You should be aware, for example, that the Commission is starting to prepare its annual budget process. Estimated Local Transportation Fund revenues for Riverside County next fiscal year (FY 1990-91) are $22 million. The Commission can use up to 3% ($660,000) for planning with 50% ($330,000) to be used for planning studies in the Western County and Coachella Valley areas. The Coachella Valley Association of Governments will undoubtedly request some of these funds for studies in their area. It would be advantageous for the WRAG to identify studies needed in the Western County next year, to be done by staff or consultants, that should be considered by the Commission for funding under this program. Another consideration is to provide recommendations to the Commission regarding the Measure A Program. The Commission uses CrAG as the Measure "A" Policy Advisory Committee for the Coachella Valley Area. A Western County Measure "A" Policy Advisory Committee was formed because no other forum existed in the western county area. RCTC has had difficulty assembling a quorum at these meetings. It is my understanding that RCTC plans to schedule Policy Advisory Committee meetings to be on the same day, at the same place and just prior to the WRAG meetings. If this does not increase attendance, perhaps these issues should be taken up by the WRAG. MEMO KKY S. CENCEROS MEMO TO: -Mischelle Zimmerman Administrative Office DATE: February 22, 1990 SUBJECT: Kay Ceniceros/~ Report on Regionel Governance Meeting Here is a summary of the summit meeting on regional governance I attended February 5 for distribution with the March Western Riverside County COG meeting agenda. KC:JM:vc E BULLETIN Number 6 Supervisor John MacDonald (San Diego Countyl. The summit was intended to begin an open dialogue between the vadous groups in order tc share our perspectives on regional governance anc identify points of consensus regarding solutions towards the many problems associated with growth. The group focused on several issues including: · Formation of Boundaries for Regions anc Subregions Planning & Financing (The role of local, regional and state government) · State Role in Growth Management Governance (i.e. roles, composition, conflict resolution, etc.) Comprehensive Plans On Monday, Feb. 5 a summit of representatives from CSAC, the League of California Cities and Califomia Councils of Govemments (CALCOG) was held to discuss regional governance with respect to growth management in California. The CSAC representatives included: Supervisor Kay Caniceros (Riverside County), Supervisor Betsy Marclland (Yolo County), Supervisor Rolland Stare (Stanislaus County), Supervisor Jim' Streng (Sacramento County) and Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Lad Sheehan representing · Financing (i.e. revenue shadng, tax structure revision) The discussions resulted in several points of consensus including; 1) the need for a greater role for the state (i.e. a goals and policy report, guidelines for.implementing such policies, preparation of. a comprehensive state long rang~ in~.structure plan and funding for such a plan), 2) a restructuring of the current tax base whic,~ considers revenue capacity versus service responsibility, 3) conflict resolution should be resolved at the lowest possible level of government. The project facilitator, John Kidin, School of Public Administration,. Sacramento Center, University of Southern California, plans to prepare a summary, which will contain a comprehensive list of the points of consensus reached through the discussions. Further meetings of this group may continue as the press is on to seek solutions to 6 I February 12, 1990 LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN Number 61 -) the many problems local jurisdictions face with the continued growth within California. The Assembly Local Government Committee also held a heating on regional governance last week. Many witnesses that testified before the Committee on Wednesday, Feb. 7 were participants at the summit mentioned above. The testimony was familiar from the discussions which transpired at the summit meeting. League of California Cities representatives mentioned the need for a stronger state role, the possibility of determining regional boundaries based on commute corridors or air basins, and the need for a consensus to solve functional problems and resolve conflict resolution in order to address problems surrounding growth management. Other city representatives touted the need for: · Compact growth rather than urban sprawl; Limiting aggregate economic development to a level in agreement with housing and infrastructure; Housing policies that increase densities and provide land to meet the housing need; and Transportation demand management programs. Housing advocates stressed the failure of the current system to provide affordable housing and the need for a stronger regional role to require local governments to meet their fair share regional housing allocation numbers. Throughout the testimony from local officials came the common theme that local general plans should not be replaced by subregional or regional plans. Also relayed was the frustration with · comments received from the Department of Housing and Community Development after review of a local housing element, which identified the need for additional affordable housing by the jurisdiction without any direction as to how such housing or the necessary infrastructure should be financed. CSAC's testimony focused on the need for creation of a task force to-address the problems in a comprehensive manner as explained in the letter to the Governor and Legislative Leadership outlined in the Feb. 5 issue o.f the Legislative Bulletin. We further pointed out that better or more planning was only part of the solution and a primary component must be restructuring of the tax base. Local governments are continuously attacked for their land use decisions based on revenue generation, often referred to as the "fiscalization of land use'. Unless revenue capacity versus service responsibility is addressed as part of the solution the motivation for such decisions will remain. CSAC and the other parties which endorsed the letter requesting the creation of a task force plan to meet with the Legislature and Administration to pursue our request. Our perspective is in concert with the policy recommendation from a rec.ent report from the Assembly Office of Research, California 2000: Gettincl Ahead of the Growth Curve/The Future of Local Government in California. The recommendation calls for the formation of a blue-ribbon commission to set broad goals and policies concerning the direction growth .should take in California including, but not limited to: areas in which development is desirable, areas in which development should not occur and minimum standards defining adequate public facilities and levels of service. This report also contains many other policy recommendations. A copy of the full California 2000 report may be obtained for a small fee from the the Joint Publications Office, State Capitol, Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0001, (916) 445-4874. (CSAC Staff: Victor Pottorff and DeAnn Baker) 7 PROPOSED BY-LAWS FOR THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS ARTICLE I SECTION 1. These By-Laws are provided for the organization and administration of the Western Riverside Association of Governments which has been established under a Joint Powers Agreement. These By-Laws supplement the Agreement. SECTION 1. A. ARTICLE II GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETINGS The annual General Assembly shall meet in June. In addition, an annual local Government Conference may be held sometime during each fiscal year and a General Assembly social event may be held anytime as provided for in Article II, Section I. B. The locations and times of these meetings shall be determined by the Executive Committee. Special meetings of the General Assembly may be called by the Chairman or a majority of the member agencies. SECTION 2. OFFICERS A. The officers of the General Assembly, elected by a majority vote thereof, shall be a Chairman and Vice-Chairman, who shall be elected annually before July of each year. To be eligible for nomination and election, said officer shall be a member of the Executive Committee, having been so designated in Ce accordance with Article III, Section 1.A. of these By-Laws. The Executive Committee, as defined in Article III, shall recommend nominees for Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Additional nominations may be made in the General Assembly. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall not be representatives of the same member governments. The Chairman of the General Assembly shall preside at all meetings of the General Assembly and Executive Committee. In the absence of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman shall perform all the duties of the Chairman. In the absence of both the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, the General Assembly or Executive Committee shall choose one of its voting members to chair the meeting for that day only. SECTION 3. VOTING A. Each member Councilmember, vote for each votes of each be no more than the number of voting members of the General Assembly shall have one Mayor or Supervisor present; however, the member government shall present. B. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman are eligible to vote. C. Except as provided in the Joint Powers Agreement or in these By-Laws, voting in the General Assembly shall be by a majority vote of those member government representatives present and voting. SECTION 4. QUORUM A majority of the voting General Assembly membership shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of all business unless otherwise provided by the Joint Powers -2- Agreement or these By-Laws. ARTICLE III EXECUTIVE COMMI'I'I'EE SECTION 1. MEMBERSHIP A. There is hereby established as the administrative and management arm of the General Assembly an Executive Committee. B. The Executive Committee will be composed of the Mayor from each of the member cities and four members of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, the remaining member of the Board of Supervisors shall serve as an alternate, except any City Council, at its discretion, can appoint a Mayor Pro Tern or other city council member in place of the Mayor. The Immediate Past Chairman of WRAG shall be entitled to serve on the Executive Committee without vote for a one-year term provided he/she remains an elected official of one of WRAG's member governments. SECTION 2. OFFICERS A. The officers of the Executive Committee shall be the Chairman and Vice- Chairman of the General Assembly. B. The duties of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be the same as prescribed bv the General Assembly. C. If an officer misses three consecutive meetings, the office shall automatically be deemed vacant; and the Executive Committee shall appoint a replacement. SECTION 3. MEETINGS A. The Executive Committee shall meet the first Monday of each month be<3innin.Q -3- at 4:00 p.m. at the Moreno Vallev Citv Council Chamber. 23119 Cottonwood Avenue. Buildina B. or monthly at times and places designated by the Executive Committee at the regular meeting preceding the next scheduled meeting. 1. Notice, including an agenda and any information packet, shall be given to all member governments of the time and place of all regular meetings of the Executive Committee by mailing a written notice of the same at least ten (10) days prior to the meeting; provided, however, that failure to receive such notice shall not invalidate any proceeding of such meeting. When changes are made to a General Assembly or Executive Committee agenda that has already been posted, the changes shall be noted on the official agenda displayed at WRAG's offices for public notice. In addition, all members of the General Assembly or Executive Committee shall be notified of the changes made by telephone or written notice no less than 24 hours in advance of the meeting. QUORUM SECTION 4. A. A majority of the member agencies must be represented by a voting member to constitute a quorum. SECTION 5, VOTING A. Each member city present shall have one vote in the Executive Committee, and each County Supervisor present shall have one vote (up to a maximum of four). B. The City Manager and/or City Administrator of each member city and the County Administrative Officer are non-voting members of the Executive Committee. C. Only members present or designated alternates may vote. -4- SECTION 6. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS A. To prepare and recommend to the General Assembly a yearly budget for funds and distribution and to determine the estimated share of contributions from each member government. B. To administer, manage, contract for, and handle the financing of the studies, projects and programs approved and adopted by the General Assembly. C. To review proposed Federally-funded projects within the Association area which require clearing-house review in accordance with Circular A-95. D. To report the findings and recommendations of all projects to the General Assembly for action. E. To submit policy and planning positions to the General Assembly. F. To select and employ an Executive Director who shall be the Chief Administrative Officer of the Association and who shall have administrative supervision over all other employees of the Association. The Executive Committee shall establish personnel rules and regulations and shall provide for compensation of Association staff. G. To appoint regular and special committeas within the Executive Committee. H. To establish and operate a permanent office for the Association of Governments upon approval of the General Assembly. I. The Executive Committee may also appoint advisory committees on such projects as it determines advisable. J. Members of advisory committees may be named from any government agency, from non-public groups, or organizations, or from the general public. Advisory -5- committees shall meet and report as directed by the Executive Committee. SECTION I. A. ARTICLE IV RULES OR PROCEDURES PARUAMENTARY AUTHORITY A policy and procedures manual for the governance of all General Assembly and Committee meetings will be adopted by WRAG's Executive Committee and confirmed by the first General Assembly meeting following its adoption for the governance of all General Assembly and Committee meetings. Except as otherwise provided herein, or by vote of the majority of those present at General Assembly or Executive Committee meetings, that policy and procedures manual shall constitute the parliamentary authority for the Western Riverside Association of Governments. SECTION 2. NOTICE OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS Except resolutions of courtesy, commendations, appreciation or condolence, no resolution expressing the opinion or policy of the Association on any questions shall be considered by the Association, unless it has been submitted to the General Assembly membership for approval not less than three weeks prior to a general Assembly meeting. good and sufficient cause is If time requirements are critical and providing demonstrated, this notice requirement may be waived at a meeting of the General Assembly by a majority vote of those present and voting. -6- SECTION 1. A. ARTICLE V DEFINITION OF WESTERN RIVERSIDE AREA The Western Riverside Area is defined as all the unincorporated and incorporated area westerly of and including the City of Banning bounded by San Diego County to the south, San Bernardino County to the north and Orange County to the west. SECTION 1. A. ARTICLE Vl AMENDMENTS These By-Laws and any amendments thereto may be amended by the General Assembly, by maioritv vote. Proposed amendments shall be submitted. in writing. to members of the General Assemblv not less than ten davs Drior to the General Assembly meetinQ. -7- r"-:' COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE .~ OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR Ivan F. Tennant, Acting Road Commissioner & County Surveyor County Administrative Center Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1090 Riverside, CA 92502 Telephone: (714)275-6880 February 15, 1990 City of Temecula P.O. Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 Attention: F. D. Aleshire, City Manager RE: Traffic issues City of Temecula Dear Mr. Aleshire: The Riverside County Road Department has implemented a number of items to help the traffic flow in the City of Temecula. We have been working with the California Highway Patrol (CHP), along with your City's Traffic Committee. Most of the items listed on the attached Traffic Congestion Relief Plan, as prepared by the CHP, have been implemented. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (714)275-6800. Very truly yours, Richard Barrera, Traffic Engineer RB:WEM:bjl attachment cc: W. E. Morgan, Jr., Technical Engineering Unit Supervisor TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF PLAN designed for City of Temecula During the past year, the Temecula area has experienced a dramatic rise in traffic flow on the two major traffic arteries over the I-IS Freeway connecting the east and mest sides of the City. The two major highways are Winchester Road (S/R 79) and Rancho California Road. The addition of stop signs on both overcrossings to alleviate freeway off-ramp traffic have also appeared to exacerbate the congestion during peak commute traffic hours, causing traffic to back-up to nearby intersections and create near gridlock conditions. Morning commute traffic on Hinchester Road appears to be heaviest travelling westbound. Stop and go traffic on Winchester Road starts east of Ynez Road and continues past the 1-15 Freemay overcrossing to Jefferson Avenue. A ripple effect causes traffic to aIso back up on northbound Ynez Road from Winchester Road. Horning commute traffic on Rancho California Road appears to be equally divided. The heaviest traffic in both directions continues to be east of the freemay due mainly to the close proximity of Front Street and it's signalized intersection. Afternoon commute traffic on eastbound Winchester Road backs up from the I-iS Freeway overcrossings to several blocks west of Jefferson Avenue. As the result of northbound traffic on Jefferson Avenue making right turns onto eastbound Winchester Road during left turn phases, near gridlock has developed on eastbound Winchester Road west of Jefferson Avenue. Vehicles entering Winchester Road from parking lots and side streets add to this congestion. Afternoon commute traffic on eastbound Rancho California Road backs up from the free~ay overcrossings to west of Diaz Road. Traffic on north and southbound Front Street also backup for some distance due to the congestion on Rancho California Road between Front Street and the overcrossing. Traffic on Rancho California Road east of the freeway is usually free flow The intersection of Ynez Road and Rancho California Road has little traffic congestion during commute traffic hours. A study of the traffic patterns on the two congested highways by this Department has revealed that the optimum solution would be the replacement of the stop signs at the two overcrossings with synchronized traffic signals. This would allow a much larger volume of traffic to move unrestricted through the problem areas. As a short term solution until signals are installed, the following action plan is recommended. ACTION STEPS Traffic Direction Provide traffic direction at the following locations during peak traffic hours. Winchester Road at s/b 1-15 off-ramp. Winchester Road at n/b 1-15 off-ramp. Winchester Road at Ynez Road. Rancho California Road at s/b 1-15 off ramp. Rancho California Road at n/b I-1S offramp. B. ROADWAY MODIFICATIONS 1. Winchester Road. Create additional westbound traffic lane on Winchester Road from Ynez Road to ~est of 1-15. Add additional left turn lane on ~estbound Winchester Road at Jefferson Avenue. By utilizing a split phase signal, the lane would be designated as an optional through traffic lane. 2. Front Street. Add additional left turn lane froa southbound Front Street to east bound Rancho California Road. Lengthen present left turn lane from southbound Front Street to eastbound Rancho California Road. Rancho California Road. Create right turn only traffic lane on eastbound Rancho California Road at 1-15 southbound onramp. Create right turn only traffic lane on westbound Rancho California Road at I-IS northbound onramp. Lengthen left turn 1-15 freeway access lanes on Rancho California Road. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS Reconditioning and repainting of all roadway markings in problem area. Post additional "Right lane must turn right" signs and road markings on Front Street at Rancho California Road. Post anti-gridlock warning signs. a. Rancho California Road at Front Street. Winchester Road at Jefferson Avenue.