Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Agenda Packets - Regular Meeting 8/20/1991SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCI AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DATE August 20, 1991 TIME: 6:30 p.m. PLACE: COMMUNITY CENTER 625 South Pico San Jacinto, Cal iforni EXECUTIVE (Closed) SESSION for Labor Personnel & Potential Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 1.0 CALL TO ORDER 7: Roll Call Moment of Silence for Ref Pledge of Allegiance CONSENT CALENDAR ection All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will ,enacted by one motion by the City Council in the form listed. There will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the motion unless members of the City Council, staff or the public requests specified items to be removed and/or discussed. Anyone wishing to ,discuss:,a Consent Calendar item should 'dome forward, upon invitation' of the Mayor, state their name, address - and the Consent Calendar item number. MOTION: Approve the' consent calendar as presented (or corrected) 2. Minutes -of Regular Meeting of August 6, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes, of August 6, 1991, as -submitted. 2 2 Warrant Register RECOMMENDATION: Approve Warrant Register No. 25536 through 25902 dated 7/1/91 through 8/15/91, in the amount of $794,475.43 as submitted by the Finance Director. 2.3 Buena Vista Basin - Utility Easement RECOMMENDATTION: Adopt Resolution No. accepting the utility easement and assignment to Riverside County Flood Control. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE UTILITY EASEMENT AND ASSIGNMENT TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL 2.4 Fred James Claim RECOMMENDATION: Deny the claim of Fred James pursuant to Government Code. 2.5 GTE Corporation Claim RECOMMENDATION: Deny the claim of GTE Corporation. pursuant to Government Code. 2.6 ARCO RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council to authorize ARCO to'proceed with the engineering and direct Staff to prepare the necessary agreement,. 2.7 Northwest Improvement Resolution RECOMMENDATION. Adopt Resolution No, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, CLARIFYING EXEMPTIONS TO THE OPEN SPACE DESIGNATIONS ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 1906 2.8 San Jacinto Police Officers 'Association RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Memorandum of Understanding and authorize City Manager to execute and negotiate with the San Jacinto Police Officers' Association END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by: Seconded by: to approve consent calendar items 2.1 through 2.8 and adopt Resolution Nos and waive the readings in full. Vote: 3.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Appeal - SP 2-88 Amendment RECOMMENDATION: None Motion by: 4.0 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Seconded by: 5.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 5.1 Sewer Inspection/Cleaning Contract - Vryheid RECOMMENDATION: Award the Sewer Inspection/Cleaning Contract to. Houston and Harris in an amount not to exceed $20,000 from Fund 14, Department 4600, Account 2710. 5.2 Default B & Sons - Townsel RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends that the Council suspend the operation of the contract and order the work to be. completed by separate contract and deduct the cost of such work from their contract 5.3 North Mountain Comm Site (Continued from 8/6/91) Kozma/Cox/Vega (Information from staff to'be delivered to Councilmembers on Monday, August 19.) RECOMMENDATION: 5.4 Employee Fitness. Program - Vega RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Employee Fitness Program 5.5 Defeasance of Certificate of Participation - Vega RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. of the City of San Jacinto Authorizing the Defeasance of the Certificates of Participation Issues RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE DEFEASANCE OF THE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION ISSUES 5.6 Award Telephone Program - Kozma (Information from staff to be delivered to Councilmembers on Monday, August 19.) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council authorize the lease -purchase of the GTE CentraNet Service and GTEL'S Norstar Key Telephone Equipment 5.7 City Hall Lease Cox RECOMMENDATION: Approve the terms of the lease agreement with Divine and direct staff to prepare a lease agreement for execution by the Mayor. 6.0 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 7.0 ADJOURNMENT Motion by: Seconded by: Action• to adjourn to September 3, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. Vote: Time: I, Maurice Armster, do hereby certify that I caused to be posted the foregoing agenda this 16th day of August, 1991, as required by law. Maurice Armster, City Clerk Deputy SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DATE: August 27, 1991 TIME: 6:00 p.m. PLACE: COMMUNITY CENTER 625 South Pico San Jacinto, California EXECUTIVE (Closed) SESSION for Labor Personnel & Potential Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 1.0 CALL TO ORDER - 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Moment of Silence for Reflection Pledge of Allegiance 2.0 CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion by the City Council in the form listed. There will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the motion unless members of the City Council, staff or the public requests specified items to be removed and/or discussed. Anyone wishing to discuss a Consent Calendar item should come forward, upon invitation of the Mayor, state their name, address and the Consent Calendar item number. MOTION: Approve the consent calendar as presented (or corrected). 2.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of August 6, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the supplemental Minutes of August 6, 1991, as submitted. 2.2 Warrant Register RECOMMENDATION: Approve Warrant Register No. 25536 through 25902 dated 7/1/91 through 8/15/91, in the amount of $794,475.43 as submitted by the Finance Director. 2.3 Buena Vista Basin - Utility Easement RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. accepting the utility easement and assignment to Riverside County Flood Control. RESOLUTION NO. 1c\ /j A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE UTILITY EASEMENT AND ASSIGNMENT TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL 2.4 Fred James Claim RECOMMENDATION: Deny the claim of Fred James pursuant to Government Code. 2.5 GTE Corporation Claim RECOMMENDATION: Deny the claim of GTE Corporation pursuant to Government Code. 2.6 ARCO RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council to authorize ARCO to proceed with the engineering and direct Staff to prepare the necessary agreement. 2.7 Northwest Improvement Resolution RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. 1991 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, CLARIFYING EXEMPTIONS TO THE OPEN SPACE DESIGNATIONS ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 1906 2.8 San Jacinto Police Officers 'Association RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Memorandum of Understanding and authorize City Manager to execute and negotiate with the San Jacinto Police Officers' Association END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by: Seconded by: to approve consent calendar items 2.1 through 2.8 and adopt Resolution Nos. Mb AA.c(5,1 and waive the readings in full. Vote: 2 3.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Appeal - SP 2-88 Amendment RECOMMENDATION: None Motion by: Seconded by: to ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 5.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 5.1 Sewer Inspection/Cleaning Contract - Vryheid RECOMMENDATION: Award the Sewer Inspection/Cleaning Contract to Houston and Harris in an amount not to exceed $20,000 from Fund 14, Department 4600, Account 2710. 5.2 Default B & Sons - Townsel RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council suspend the operation of the contract and order the work to be completed by separate contract and deduct the cost of such work from their contract 5.3 North Mountain Comm Site (Continued from 8/6/91) - Kozma/Cox/Vega (Information from staff to be delivered to Councilmembers on Monday, August 19.) RECOMMENDATION: 5.4 Employee Fitness Program - Vega RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Employee Fitness Program 5.5 Defeasance of Certificate of Participation - Vega RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. of the City of San Jacinto Authorizing the Defeasance of the Certificates of Participation Issues RESOLUTION NO. 1.9� Z A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE DEFEASANCE OF THE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION ISSUES 5.6 Award Telephone Program - Kozma (Information from staff to be delivered to Councilmembers on Monday, August 19.) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council authorize the lease -purchase of the GTE CentraNet Service and GTEL'S Norstar Key Telephone Equipment 5.7 City Hall Lease - Cox RECOMMENDATION: Approve the terms of the lease agreement with Divine and direct staff to prepare a lease agreement for execution by the Mayor. 6.0 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 6.1 Discussion of Council Travel and Conference Expenses 7.0 ADJOURNMENT Motion by: Seconded by: adjourn to September 3, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. Vote: Time: Action: to I, Maurice Armster, do hereby certify that I caused to be posted the foregoing agenda this 26th day of August, 1991, as required by law. Maurice Armster, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk 4 SUPPLHnNTA4 Miglittg REGULAR MEETING SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY August 6, 1991 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Boykin at the Community Center, 625 South Pico, San Jacinto, California. PRESENT: Councilmembers Ford, Leahy, Richards and Mayor Boykin ABSENT: Councilmember Hafliger A Moment of Silence was observed for Reflection The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Boykin 2.0 CONSENT CALENDAR City Manager Easter requested that item 2.4 be pulled from the consent calendar. The Warrant Register cannot be ready at this time due to computer problems. Council consensus to make the following corrections to minutes of July 16, 1991: Item 2.1 - Page 4 - Paragraph 2 - State that Councilmember Leahy inquired, not stated. Item 2.1 - Page 4 - Paragraph 5 - Clarify that Councilmember Richards comments were relating to a telephone conversation Item 2.1 - Page 6 - Paragraph 3 - Change goof to good. Council consensus to make the following corrections to minutes of July 23, 1991: Item 2.2 - Page 1 - Paragraph 5 - Finance Director comments - add after "an automatic" the words "annual increase up to 2% until buildout." Council consensus to make the following correction to item 2.13 Study Session Guidelines: 1 Paragraph 5 of the policy, change "arguments" to "debate". Paragraph 1 of the policy to read that meetings are the "First Tuesday following the first Monday of the month." Councilmember Leahy commented she would like to see a better rate negotiated in the future on item 2.12 Fines and Forfeitures Agreement with the County. Councilmember Richards voiced concern regarding the lot sizes for item 2.17 Revised Development Plan Tract 24047-1. Mr. Richards was advised of the limitations associated with PUD's and the exchange for open space and recreational area and other amenities. In response to Council inquiries, Finance Director Vega stated that at the completion of the contract proposed under item 2.18 Property Tax Audit City staff will be able to do this in house. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve the consent calendar with the corrections noted above and with the exception of items 2.4 and 2.16. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 2.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 16, 1991 Approved as corrected. 2.2 Minutes of Adjourned Meeting of July 23, 1991 Approved as corrected. 2.3 Minutes of Adjourned Meeting of July 24, 1991 Approved as submitted. 2.5 Final Parcel Map 25869 (I.S. Properties) Located on the southwest corner of Ramona Blvd. and State Street. Approved the final parcel map and authorized the Mayor to execute the public improvements agreement. 2.6 Bond Release - Tract 24745 (Forecast Corporation) Located east of Vernon Avenue, west of Camino Los Banos and between Artesia Street and First Street. Released monument bond #200745S in the amount of $5,000. 2.7 Whitefeather Farms Composting Facility (AB 2296) Adopted Resolution No. 1984 accepting site identification and description of facility. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 1984 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE WHITEFEATHER FARMS COMPOSTING FACILITY 2.8 Esplanade Avenue Associates Claim Denied claim pursuant to Government Code. 2.9 UCR Law School Adopted Resolution No. 1985 supporting the establishment of a Law School at the University of Riverside. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LAW SCHOOL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT RIVERSIDE 2.10 Ordinance No. 938 - Citation Authority Waived full second reading of ordinance and Adopted Ordinance No. 938. ORDINANCE NO. 938 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OD SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER 1.12 TO TITLE 1 OF THE SAN JACINTO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY 2.11 Park Use Request Received and Filed. 2.12 Fines & Forfeitures Agreement - County of Riverside Approved agreement for the distribution of fines and forfeitures. 2.13 Study Session Guidelines Approved policy for conduct of Study Sessions as corrected. 2.14 Assistant Building Official Approved job description as presented. 2.15 Senior Center Nutrition Program Approved agreement with County of Riverside for rental of Community Center for Senior Nutrition Program at a rate of $250 monthly. 2.17 Revised Development Plan Tract 24047-1 (Morrison Homes) Approved the revised development plan as presented. 3 2.18 Property Tax Audit Contract Approved the contract for Property Tax Audit with Hinderliter & DeLlamas in an amount not to exceed $10,800. 2.19 Treasurer's Report - July, 1991 Received and filed. Items Pulled From Consent: 2.4 Warrant Register Council consensus to pull at the request of the City Manager. 2.16 Extension of Time Tract 22665 (Palomar Savings & Loan) Located on the southwest corner of Palm and Seventh. Approved the third extension of time for one year with the added language for school mitigation fees. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Richards, seconded by Councilmember Ford to pull item 2.16 from the Consent Calendar. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. Greg Weiler, of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron, representing developers as noted in the letter dated today, and enclosed as part of the agenda packet, stated he was present to address the propriety of the City requiring for developers of single-family dwelling units to participate in a Mello Roos District to address school facility needs. Although sympathetic to the situation, he stated it is a community problem facing the entire state, and the state has failed to provide sufficient funding for schools. He feels the state statutes are very clear on what is required by developers. A limitation of $1.58 per square foot was established in 1986 and feels the City cannot require a new tax in addition to the fee set by law. Became aware, after talking to the City Attorney and the District Attorney, their position was they had found a loop hole in the state statute. While he acknowledged it was a novel concept with an admirable end, does not believe the end justifies the means. Stated he felt this action was strictly prohibited under Government Code Section 65996. No court decision has determined this action to be legal, and he feels it is not. Feels if this were legal many other agencies would also be doing this, however they are not. He spoke with legislators who proposed the 1986 legislation, and they indicate this was not the intent. It is the desire of the developers to work with the school district and the City to obtain adequate school facilities and requested that the City refrain from 4 imposing this illegal requirement. Further, requested a study to determine the extent of the need which has not been established, as well as a means for equitable spread of costs to all residents, not just the new residents. And finally, requested the Council consider the school district impact on residents and how they would finance police, fire and other municipal needs if all the funding is used for school facilities. Requested the City continue to work with the school district to resolve this matter to the satisfaction of all. Mr. Weiler further questioned the city's right to mandate a favorable vote by the property owner to secure approval of a project. The laws specifically grant voting rights with regard to taxation, and the City is taking away the property owner's right to vote yes or no as they seek approval. Stated it is a matter of civil rights. City Attorney Cox, in response to the Council, stated he had a conversation with Mr. Weiler, and feels he is over- looking part of Government Code. Section 65996 states the exclusive methods to mitigate. Also that when considering approval of development projects, Article 2.5 of the Government Code specifically lists the provisions allowing the establishment of a Mello Roos. Further, reading from the Government Code, "...permits the imposition of a Mello Roos on development...", and feels the only question is the way the City is required to mitigate. Mr. Weiler, relating the intent of the Legislature, felt the section makes it perfectly clear that the provision is, if owners want to finance with a Mello Roos, the $1.58 per square foot does not prevent a voluntary Mello Roos, but it does not allow cities to impose an additional tax. Further, the state specifically provides that a special tax must be voted upon by the people. If it were legal, it is an exception and the $1.58 per square foot would be irrelevant. Donald Morris, 45701 Classic Way, Temecula, Property Owner. Stated he was here to request an extension and the Mello Roos is a much broader issue. Although not as astute with regard to the law, is requesting an extension without the condition as proposed, on the basis of his inability to acquire information on what he is accepting as a condition and being able to determine the ability to comply. In addition, if he has paid all the fee mandates of Government Code Section 65995 and joins the assessment district as required by the City to finance school facilities, feels he is being charged twice. If the $1.58 per square foot is not adequate then this problem should be resolved at the state level, and a determination as to what is adequate should be made. Has posed questions regarding the principle, how this is assessed, as well as how a single owner would have to pay the actual assessment payments. After there are new owners, would this pass on or carry over for years until buildout, and what about when there is no impact on the schools. These could not be answered. Concerned if other alternatives have been pursued, such as the state general fund and general obligation bonds to provide facilities, to be paid by the entire community for the community needs. Feels the requirement is unfair, when others farther in the process, are not also required to participate in a Mello Roos. Community Development Director McNabb related the discussion occurring between the development community, the school district and the city. The concern is that if a Mello Roos is used, there is a need for a level playing field so that what is fair for one is fair for all, and no one developer will have a marketing edge. However, there are some projects, by their nature and their place in the process, will be presumably exempt from the Mello Roos. It all depends on the policy established. For the past 1-2 years, environmental analysis conditions have been placed on new development to address impacts. Rather than denying the request, the City has been imposing conditions adequate to address those impacts. The concerns are understandable; the unknown costs per unit per year, and the set fee. The City, school district and development community are working to endorse a concept which will be equitable. Mayor Boykin stated that the $1.58, per the school district, only covers the possibility of portable facilities and does not address actually building schools. With regard to state school funds, the funding approved by vote last June, was obligated prior to the vote and there is still a $3 billion deficit statewide for school facilities. The effort is to try and alleviate a problem which is quickly approaching San Jacinto. The state has passed the funding problems on to local government. Later on this evenings agenda, is a proposal for a consultant to review school fees and work with the City, school district and development community to arrive at an agreeable figure. The applicant related some concerns from examples of situations in other locals; one where a developer was assessed on 700 acres and is already paying interest on the property for the funding of $10 million infrastructure and $8 million on school facilities. In addition, a Mello Roos which was invested in Executive Life, was recently reported to have been in receivership. Feels it is the responsibility of everyone to provide a means to fund schools. Related the possible marketing problems if two tracts, immediately across the street from each other, with one not participating in a Mello Roos and the negative impact on marketing for the tract that must participate. Further, presently it is not possible to participate in a Mello Roos, since one has not yet formed. Would like other alternative funding mechanisms investigated before taking the path of least resistance, or the one with the most leverage. The applicant needs to know what the costs are. Requested an extension without the condition, and when they come back for final recordation will have worked with Community Development on a condition for joining a Public Facilities District and will join on their own accord, but cannot agree to the open ended nature of the costs at this time. Councilmember Ford stated that a number of developers have been working with the City and school district and are generally very willing to join the CFD for infra- structure and school facilities. He feels this is only fair to make the same request of this applicant. Applicant would agree, if participating would benefit his property or that of the future owners. He was not aware of any negotiations that have transpired. Would first like to know the costs, and the agreement clearly defined. Suggested amending the condition later when more information is available. Community Development Director McNabb advised that at any time prior to recordation, with a public hearing, there can be a reconsideration of the conditions of approval. Clarified for the applicant that the process would take approximately 60 days. In response to a question by Councilmember Richards, staff explained that the situation regarding the Rice tentative map some weeks ago, was not the addition of a new condition, but rather a determination if the conditions had been met, which the Council determined the conditions had been met. In response to Council, Community Development Director McNabb, stated that so long as the request for tensirn was received in a timely manner, the City has essentiai'ly a 60-90 day time frame to act upon this matter. Councilmember Leahy inquired if the applicant agreed to the condition in the extension now, with the provision he could come back later and amend. Applicant responded yes, under protest, in order to obtain an extension now and resolve within 30 days. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Mayor Boykin to continue this matter to the September 3, 1991, meeting, with the expectation that this matter may have more resolve to it by that time. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting and Councilmember Hafliger absent. 3.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Abandonment - Between Santo and Seventh RECOMMENDATION: Conduct Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. ordering abandonment of a portion of alley between Santo Drive and Seventh Street, east of Jordan Avenue and authorizing recording of same. Community Development Director McNabb briefly explained the concerns of neighboring property owners. Staff met with the Homeowner's Association to determine the best course of action, which was to abandon the alley. In the past the property was given back to the asociation to control. Staff feels the best recommendation is to abandon the alley (retaining only the utility easements) and allow the apartments and association to work out a reciprocal access. Mayor Boykin opened the public hearing. Gary Phillips, Property Owner at 322 East Seventh Street, adjacent to the alley. Read aloud a letter which has been submitted as part of the agenda packet. Basically, an affirmative action on this matter would result in Mr. Phillips being unable to proceed with future development plans for a garage next to the home and additional units behind the home. Stated the future development of this property was a contingency on the sale of this property. Mr. McNabb explained the Council would could restructure the property line to provide access by giving an easement to the property owner;r ?Phillips. Stated, however, that the property owner has no legal right to access to his parcel from the location requested. When this was dedicated to the City in the 1960's, a one foot barrier strip was retained and controlled by the City in order to control access. Further, the owner, by building a garage, would prevent access to the back. The concerns voiced by the association were increased traffic access 8 in the rear, generated by the apartments. John Hufinger, resident of Napier Villas, voiced serious concerns regarding the formal action to abandon and such informal action to close off access with a gate. Intention was to keep alley open as public domain thoroughfare, presently in closed state with weeds and oleanders. In response to Councilmember Leahy, speaker indicated that he would be willing to take Mr. Phillips easement into consideration. Mr. McNabb explained the City's ability to take such an action in light of the public safety concerns which favored the closure of a non -publicly maintained alley. Further, advised that once abandoned, it becomes association property and they do as they choose with it. Mary Gary, 332 East Seventh Street, is the responsible party for the fencing. Property is owned by her parents and she has durable power of attorney. Reading from her prepared statement, cited the following reasons for fencing the alley adjoining their property: 1) Has incurred much trouble and harassment. 2) It is an unimproved dirt alley with many ruts. 3) People pound on the side of the house, throw rocks at the windows and paint graffiti on the side of the house. Presented a photo of the last incident. 4) Constantly bothered by racing vehicles, causing a great deal of noise late at night and almost hitting the house. 5) Some park next to house with motors running and radios blaring. 6) They have been asked to move and have even been threatened. In order to alleviate these problems, they installed a fence to close access to the alley, with permission from the City. All, but two residents of Napier Villas accepted keys to the gates, as do repair and service persons, extras for vacancies and the police. In addition, a lock box has been provided for fire access. The $3,000 cost for the gates was from their own pocket and it has improved security and safety, and people can sleep at night. It has also provided enhanced security in the common area of Napier Villas. Many neighbors are happy with the installation of the gates and have requested that they remain. Previously the alley provided an escape route and now the gates work to help the Police apprehend. Identified an insurance letter which requested the gates be left in place after abandonment to deter theft and vandalism. Requested the gates remain in place and be enforced by law. Bill O'Hare, Treasurer of Napier Villas, stated that the insurance letter was originated and written at the request of Mr. Gary, and upon talking to their agent, who did not understand the letter, determined the letter came from the Regional Offices. In response to inquiry by Councilmember Leahy, Mr. O'Hare stated there is no indication from the Police or Fire, nor any file on the problems associated with the alley, prior to, during or after the fence installation. Police Chief Kozma stated that alleys are normally conducive to vandalism and are used as escape routes. At the time of responding to incidents with cars, with the combined fact that the alley was unimproved and not maintained by the City, there was a give and take on the matter. The best recommendation was to abandon and maintain the right of access for water. Unable to determine if the fence has been a deterrent since installation. Bay Burns, 322 Seventh , President of Napier Villas, advised that there is about a 50/50 split on the issue of the fence. Some of the concerns voiced have been who is liable for the alley when people climb on the fence and any possible vandalism to the fence. Does not understand why the alley was originally dedicated. With the fence installed, it is causing additional traffic impact to residents on Santo Drive. There has been no vote by the association at this time with regard to opening or closing the alley. There being no further speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Boykin closed the public hearing. Councilmembers Ford and Leahy would prefer to continue the matter, so staff can review the possibility of the fence remaining and the security it is providing. Councilmember Richards and Mayor Boykin unsure of what the purpose would be for continuing this matter. Staff has made a recommendation and the decision should be that of the association. Community Development Director McNabb advised the City could only mandate the fence on the public right of way, not private property, as where the fence is located and would be the case if abandoned. 10 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to continue this matter to the meet- ing of September 3, 1991, and instruct staff to come back with additional facts, work with the Council Public Works Subcommittee the association and property owners on a recommendation. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. City Attorney Cox will mediate the fence issue with Mr. Phillips and the association and try to facilitate a transfer of private easement. 3.2 Annexation #68 - LAFCO #90-87-3 (Continued from 7/16/91) Located east of Hewitt Street, south of Washington Avenue, west of Windham Street and north of Park Avenue. Community Development Director McNabb provided a brief staff report. Mayor Boykin opened the public hearing. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Boykin closed the public hearing. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Ford to adopt Resolution No. 1986 approving Annexation #68. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1986 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO (ANNEXATION NO. 68) 3.3 Northwest Improvement Area (Continued from 7/16/91) RECOMMENDATION: Accept testimony on Northwest Improvement Area and adopt Resolution No. approving amendment of the Land Use Element, Circulation Element, Aesthetic, Cultural, Recreational Resources Element, and Hazards Element of the General Plan and adopt by reference the Northwest Improvement Project. Community Development Director McNabb advised it is staff recommendation to take testimony and continue this matter to the meeting of September 3, 1991. so staff can address thc is-uc of development policies adjacent to agricultur al uses. Additionally, staff requested a correction to the circulation element on page 10. And finally, the designation and existing zoning on Mr. Gruda's property is in conflict, and an adjustment would have to be made for that if Council so desires. Further, staff has re- 11 viewed the storm drain facilities on the master plan and the development plans mmhopkoog and does not find them to be inconsistent. Emphasized these are only conceptual. Mayor Boykin continued to call for testimony on this public hearing. Donald Holmes, 142 South Sheraton ShOriff, and owner of property on Cottonwood. Referring to flood control documents, still feels there are inconsistencies. Properties in the area are inundated every time it rains. Voiced concerns that the City and County have moved the water flows. Stated provisions need to be made to place water on the west side of the San Jacinto Reservoir. Voiced concerns regarding the three Metropolitan Water District (MWD) aqueducts in the area which flow under proposed flood control path. Voiced concern that water has not yet been consulted on this matter. Mayor Boykin read the letter faxed from MWD, copy of which is entered into the agenda packet. Mr. McNabb reviewed the concept at this time and identified the various aspects. One concern is the City's desire not to incur the cost to relocate major facilities. Many concerns will be addressed when an actual construction project exists. Drainage must be designed to avoid major problems. In response to Councilmember Richards, Mr. Holmes advised that for years, agencies have been dumping water on the homes in that area. MWD bought the reservoir and removed soil to build a dike, leaving a trench which displaced water back to Lyon and along property frontage. Feels this needs to be rerouted. Dave Cottington, 1655 East Sixth, Corona, requested approval, stating the drainage problems are an engineering matter which can be addressed at the design stage. He was further surprised by the recommendation to continue this matter, especially with the testimony of the past 5-6 months. He is the property owner and would like to develop. Ken Smith, 38150 Cottonwood, understands the Northwest Improvement Area project is conceptual. However, inquired if there has been an environmental study as part of this, as required by CEQA. Staff advised there was. However it is not a part of the NBS Lowry documents. 12 City Manager Easter advised that if there are those interested in reviewing the environmental documents, they are available at City Hall. Mr. Smith also has some drainage concerns and made inquiries regarding the sewerage system studies and availability to Tract 26426. Mr. McNabb advised the plan does not get that specific. Advised Mr. Smith these are engineering issues and policy issues. If a tract map can be engineered to flow into that particular line and it meets the policy of the district and thii4RIg capacity, then there would be no problem. Dr. Bill Marshall, representing the school district, inquired if the environmental assessment is only a checklist and not a full EIR. Mr. McNabb advised it is not an EIR. Dr. Marshall presented a letter which will be entered as part of the agenda packet. Stated this was an amendment to the General Plan when done and questioned it being done without an EIR. Further, feels this is subject to the Murrietta and Hart Case, requested an EIR because this obviously impacts the schools and it should all be put into a mitigation plan pursuant to AB3180. Dr. Marshall, in response to Councilmember Richards, stated that school placement is only for the purpose of determining acreage for the land use element and there is no actual approved site. Further, tentative locations were not determined by the school district. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards to reconsider the zoning lines regarding the Gruda property for the purpose of retaining the present zoning on the entire acreage, rather than excluding part of it. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Mayor Boykin to continue this hearing to September 3, 1991. Councilmember Richards requested an explanation as to why it was necessary to continue this matter. Community Development Director McNabb advised that the land use element of the General Plan amendment needs change in that a paragraph relating to the school, th: formula for the plan, makingit applicable citywide was inadvertently left out. Also the acreage calculations for scho1s nd the acreage of school sites on the iap do hot.11:catbit a lthough conceptual,: Stalf'jutcca---b - , . c of the Criteria for the schools and it presently is not 13 concistcnt with the statc. If Council prefers it could be approved now and amended at a later date. Councilmember Leahy expressed interest in withdrawing her motion, in view of the fact it is possible to make changes in the future if approved tonight and instruct staff to make changes and come back with an amendment. Mayor Boykin declined withdrawal. Motion failed on a 2- 1-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting and Councilmember Leahy abstaining, with Councilmember Hafliger absent. City Attorney Cox advised he would like to review the CEQA status of this prior to any action by the Council. A MOTION was made by Mayor Boykin, seconded by Council - member Ford to continue this hearing to September 3, 1991. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting and Councilmember Hafliger absent. 3.4 Street Lighting & Landscape Maintenance Rates Les Evans presented a corrected Exhibit A which will be made a part of the agenda packet. Staff advised the ex- hibit was basically the same, just one of the sample sce- narios had been included and was unnecessary. The major- ity of the areas have the same tax rate with a few excep- tions. Mr. Evans explained each one in detail. Some cal- culation errors from a previous year have been corrected. Staff clarified for Council that the landscape maintenance for Soboba is open space, and not association common area. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Boykin closed the public hearing. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to adopt Resolution No. 1987 approving rates for street lighting and landscape maintenance. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1987 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER, DATED JULY 10, 1991, PREPARED PURSUANT TO RESO- LUTION NO. 1961 AND APPROVED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1961A OF SAID COUNCIL, AND THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ESTIMATE, DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT CONTAINED IN SAID REPORT, ORDERING CERTAIN STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES TO BE 14 MAINTAINED AND ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO BE FURNISHED FOR LIGHTING SAID FIXTURES AND TO ORDER CERTAIN LANDSCAPING TO BE MAINTAINED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1991, AND LEVYING SAID ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 1991, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1992 (SAN JACINTO COMBINED L & L DISTRICTS) Mayor Boykin advised that item 3.5 is being removed from the agenda. 3.5 Weed Abatement Assessments RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. authorizing the County Assessor to place parcel assessments on the tax rolls. 4.0 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Fred Dcnnia D. s spoke to Council regarding the Vosburg Hotel and a proposed project for the property. He would like input from Council and a consensus of the concept. Presented conceptual plans which will be made a part of the agenda packet. Community Development Director McNabb advised this would require a zone change. Further, parking would have to be addressed as well as Conditional Use Permit necessary for the cocktail lounge. Only concerns of Council seemed to be that of the new owner, preservation of the hotel and saving the historical nature of the facility. Understands the prospective developer would like to set up a museum. Betty Stack, 1942 Hooper Drive, addressed the Council regarding a problem with a neighborhood dog barking at all hours. Feels this has become a nuisance. Questioned if the Municipal Code is still in effect and requested Council assistance to resolve the matter. Community Development Director McNabb advised the code is still in effect, but has been modified. Loud animals are still considered a nuisance. Police Chief Kozma stated he is familiar with the situation. Stated a complaint cannot be filed without neighbors willing to sign the complaint. Will monitor the area and notification must be made when this nuisance occurs. Gave Mrs. Stack his direct number to call. The owner has been attempting to mitigate the situation. Dora Goodman, 1967 Washington Avenue, stated she felt that the residents had gotten the runaround when calling with complaints regarding the same barking dog. 15 Mayor Boykin advised the ladies if they did not get the matter resolved to contact the City Manager or the Mayor. Gerald Stack, 1942 Hooper Drive, voiced the same concerns regarding the barking dog as the previous two speakers. Councilmember Leahy suggested "Living Free" in Idyllwild if it continued to be a problem. Police Chief Kozma advised if it is a nuisance it will be treated as such and the necessary action taken. 5.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 5.1 Request for Park Use - Society for Creative Anachronism City Manager Easter advised that the organization has found another location and no longer needs to use Sallee Park. However we have been unable to determine if they still plan to use the college. Therefore recommended that a fee free permit be granted due to their status as a non-profit organization. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards to approve the request for a free of cost City Business License. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.2 RDA Consultant Contract Community Development Director McNabb corrected the total not to exceed an amount of $79,000. Stated that if there are no revisions, there will be no added costs. Mailings, as in the past, will be done by staff. The entire process will take approximately 12 months. Staff has interviewed 2-3 other candidates and this one meets the City's needs. Contractor will work with the school district to help mitigate theshortage of classrooms and other facilities. Also Mr. McNabb pointed out .6: Redeveioptent ;Attorney -wiN need to be Staff. wall, be . bringing- a recommendation forward soon Staff addressed questions regarding the process for Council and explained the RDA concept and various alternatives. Councilmember Richards asked what the affects would be to defer this action for one year, in light of the budgetary constraints and the high consultant costs budgeted. Mr. McNabb advised that the funding for this would come from RDA funds and not City General Funds. Staff further pointed out the financial advantages of not waiting. 16 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to award an RDA Consultant Services contract to GRC-Bryce Russell in an amount not to exceed $79,000. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.3 North Mountain Communication Site Police Chief Kozma stated that it is recommended that more time be taken to review viability of site, financing options, and evaluate engineering on the site. Matter will come back for Council review in a couple weeks. City Manager Easter advised that the City is trying to be responsive to the current property owner concerns. Staff, including the City Attorney, will conduct additional review and come back in two weeks with the necessary documentation and legislative actions for this matter. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, to direct staff to negotiate this matter and come back in two weeks with a recommendation. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.4 Community Center Policy & Procedures Manual At the hour of 11:14 P.M., Councilmember Richards left the Council Chambers. Police Chief Kozma gave the background on the necessity for the user fees. Pointed out that the costs are still far below that of any other facility. At the hour of 11:20 P.M., Councilmember Richards returned to the Council Chambers. Harold Haight, 800 West Community College Drive, requested exemption to the fees for non-profit organizations, who would be forced to seek another location because of their inability to pay the fees. Supports the fees for parties, but not non-profit groups which contribute to the community. He gave the example of the radio club, which provides a service in the event of a disaster. Jeanne Adamack, 1924 Flores in Hemet, representing the Senior Day Care Center, stated that various support groups have no funding and without the ability to meet would have to cease. This is a much needed service which needs the use of the facilities. 17 Edward Murray, 43601 East Florida in Hemet, stated that both the AARP and the Senior Guild supply a needed service to the community center. They have contributed the cabinets, the generator, and tables and chairs used tonight. Commended the Chief on a fine job. Eva England, 171 Palm, stated that the building was originally built with Senior Grant Funds and use by the seniors must be retained. Pensions are not such that the costs could be absorbed and they would have to forgo the services. Many of the social activities provide groceries as prizes. During the past year, the Senior Guild also donated to the acquisition of the refrigerator, generator, tables and chairs and $2,000 towards building the cabinets in the community center. Further, they have donated their time for maintenance. Requested that the Senior Guild also be exempt from the fees. Ruth Gussey, 1923 Flores Street in Hemet, spoke on behalf of the Jolly Blowhards, and the need for the facility and an inability to pay. Mel Low, 237 Lapoloma, stated the Camera Club has been operating in the area for over 43 years and in appreciation they have donated to the Memorial Library. They also donated the projector screen hanging in this room this evening. Council consensus to grant Police Chief the administrative authority to review each application. If a dispute over fees arises, an appeal can be made to the Council. Staff will come back to the Council with a draft administrative manual. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to adopt Resolution No. 1988 establishing user fees for the Community Center and approving the Policy and Procedures Manual. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1988 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO ESTABLISHING FEES FOR RENTAL OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE At the hour of 11:40 P.M. the Council recessed. At the hour of 11:45 P.M. the Council reconvened with all members present except Councilmember Hafliger. 18 5.5 City Committees and Commissions Report A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, to continue this matter to the meeting of September 3, 1991. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.6 School Mitigation Fee - Consultant City Manager Easter requested that approval for the contract be limited to a lower amount of $25,000. If additional funding is needed the matter would come back for Council approval. Would also request that the Council authorize staff to seek reimbursement for these through the school's Mello Roos, as well as accept participation by developers to assist with the cost. The consultant will work with city staff, school district and the development community and bring back an equitable recommendation. Dave Cottington, Peacock Radaker, urged favorable Council action on this request to expedite the negotiations which have been going on for months. This is a positive step, and feels the city should take this action to protect the City's position on this matter. Dr. Bill Marshall, school district, feels this is truly the next step to resolving this matter. The questions have highly technical answers and an expert is needed to work this out. Urged favorable Council action on this contract. In response to Councilmember Richards, Dr. Marshall will review the value of this to the school district and consult the school board on a sharing of costs plus expenses of the City's consultant. David Cottington offered that some developers would possibly help with costs. Jcrry Ricc would bc willing to givc come of thc ochool fccs to pay for thc consultant. City Attorney Cox recommended a change on Page 2, Paragraph "TERMS" that it be deleted and add this agreement for professional services to be performed as needed and as authorized by the City and may be terminated at anytime with 14 days notice by either party. The City may decide that services cease at any time and shall not be liable for services performed after the time of the cessation or termination, whichever occurs first. 19 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to approve the contract as proposed this evening by the City Manager and City Attorney, with Caldwell, Flores, Winter, Inc, in an amount not to exceed $22,500. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.7 Urgency Ordinance - Suspending Ordinance No. 820 - 90 Days RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. suspending the underground utility fee for a period of 90 days (requires a 4/5ths vote). Community Development Director McNabb requested that the urgency clause be deleted and the standard 30 day effective clause be added. City Attorney Cox concerned regarding the status of the exemption in relation to those already collected. Suggested further study by staff on this matter prior to Council action. Council consensus to direct staff to do further study on this matter. 6.0 CONTINUED ITEMS (From 7/16/91) 6.1 1991/92 Budget Follow Up Items (Chamber of Commerce and School of the Arts Stephan Marlow, 769 San Jacinto Avenue, stated he understood the reluctance to approve this funding request for School of the Arts, when the City is faced with possible cutbacks to services already funded. However, reiterated his comments of the previous meeting and requested favorable support by the Council. Further, identified the need for public funding in order to obtain support from other sources. Richard Perry, 739 Alpine in Hemet, member of the Boxing Club, urged funding support by the Council for School of the Arts. Mayor Boykin suggested that, rather than use public funds, each Councilmember contribute $100 monthly. Councilmember Ford agreed to give $25 monthly, but is opposed to the use of tax payer's funds. Councilmember Leahy reiterated Mr. Marlow's comments regarding the need for funding support from the City in order for them to attract additional funding sources. 20 Councilmember Richards agrees with City support. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Richards, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to direct staff to help come up with a policy for budget year 1992/93 for supporting non- profit organizations, possibly use committee to review applications and make recommendations to the Council; and appropriate $5,000 from fund 10-2710 for Valley School of Arts. Motion carried on a 3-1, vote with Councilmember Ford dissenting and Councilmember Hafliger absent. City Manager Easter advised she met with Jerry Rice and Dave Hall of the Chamber and outlined 4 projects for their 1991/92 program of work. The one not yet responded to is the newsletter, which needs to include a discussion with the school district. Clarified for Council that the 1990/91 adopted budget had not included the additional $7,500 being requested by the Chamber. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards to appropriate $7,500 to the Chamber of Commerce out of the 10-2710 fund and to amend the budget for a total of $22,500 for fiscal year 1991/92. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 6.2 Valley Restart Task Force Councilmember Richards opposed to supporting a facility located in Hemet. A MOTION was made by Mayor Boykin, seconded by Councilmember Ford to rcvicc reprogram the City's CDBG funds project allocation in the amount of $26,270 and indicate it for Valley Restart Shelter. This is contingent upon both the City of Hemet and the County contributes proportionately to population. Previously allocated CDBG funding for water lines to be replaced with RDA/Water Fund funds. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting, and Councilmember Hafliger absent. 6.3 Tract 24330-3 (Windward Homes, Inc.) Located op the northwest corner of Chase Street and the Ramona Expressway. City Attorney Cox inquired of Mark Sierson if he still intended to comply with his 1989 agreement with the district to pa.rticipate in thechoo1r.assessment district. If thatis in question, perhaps the conditions 21 have not been met. Mr. Mark Seierson advised they will participate in the school district Mello Roos, if it is fair and across-the- board to everybody. He will still stand by that agreement. Dr. Marshal withdrew his request to speak. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards, tof approve t e final ma con oned p ae leve o hono e ess ds , accept the dedcat on of easement and authorize the Mayor to execute the subdivision agreement. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 6.4 CVJPIA - Claims Administration A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Mayor Boykin to approve the agreement with CVJPIA for Claims Administration Services. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 7.0 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 7.1 Council Subcommittee Appointments A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to receive and file the appointments. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 7.2 Consideration of Eastside Reservoir Project Site A MOTION was made by Councilmember Richards, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to adopt Resolution No. 1989 supporting the site selection for the project and direct staff to send copies of the resolution to the Pass Area Cities and RMWD. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1989 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, FAVORING THE POTRERO CREEK RESERVOIR ALTERNATIVE AS THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED EASTSIDE RESERVOIR PROJECT 22 7.3 Senior Day Care Meeting Update 7.4 Update on San Jacinto Valley Child Care Council Councilmember Leahy speaking on both items 7.3 and 7.4, related the need to look for alternative sites. Feels this is a valley wide issue and should seek support from entire valley for a youth center, child care center and senior day care center. Feels the San JacintoftteirMt area would be a neutral location. Mud Ve-e 044 Council consensus to discuss this concept with the other valley agencies and to appoint Councilmember Leahy to the Child Care Council. 8.0 EXECUTIVE SESSION At the hour of 12:45 A.M. the Council convened in closed session. 8.1 Closed Session for Labor Relations pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. At the hour of It° 9.0 ADJOURNMENT _ 21C. the Council reconvened in open session. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned 4.;z1 rnelnory ot Bill Quic1 The hour of adjournment being .14133. M. Submitted by Maurice Armster, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk Approved by Francis R. Boykin, Mayor 23 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING (.7 SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY August 6, 1991 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Boykin at the Community Center, 625 South Pico, San Jacinto, California. PRESENT: Councilmembers Ford, Leahy, Richards and Mayor Boykin ABSENT: Councilmember Hafliger A Moment of Silence was observed for Reflection The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Boykin 2.0 CONSENT CALENDAR City Manager Easter requested that item 2.4 be pulled from the consent calendar. The Warrant Register cannot be ready at this time due to computer problems. Council consensus to make the following corrections to minutes of July 16, 1991: Item 2.1 - Page 4 - Paragraph 2 - State that Councilmember Leahy inquired, not stated. Item 2.1 - Page 4 - Paragraph 5 - Clarify that Councilmember Richards comments were relating to a telephone conversation relative to Las Brisas. Item 2.1 - Page 6 - Paragraph 3 - Change goof to good. Council consensus to make the following corrections to minutes of July 23, 1991: Item 2.2 - Page 1 - Paragraph 5 - Finance Director comments - add after "an automatic" the words "annual increase up to 2% until buildout." Council consensus to make the following correction to item 2.13 Study Session Guidelines: 1 Paragraph 5 of the policy, change "arguments" to "debate". Paragraph 1 of the policy to read that meetings are the "First Tuesday following the first Monday of the month." Councilmember Leahy commented she would like to see a better rate negotiated in the future on item 2.12 Fines and Forfeitures Agreement with the County. Councilmember Richards voiced concern regarding the lot sizes for item 2.17 Revised Development Plan Tract 24047-1. Mr. Richards was advised of the limitations associated with PUD's and the exchange for open space and recreational area and other amenities. In response to Council inquiries, Finance Director Vega stated that at the completion of the contract proposed under item 2.18 Property Tax Audit City staff will be able to do this in house. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve the consent calendar with the corrections noted above and with the exception of items 2.4 and 2.16. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 2.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 16, 1991 Approved as corrected. 2.2 Minutes of Adjourned Meeting of July 23, 1991 Approved as corrected. 2.3 Minutes of Adjourned Meeting of July 24, 1991 Approved as submitted. 2.5 Final Parcel Map 25869 (I.S. Properties) Located on the southwest corner of Ramona Blvd. and State Street. Approved the final parcel map and authorized the Mayor to execute the public improvements agreement. 2.6 Bond Release - Tract 24745 (Forecast Corporation) Located east of Vernon Avenue, west of Camino Los Banos and between Artesia Street and First Street. Released monument bond #2007455 in the amount of $5,000. 2.7 Whitefeather Farms Composting Facility (AB 2296) Adopted Resolution No. 1984 accepting site identification and description of facility. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 1984 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE WHITEFEATHER FARMS COMPOSTING FACILITY 2.8 Esplanade Avenue Associates Claim Denied claim pursuant to Government Code. 2.9 UCR Law School Adopted Resolution No. 1985 supporting the establishment of a Law School at the University of Riverside. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LAW SCHOOL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT RIVERSIDE 2.10 Ordinance No. 938 - Citation Authority Waived full second reading of ordinance and Adopted Ordinance No. 938. ORDINANCE NO. 938 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OD SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER 1.12 TO TITLE 1 OF THE SAN JACINTO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY 2.11 Park Use Request Received and Filed. 2.12 Fines & Forfeitures Agreement - County of Riverside Approved agreement for the distribution of fines and forfeitures. 2.13 Study Session Guidelines Approved policy for conduct of Study Sessions as corrected. 2.14 Assistant Building Official Approved job description as presented. 2.15 Senior Center Nutrition Program Approved agreement with County of Riverside for rental of Community Center for Senior Nutrition Program at a rate of $250 monthly. 3 2.17 Revised Development Plan Tract 24047-1 (Morrison Homes) Approved the revised development plan as presented. 2.18 Property Tax Audit Contract Approved the contract for Property Tax Audit with Hinderliter & DeLlamas in an amount not to exceed $10,800. 2.19 Treasurer's Report - July, 1991 Received and filed. Items Pulled From Consent: 2.4 Warrant Register Council consensus to pull at the request of the City Manager. 2.16 Extension of Time Tract 22665 (Palomar Savings & Loan) Located on the southwest corner of Palm and Seventh. Approved the third extension of time for one year with the added language for school mitigation fees. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Richards, seconded by Councilmember Ford to pull item 2.16 from the Consent Calendar. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. Greg Weiler, of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron, representing developers as noted in the letter dated today, and enclosed as part of the agenda packet. Stated he was present to address the propriety of the City requiring for developers of single-family dwelling units to participate in a Mello Roos District to address school facility needs. Although sympathetic to the situation, he stated it is a community problem facing the entire state, and the state has failed to provide sufficient funding for schools. He feels the state statutes are very clear on what is required by developers. A limitation of $1.58 per square foot was established in 1986 and feels the City cannot require a new tax in addition to the fee set by law. Became aware, after talking to the City Attorney and the District Attorney, their position was they had found a loop hole in the state statute. While he acknowledged it was a novel concept with an admirable end, does not believe the end justifies the means. Stated he felt this action was strictly prohibited under Government Code Section 65996. No court decision has determined this action to be legal, and he feels it is not. Feels if this were legal many other agencies would also be doing this, however they are not. He spoke with legislators who proposed the 1986 legislation, and they indicate this was not the intent. 4 It is the desire of the developers to work with the school district and the City to obtain adequate school facilities and requested that the City refrain from imposing this illegal requirement. Further, requested a study to determine the extent of the need which has not been established, as well as a means for equitable spread of costs to all residents, not just the new residents. And finally, requested the Council consider the school district impact on residents and how they would finance police, fire and other municipal needs if all the funding is used for school facilities. Requested the City continue to work with the school district to resolve this matter to the satisfaction of all. Mr. Weiler further questioned the city's right to mandate a favorable vote by the property owner to secure approval of a project. The laws specifically grant voting rights with regard to taxation, and the City is taking away the property owner's right to vote yes or no as they seek approval. Stated it is a matter of civil rights. City Attorney Cox, in response to the Council, stated he had a conversation with Mr. Weiler, and feels he is over- looking part of Government Code. Section 65996 states the exclusive methods to mitigate. Also that when considering approval of development projects, Article 2.5 of the Government Code specifically lists the provisions allowing the establishment of a Mello Roos. Further, reading from the Government Code, "...permits the imposition of a Mello Roos on development...", and feels the only question is the way the City is required to mitigate. Mr. Weiler, relating the intent of the Legislature, felt the section makes it perfectly clear that the provision is, if owners want to finance with a Mello Roos, the $1.58 per square foot does not prevent a voluntary Mello Roos, but it does not allow cities to impose an additional tax. Further, the state specifically provides that a special tax must be voted upon by the people. If it were legal, it is an exception and the $1.58 per square foot would be irrelevant. Donald Morris, 45701 Classic Way, Temecula, Property Owner. Stated he was here to request an extension and the Mello Roos is a much broader issue. Although not as astute with regard to the law, is requesting an extension without the condition as proposed, on the basis of his inability to acquire information on what he is accepting as a condition and being able to determine the ability to comply. In addition, if he has paid all the fee mandates of Government Code Section 65995 and joins the assessment district as required by the City to finance school facilities, feels he is being charged twice. If the $1.58 per square foot is not adequate then this problem should be resolved at the state level, and a determination as to what is adequate should be made. Has posed questions regarding the principle, how this is assessed, as well as how a single owner would have to pay the actual assessment payments. After there are new owners, would this pass on or carry over for years until buildout, and what about when there is no impact on the schools. These could not be answered. Concerned if other alternatives have been pursued, such as the state general fund and general obligation bonds to provide facilities, to be paid by the entire community for the community needs. Feels the requirement is unfair, when others farther in the process, are not also required to participate in a Mello Roos. Community Development Director McNabb related the discussion occurring between the development community, the school district and the city. The concern is that if a Mello Roos is used, there is a need for a level playing field so that what is fair for one is fair for all, and no one developer will have a marketing edge. However, there are some projects, by their nature and their place in the process, will be presumably exempt from the Mello Roos. It all depends on the policy established. For the past 1-2 years, environmental analysis conditions have been placed on new development to address impacts. Rather than denying the request, the City has been imposing conditions adequate to address those impacts. The concerns are understandable; the unknown costs per unit per year, and the set fee. The City, school district and development community are working to endorse a concept which will be equitable. Mayor Boykin stated that the $1.58, per the school district, only covers the possibility of portable facilities and does not address actually building schools. With regard to state school funds, the funding approved by vote last June, was obligated prior to the vote and there is still a $3 billion deficit statewide for school facilities. The effort is to try and alleviate a problem which is quickly approaching San Jacinto. The state has passed the funding problems on to local government. Later on this evenings agenda, is a proposal for a consultant to review school fees and work with the City, school district and development community to arrive at an agreeable figure. The applicant related some concerns from examples of situations in other locals; one where a developer was assessed on 700 acres and is already paying interest on the property for the funding of $10 million infrastructure and $8 million on school facilities. In addition, a Mello Roos which was invested in Executive Life, was recently reported to have been in receivership. Feels it is the responsibility of everyone to provide a means to fund schools. Related the possible marketing problems if two tracts, immediately across the street from each other, with one not participating in a Mello Roos and the negative impact on marketing for the tract that must participate. Further, presently it is not possible to participate in a Mello Roos, since one has not yet formed. Would like other alternative funding mechanisms investigated before taking the path of least resistance, or the one with the most leverage. The applicant needs to know what the costs are. Requested an extension without the condition, and when they come back for final recordation will have worked with Community Development on a condition for joining a Public Facilities District and will join on their own accord, but cannot agree to the open ended nature of the costs at this time. Councilmember Ford stated that a number of developers have been working with the City and school district and are generally very willing to join the CFD for infra- structure and school facilities. He feels this is only fair to make the same request of this applicant. Applicant would agree, if participating would benefit his property or that of the future owners. He was not aware of any negotiations that have transpired. Would first like to know the costs, and the agreement clearly defined. Suggested amending the condition later when more infoimation is available. Community Development Director McNabb advised that at any time prior to recordation, with a public hearing, there can be a reconsideration of the conditions of approval. Clarified for the applicant that the process would take approximately 60 days. In response to a question by Councilmember Richards, staff explained that the situation regarding the Rice tentative map some weeks ago, was not the addition of a new condition, but rather a determination if the conditions had been met, which the Council determined the conditions had been met. In response to Council, Community Development Director McNabb, stated that so long as the request was received in a timely manner, the City has essentially a 60-90 day time frame to act upon this matter. Councilmember Leahy inquired if the applicant agreed to the condition in the extension now, with the provision he could come back later and amend. Applicant responded yes, under protest, in order to obtain an extension now and resolve within 30 days. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Mayor Boykin to continue this matter to the September 3, 1991, meeting, with the expectation that this matter may have more resolve to it by that time. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting and Councilmember Hafliger absent. 3.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 Abandonment - Between Santo and Seventh RECOMMENDATION: Conduct Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. ordering abandonment of a portion of alley between Santo Drive and Seventh Street, east of Jordan Avenue and authorizing recording of same. Community Development Director McNabb briefly explained the concerns of neighboring property owners. Staff met with the Homeowner's Association to determine the best course of action, which was to abandon the alley. In the past the property was given back to the association to control. Staff feels the best recommendation is to abandon the alley (retaining only the utility easements) and allow the apartments and association to work out a reciprocal access. Mayor Boykin opened the public hearing. Gary Phillips, Property Owner at 322 East Seventh Street, adjacent to the alley. Read aloud a letter which has been submitted as part of the agenda packet. Basically, an affirmative action on this matter would result in Mr. Phillips being unable to proceed with future development plans for a garage next to the home and additional units behind the home. Stated the future development of this property was a contingency on the sale of this property. 8 Mr. McNabb explained the Council would restructure the property line to provide access by giving an easement to the property owner. Stated, however, that the property owner has no legal right to access to his parcel from the location requested. When this was dedicated to the City in the 1960's, a one foot barrier strip was retained and controlled by the City in order to control access. Further, the owner, by building a garage, would prevent access to the back. The concerns voiced by the association were increased traffic access in the rear, generated by the apartments. John Hufinger, resident of Naper Villas, voiced serious concerns regarding the formal action to abandon and such informal action to close off access with a gate. Intention was to keep alley open as public domain thoroughfare, presently in closed state with weeds and oleanders. In response to Councilmember Leahy, speaker indicated that he would be willing to take Mr. Phillips easement into consideration. Mr. McNabb explained the action in light of the favored the closure of a Further, advised that association property and City's ability to take such an public safety concerns which non -publicly maintained alley. once abandoned, it becomes they do as they choose with it. Mary Gary, 332 East Seventh Street, is the responsible party for the fencing. Property is owned by her parents and she has durable power of attorney. Reading from her prepared statement, cited the following reasons for fencing the alley adjoining their property: 1) Has incurred much trouble and harassment. 2) It is an unimproved dirt alley with many ruts. 3) People pound on the side of the house, throw rocks at the windows and paint graffiti on the side of the house. Presented a photo of the last incident. 4) Constantly bothered by racing vehicles, causing a great deal of noise late at night and almost hitting the house. 5) Some park next to house with motors running and radios blaring. 6) They have been asked to move and have even been threatened. In order to alleviate these problems, they installed a fence to close access to the alley, with permission from the City. All, but two residents of Naper Villas accepted keys to the gates, as do repair and service persons, extras for vacancies and the police. In addition, a lock box has been provided for fire access. The $3,000 cost for the gates was from their own pocket and it has improved security and safety, and people can sleep at night. It has also provided enhanced security in the common area of Naper Villas. Many neighbors are happy with the installation of the gates and have requested that they remain. Previously the alley provided an escape route and now the gates work to help the Police apprehend. Identified an insurance letter which requested the gates be left in place after abandonment to deter theft and vandalism. Requested the gates remain in place and be enforced by law. Bill O'Hare, Treasurer of Naper Villas, stated that the insurance letter was originated and written at the request of Mr. Gary, and upon talking to their agent, who did not understand the letter, determined the letter came from the Regional Offices. In response to inquiry by Councilmember Leahy, Mr. O'Hare stated there is no indication from the Police or Fire, nor any file on the problems associated with the alley, prior to, during or after the fence installation. Police Chief Kozma stated that alleys are normally conducive to vandalism and are used as escape routes. At the time of responding to incidents with cars, with the combined fact that the alley was unimproved and not maintained by the City, there was a give and take on the matter. The best recommendation was to abandon and maintain the right of access for water. Unable to determine if the fence has been a deterrent since installation. Bay Burns, 322 Seventh , President of Naper Villas, advised that there is about a 50/50 split on the issue of the fence. Some of the concerns voiced have been who is liable for the alley when people climb on the fence and any possible vandalism to the fence. Does not understand why the alley was originally dedicated. With the fence installed, it is causing additional traffic impact to residents on Santo Drive. There has been no vote by the association at this time with regard to opening or closing the alley. 10 There being no further speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Boykin closed the public hearing. Councilmembers Ford and Leahy would prefer to continue the matter, so staff can review the possibility of the fence remaining and the security it is providing. Councilmember Richards and Mayor Boykin unsure of what the purpose would be for continuing this matter. Staff has made a recommendation and the decision should be that of the association. Community Development Director McNabb advised the City could only mandate the fence on the public right of way, not private property, as where the fence is located and would be the case if abandoned. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to continue this matter to the meet- ing of September 3, 1991, and instruct staff to come back with additional facts, work with the Council Public Works Subcommittee the association and property owners on a recommendation. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. City Attorney Cox will mediate the fence issue with Mr. Phillips and the association and try to facilitate a transfer of private easement. 3.2 Annexation #68 - LAFCO #90-87-3 (Continued from 7/16/91) Located east of Hewitt Street, south of Washington Avenue, west of Windham Street and north of Park Avenue. Community Development Director McNabb provided a brief staff report. Mayor Boykin opened the public hearing. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Boykin closed the public hearing. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Ford to adopt Resolution No. 1986 approving Annexation #68. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1986 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO (ANNEXATION NO. 68) 11 3.3 Northwest Improvement Area (Continued from 7/16/91) RECOMMENDATION: Accept testimony on Northwest Improvement Area and adopt Resolution No. approving amendment of the Land Use Element, Circulation Element, Aesthetic, Cultural, Recreational Resources Element, and Hazards Element of the General Plan and adopt by reference the Northwest Improvement Project. Community Development Director McNabb advised it is staff recommendation to take testimony and continue this matter to the meeting of September 3, 1991, so staff can address the issue of development policies adjacent to agricultur- al uses. Additionally, staff requested a correction to the circulation element on page 10. And finally, the designation and existing zoning on Mr. Gruda's property is in conflict, and an adjustment would have to be made for that if Council so desires. Further, staff has re- viewed the storm drain facilities on the master plan and the development plans and does not find them to be inconsistent. Emphasized these are only conceptual. Mayor Boykin continued to call for testimony on this public hearing. Donald Holmes, 142 South Sheraton, and owner of property on Cottonwood. Referring to flood control documents, still feels there are inconsistencies. Properties in the area are inundated every time it rains. Voiced concerns that the City and County have moved the water flows. Stated provisions need to be made to place water on the west side of the San Jacinto Reservoir. Voiced concerns regarding the three Metropolitan Water District (MWD) aqueducts in the area which flow under proposed flood control path. Voiced concern that water has not yet been consulted on this matter. Mayor Boykin read the letter faxed from MWD, copy of which is entered into the agenda packet. Mr. McNabb reviewed the concept at this time and identified the various aspects. One concern is the City's desire not to incur the cost to relocate major facilities. Many concerns will be addressed when an actual construction project exists. Drainage must be designed to avoid major problems. In response to Councilmember Richards, Mr. Holmes advised that for years, agencies have been dumping water on the homes in that area. MWD bought the reservoir and removed soil to build a dike, leaving a trench which displaced water back to Lyon and along property frontage. Feels this needs to be rerouted. 12 Dave Cottington, 1655 East Sixth, Corona, requested approval, stating the drainage problems are an engineering matter which can be addressed at the design stage. He was further surprised by the recommendation to continue this matter, especially with the testimony of the past 5-6 months. He is the property owner and would like to develop. Ken Smith, 38150 Cottonwood, understands the Northwest Improvement Area project is conceptual. However, inquired if there has been an environmental study as part of this, as required by CEQA. Staff advised there was. However it is not a part of the NBS Lowry documents. City Manager Easter advised that if there are those interested in reviewing the environmental documents, they are available at City Hall. Mr. Smith also has some drainage concerns and made inquiries regarding the sewerage system studies and availability to Tract 26426. Mr. McNabb advised the plan does not get that specific. Advised Mr. Smith these are engineering issues and policy issues. If a tract map can be engineered to flow into that particular line and it meets the policy of the district and capacity, then there would be no problem. Dr. Bill Marshall, representing the school district, inquired if the environmental assessment is only a checklist and not a full EIR. Mr. McNabb advised it is not an EIR. Dr. Marshall presented a letter which will be entered as part of the agenda packet. Stated this was an amendment to the General Plan when done and questioned it being done without an EIR. Further, feels this is subject to the Murrietta and Hart Case, requested an EIR because this obviously impacts the schools and it should all be put into a mitigation plan pursuant to AB3180. Dr. Marshall, in response to Councilmember Richards, stated that school placement is only for the purpose of determining acreage for the land use element and there is no actual approved site. Further, tentative locations were not determined by the school district. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards to reconsider the zoning lines regarding the Gruda property for the purpose of retaining the present zoning on the entire acreage, rather than excluding part of it. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 13 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Mayor Boykin to continue this hearing to September 3, 1991. Councilmember Richards requested an explanation as to why it was necessary to continue this matter. Community Development Director McNabb advised that the land use element of the General Plan amendment needs a change in a paragraph relating to schools, the formula for the plan, making it applicable citywide was inadvertently left out. The acreage calculations, although conceptual, staff just became aware of the criteria for the schools and it presently is not consistent with the state. If Council prefers it could be approved now and amended at a later date. Councilmember Leahy expressed interest in withdrawing her motion, in view of the fact it is possible to make changes in the future if approved tonight and instruct staff to make changes and come back with an amendment. Mayor Boykin declined withdrawal. Motion failed on a 2- 1-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting and Councilmember Leahy abstaining, with Councilmember Hafliger absent. City Attorney Cox advised he would like to review the CEQA status of this prior to any action by the Council. A MOTION was made by Mayor Boykin, seconded by Council - member Ford to continue this hearing to September 3, 1991. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting and Councilmember Hafliger absent. 3 4 Street Lighting & Landscape Maintenance Rates Les Evans presented a corrected Exhibit A which will be made a part of the agenda packet. Staff advised the ex- hibit was basically the same, just one of the sample sce- narios had been included and was unnecessary. The major- ity of the areas have the same tax rate with a few excep- tions. Mr. Evans explained each one in detail. Some cal- culation errors from a previous year have been corrected. Staff clarified for Council that the landscape maintenance for Soboba is open space, and not association common area. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Boykin closed the public hearing. 14 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to adopt Resolution No. 1987 approving rates for street lighting and landscape maintenance. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1987 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER, DATED JULY 10, 1991, PREPARED PURSUANT TO RESO- LUTION NO. 1961 AND APPROVED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1961A OF SAID COUNCIL, AND THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ESTIMATE, DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT CONTAINED IN SAID REPORT, ORDERING CERTAIN STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES TO BE MAINTAINED AND ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO BE FURNISHED FOR LIGHTING SAID FIXTURES AND TO ORDER CERTAIN LANDSCAPING TO BE MAINTAINED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1991, AND LEVYING SAID ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 1991, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1992 (SAN JACINTO COMBINED L & L DISTRICTS) Mayor Boykin advised that item 3.5 is being removed from the agenda. 3.5 Weed Abatement Assessments RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. authorizing the County Assessor to place parcel assessments on the tax rolls. 4.0 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Fred Dennis spoke to Council regarding the Vosburg Hotel and a proposed project for the property. He would like input from Council and a consensus of the concept. Presented conceptual plans which will be made a part of the agenda packet. Community Development Director McNabb advised this would require a zone change. Further, parking would have to be addressed as well as Conditional Use Permit necessary for the cocktail lounge. Only concerns of Council seemed to be that of the new owner, preservation of the hotel and saving the historical nature of the facility. Understands the prospective developer would like to set up a museum. Betty Stack, 1942 Hooper Drive, addressed the Council regarding a problem with a neighborhood dog barking at all hours. Feels this has become a nuisance. Questioned if the Municipal Code is still in effect and requested Council assistance to resolve the matter. 15 Community Development Director McNabb advised the code is still in effect, but has been modified. Loud animals are still considered a nuisance. Police Chief Kozma stated he is familiar with the situation. Stated a complaint cannot be filed without neighbors willing to sign the complaint. Will monitor the area and notification must be made when this nuisance occurs. Gave Mrs. Stack his direct number to call. The owner has been attempting to mitigate the situation. Dora Goodman, 1967 Washington Avenue, stated she felt that the residents had gotten the runaround when calling with complaints regarding the same barking dog. Mayor Boykin advised the ladies if they did not get the matter resolved to contact the City Manager or the Mayor. Gerald Stack, 1942 Hooper Drive, voiced the same concerns regarding the barking dog as the previous two speakers. Councilmember Leahy suggested "Living Free" in Idyllwild if it continued to be a problem. Police Chief Kozma advised if it is a nuisance it will be treated as such and the necessary action taken. 5.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 5.1 Request for Park Use - Society for Creative Anachronism City Manager Easter advised that the organization has found another location and no longer needs to use Sallee Park. However we have been unable to determine if they still plan to use the college. Therefore recommended that a fee free permit be granted due to their status as a non-profit organization. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards to approve the request for a free of cost City Business License. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.2 RDA Consultant Contract Community Development Director McNabb corrected the total not to exceed an amount of $79,000. Stated that if there are no revisions, there will be no added costs. Mailings, as in the past, will be done by staff. The entire process will take approximately 12 months. Staff has interviewed 2-3 other candidates and this one meets the City's needs. Contractor will work with the school district to help mitigate the shortage of classrooms and other facilities. 16 Staff addressed questions regarding the process for Council and explained the RDA concept and various alternatives. Councilmember Richards asked what the affects would be to defer this action for one year, in light of the budgetary constraints and the high consultant costs budgeted. Mr. McNabb advised that the funding for this would come from RDA funds and not City General Funds. Staff further pointed out the financial advantages of not waiting. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to award an RDA Consultant Services contract to GRC-Bryce Russell in an amount not to exceed $79,000. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.3 North Mountain Communication Site Police Chief Kozma stated that it is recommended that more time be taken to review viability of site, financing options, and evaluate engineering on the site. Matter will come back for Council review in a couple weeks. City Manager Easter advised that the City is trying to be responsive to the current property owner concerns. Staff, including the City Attorney, will conduct additional review and come back in two weeks with the necessary documentation and legislative actions for this matter. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, to direct staff to negotiate this matter and come back in two weeks with a recommendation. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.4 Community Center Policy & Procedures Manual At the hour of 11:14 P.M., Councilmember Richards left the Council Chambers. Police Chief Kozma gave the background on the necessity for the user fees. Pointed out that the costs are still far below that of any other facility. At the hour of 11:20 P.M., Councilmember Richards returned to the Council Chambers. 17 Harold Haight, 800 West Community College Drive, requested exemption to the fees for non-profit organizations, who would be forced to seek another location because of their inability to pay the fees. Supports the fees for parties, but not non-profit groups which contribute to the community. He gave the example of the radio club, which provides a service in the event of a disaster. Jeanne Adamack, 1924 Flores in Hemet, representing the Senior Day Care Center, stated that various support groups have no funding and without the ability to meet would have to cease. This is a much needed service which needs the use of the facilities. Edward Murray, 43601 East Florida in Hemet, stated that both the AARP and the Senior Guild supply a needed service to the community center. They have contributed the cabinets, the generator, and tables and chairs used tonight. Commended the Chief on a fine job. Eva England, 171 Palm, stated that the building was originally built with Senior Grant Funds and use by the seniors must be retained. Pensions are not such that the costs could be absorbed and they would have to forgo the services. Many of the social activities provide groceries as prizes. During the past year, the Senior Guild also donated to the acquisition of the refrigerator, generator, tables and chairs and $2,000 towards building the cabinets in the community center. Further, they have donated their time for maintenance. Requested that the Senior Guild also be exempt from the fees. Ruth Gussey, 1923 Flores Street in Hemet, spoke on behalf of the Jolly Blowhards, and the need for the facility and an inability to pay. Mel Low, 237 Lapoloma, stated the Camera Club has been operating in the area for over 43 years and in appreciation they have donated to the Memorial Library. They also donated the projector screen hanging in this room this evening. Council consensus to grant Police Chief the administrative authority to review each application. If a dispute over fees arises, an appeal can be made to the Council. Staff will come back to the Council with a draft administrative manual. 18 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to adopt Resolution No. 1988 establishing user fees for the Community Center and approving the Policy and Procedures Manual. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1988 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO ESTABLISHING FEES FOR RENTAL OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE At the hour of 11:40 P.M. the Council recessed. At the hour of 11:45 P.M. the Council reconvened with all members present except Councilmember Hafliger. 5.5 City Committees and Commissions Report A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, to continue this matter to the meeting of September 3, 1991. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.6 School Mitigation Fee - Consultant City Manager Easter requested that approval for the contract be limited to a lower amount of $25,000. If additional funding is needed the matter would come back for Council approval. Would also request that the Council authorize staff to seek reimbursement for these through the school's Mello Roos, as well as accept participation by developers to assist with the cost. The consultant will work with city staff, school district and the development community and bring back an equitable recommendation. Dave Cottington, Peacock Radaker, urged favorable Council action on this request to expedite the negotiations which have been going on for months. This is a positive step, and feels the city should take this action to protect the City's position on this matter. Dr. Bill Marshall, school district, feels this is truly the next step to resolving this matter. The questions have highly technical answers and an expert is needed to work this out. Urged favorable Council action on this contract. 19 In response to Councilmember Richards, Dr. Marshall will review the value of this to the school district and consult the school board on a sharing of costs plus expenses of the City's consultant. David Cottington offered that some developers would possibly help with costs. Jerry Rice would be willing to give some of the school fees to pay for the consultant. City Attorney Cox recommended a change on Page 2, Paragraph "TERMS" that it be deleted and add this agreement for professional services to be performed as needed and as authorized by the City and may be terminated at anytime with 14 days notice by either party. The City may decide that services cease at any time and shall not be liable for services performed after the time of the cessation or termination, whichever occurs first. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to approve the contract as proposed this evening by the City Manager and City Attorney, with Caldwell, Flores, Winter, Inc, in an amount not to exceed $22,500. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 5.7 Urgency Ordinance - Suspending Ordinance No. 820 - 90 Days RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. suspending the underground utility fee for a period of 90 days (requires a 4/5ths vote). Community Development Director McNabb requested that the urgency clause be deleted and the standard 30 day effective clause be added. City Attorney Cox concerned regarding the status of the exemption in relation to those already collected. Suggested further study by staff on this matter prior to Council action. Council consensus to direct staff to do further study on this matter. 6.0 CONTINUED ITEMS (From 7/16/91) 6.1 1991/92 Budget Follow Up Items (Chamber of Commerce and School of the Arts 20 Stephan Marlow, 769 San Jacinto Avenue, stated he understood the reluctance to approve this funding request for School of the Arts, when the City is faced with possible cutbacks to services already funded. However, reiterated his comments of the previous meeting and requested favorable support by the Council. Further, identified the need for public funding in order to obtain support from other sources. Richard Perry, 739 Alpine in Hemet, member of the Boxing Club, urged funding support by the Council for School of the Arts. Mayor Boykin suggested that, rather than use public funds, each Councilmember contribute $100 monthly. Councilmember Ford agreed to give $25 monthly, but is opposed to the use of tax payer's funds. Councilmember Leahy reiterated Mr. Marlow's comments regarding the need for funding support from the City in order for them to attract additional funding sources. Councilmember Richards agrees with City support. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Richards, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to direct staff to help come up with a policy for budget year 1992/93 for supporting non- profit organizations, possibly use committee to review applications and make recommendations to the Council; and appropriate $5,000 from fund 10-2710 for Valley School of Arts. Motion carried on a 3-1, vote with Councilmember Ford dissenting and Councilmember Hafliger absent. City Manager Easter advised she met with Jerry Rice and Dave Hall of the Chamber and outlined 4 projects for their 1991/92 program of work. The one not yet responded to is the newsletter, which needs to include a discussion with the school district. Clarified for Council that the 1990/91 adopted budget had not included the additional $7,500 being requested by the Chamber. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards to appropriate $7,500 to the Chamber of Commerce out of the 10-2710 fund and to amend the budget for a total of $22,500 for fiscal year 1991/92. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 21 6.2 Valley Restart Task Force Councilmember Richards opposed to supporting a facility located in Hemet. A MOTION was made by Mayor Boykin, seconded by Councilmember Ford to revise the City's CDBG project allocation in the amount of $26,270 and indicate it for Valley Restart Shelter. This is contingent upon both the City of Hemet and the County contributes proportionately to population. Previously allocated CDBG funding for water lines to be replaced with RDA/Water Fund funds. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Richards dissenting, and Councilmember Hafliger absent. 6.3 Tract 24330-3 (Windward Homes, Inc.) Located on the northwest corner of Chase Street and the Ramona Expressway. City Attorney Cox inquired of Mark Sierson if he still intended to comply with his 1989 agreement with the district. If that is in question, perhaps the conditions have not been met. Mr. Mark Seierson advised they will participate in the school district Mello Roos, if it is fair and across-the- board to everybody. He will still stand by that agreement. Dr. Marshal withdrew his request to speak. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Richards, to approve the final map, accept the dedication of easement and authorize the Mayor to execute the subdivision agreement. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 6.4 CVJPIA - Claims Administration A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Mayor Boykin to approve the agreement with CVJPIA for Claims Administration Services. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 7.0 MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 7.1 Council Subcommittee Appointments A MOTION was made by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to receive and file the appointments. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. 22 7.2 Consideration of Eastside Reservoir Protect Site A MOTION was made by Councilmember Richards, seconded by Councilmember Leahy to adopt Resolution No. 1989 supporting the site selection for the project and direct staff to send copies of the resolution to the Pass Area Cities and EMWD. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with Councilmember Hafliger absent. RESOLUTION NO. 1989 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, FAVORING THE POTRERO CREEK RESERVOIR ALTERNATIVE AS THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED EASTSIDE RESERVOIR PROJECT 7.3 Senior Day Care Meeting Update 7.4 Update on San Jacinto Valley Child Care Council Councilmember Leahy speaking on both items 7.3 and 7.4, related the need to look for alternative sites. Feels this is a valley wide issue and should seek support from entire valley for a youth center, child care center and senior day care center. Feels the San Jacinto/Hemet area would be a neutral location. Council consensus to discuss this concept with the other valley agencies and to appoint Councilmember Leahy to the Child Care Council. 8.0 EXECUTIVE SESSION At the hour of 12:45 A.M. the Council convened in closed session. 8.1 Closed Session for Labor Relations pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. At the hour of the Council reconvened in open session. 9.0 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned. The hour of adjournment being Approved by 23 Submitted by Maurice Armster, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk Francis R. Boykin, Mayor 24 UNITED C�;.IF���IA BA�� A/C 2O1398 ISSUED TO �669* HEALTM NE? �67O* HEALTH NET .�71* BLUE CROSS OF SU^ Cn^ BLSE CRDSS OF SO, CA^ EDSION SO^ �A^ GAS RBlk[MENl '67o� PJBLIC EMP^ �ET, SYSTE� POSTMASTER 679* SO^ Co^ EDSIO� 68O` GTE M8BILE u8�� S8^ C�^ EDSIG� 682* S8, CA^ G�S 683� U,S^ POSTMASTE� /U9* STANDARD INS^ CDMPANY 79�� ST^ BOAR[� 3F EQUALIZnT� 791� S�. CA. EDSION 792* SO~ CA^ GAS 7�3» JOINT INST�RMENTATION /9la* ALL TRIPS -h'^ THIN8� 795* LE�zlGUE ClF CALIF^ CITJE� 796* ALL TRIPS ~N~ THINGS 7Y7* SO, CA^ GAS 798* �ODSION 799* S6N JACINTO TREASURER/S 80�* O^&^ ASSOC^ INC~ ATTORNEY^ 8O� �DLERHORST INT^ INC, GO3 AFTGNS FLOWERS AND GIFT 8O� AMERICAN PLANNINQ ASSOC 605 A8ROW PRINTING 6�6 E^S^ BABCDCK & SON� �O7 H�CTOR BAEZA 808 BOB°S LUMBER CALIFORNIA TOOL CALDWELL FL'jINTE:S CASTELLANO�S TOWING �12 315 �1u SH�RON GALBRAITH DEMLER EGG R�NCH MICHAEL GIMA RUDY BRON CHARLES FI�NEY F��NK �NDER8GN SOLEDAD HACIEL TvoINIDAD SANDOVAL ETHEL M�YNARD CHRISTY DENNIS GRIFFITH BROS/ KIMMEL-FReN[E �ESC��IPTION ��v����K� �������� DATE 8/15/9l � � ° ' INS;RA�CE i�EALT�� IN5EETS/COBRA �E�LTH INSURANCE HEALTH INS^~STEVENS/COB�A P�Y�[�T COLLECTIONS �Ay�E�� COL|ECTIONS RETI�E��NT P�ST�G�~[R4SH LETTER COLLF�TIONS P�yKENT COLiECTI�NS MUBILE TELEPHONE PAYHEN[ COLLECTI�NS COLLECTIOHS POSTASE-WATER BILLS LIFE & �ISABILITY I�SURANC[ FILING FEES~ANNEX 68 P�y�E�� COi-LECTIONS �A7�ENT COLLECTIONS SE��INA�^'WATER �I� �ARE�J^ LEAHY RICHRDS LEAHY �A;MENT COLL�[T�ONS COLLECTIONS REPLENI�H PET�Y CASH REFUSE COLL[��IONS LEO8L ��RVICF�STIZZA CLAlM T�AI�If,,' EDOD^ FLO�ER �RRANCEMEN]~�ORD ADVERTICE;ENT 3ENIOR PLANNER PRIHTI�� & SUPPLIES L�B TECTS�WATER DEPT^ REIHB. MILE�GE-WATER ST�IN-WATE8 �ELDE�^�A7EG DEPARTMENT ��OF^ S�R�IC[S-SCHOOL CFD TG���G-P,D^ �EHICLE UNIT 1O9 �L��NE� SERVICES D�F�#D CONS. DEPDSI� REF��N� CUNS^ DEPOSIT REF��D CGNS^ �EPOSIT �EFi|ND CONS^ DEPOSIT REF��|D CON�^ 9�POSIT �EFL31I COHS, DEPOSIT REF�@D C�NS, DEPOSIT REFUND CONS^ DEPOSIT REFUND CONS^ �EPOSIT REF\JND�EPOSIT REFi��D CONS° DEPOSIT �EFU�D CONS- DEPOSIT AMOUNT 19�886^45 129~55 3/045^0O 334°�O 34O,O6 11�.5i 1,1O0.O0 1S,481,�5 722^35 33^O� 125^5� 517^33 72^53 149^51 81O^15 �^144,27 18O,0O 589^93 545.13 63^08 5�°00 575.0O 58^O0 426^O0 733^O1 15O^0O 76'165^52 156^75 97�,84 25^51 1O^OO 6O7~16 42^�0 25.74 29^58 2,262,75 1,413°43 6O^OO l,815,OO 15.05 50^OO 34^1� 24^25 5O^0D 25^5i 7^96 22.04 14^39 23^39 5U^OO Al ;IVAI 3F A,DIMD D[40107/S ECK UT-jITEB CALIFURAIM BANK ISSUED [O 825 MARTIN/ANDREA LEM(3'NS 826 MIKE M2L1"00 827 COM SER CO, so28 Ill ONFe. AD & ASSOCIATE� 829 COX & COX 83O C^M^ DE CRINIS � CO. 831 SERAL� DAVE�nOR7 DE ENO IS BLUEPPITN" 333 8ESEkT GBeFIX 33� DIAMOND �A�L[Y N��S�K� �35 EASTERN HUHI,WATER DI�T �37 EVANS � ASSOCIol�� EVANS TIRE CJ~ FEDERAL EXPRE3S �U^ 24O FERGUSDH^PRAET QHE0104 341 GTEi 342 GENERA. TELEPHON' CA)^ �43 TGERARD 344 HALPRIJ SH|PPLY Kj^ 345 HEhET ELEC, MOTJR 346 HEHET INSDRANCE 347 14EME1, NEWS �46 HEMET OIL I�C^ 949 HEME? POLICE DEPT~ ]5O HEMET V�LLE\ TGU� 01 RANDY n, !|ICKS ]52 HILLTOP SOFT�AR� 35.3 HOT SHOTS 1 HOUR PHOTO 354 HOUSE Q QUALlT`/ �55 HU3BS STATIOGERY TONY HURTZ �57 l,B~M, CORP^ s58 I41U3TRI1ML cost! HAL.l 359 INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE AR) KENNEDY COURT REP3kTERS )61 KERN EQUIPT^ CO^ �62 JOSEPH M^ &OZMA �63 LAWFUL SERVICES 364 PAMELA LEE �65 L01GS DRUG ��ORE �67 MARKMAN^ A8Z�NS|(I /68 MAYER^C GLA�� INc 36S' MISSION UNIFU|�h S��VICE 170 MUNICIPAL EHG^CONSULTNf �'71 NATL^ AUTO GL8SS s72 NEWPOATWAVE SOFTWARE '73 OFFICE -SELF lHSU�AHCE }7� O'MALLEY }75 OVERNIGHT INDi/ST1TAL. AM 0O1398 DESMIPTION ^ �ATE 8�15/91 �EF�ND CONS^ DEPOSIT �EFUND CONS^ DEP8SIT RELOC�T1�:: STATIDN 546-CIVlC CENTER c�OFES�IDN�L SER:ICE'^AUDIT LE�AL S[RV10ES~[ITY ATTORNEY C'OP^vS REGTRUCTUBING PLAM P�G�ESGI�NAL �ER�ICE-A�NEXATION �ISSIO� 5MT^ PRINilNG H�G�OLJ� TREES~LL11D ;�lLLTIWS �IS"O"AALE MASK^~F~D. PRGF�:IONAL SERUlW P^W^ DlWCTUP �^IFaES � R[PAIRS ILTNT~COUNCIL TAPES !EGAL �ERVICES�CLAIHS PHGNE bill INT^ P^D^ & C^C° ��3�E S2�VICE� �U�GE� �OVE�-L�YOUT F1PAT SARMETS~F°D~ �EPAIR ELECTRIC D�ILL EXCESS UOR�ER^S COMP INS, ��'EiVERTISI:�G C�GGLI�� S�ARE ��SET FQRFEITURE STUD GM~F°D^ S[HINA|�-P^D^ CGMOUTEAQ PKOGRAMMING MK&ICES FILM PRDCESSING^P^Q, AUTG OFFICE �UPPLIES RE��I� �ARAGE DOOR M�I14TEN�NCETER COLD MIX SEll I�A��^^WARNER/['^D^ PIDNAL SERVICE -CLAIM �;D MO���-SWEEPER �EI��^ CHIEF'S H�ETING E����ST DUCT CLE�QED�P^D. W03T1 CITY CLERK SFRVICES D^ & CIVIC SEfIN;��-K^ L��HY LEGAL ��RVICS-HOU�EL REFLAC� WINDOW~CIVIC CENTEP �HlFOR� CL��NIN@~P~W^/WAT2R E�CIKEERING SERVICES WI�DGHI�LD~WATER DEPT` COH�UT�� HARDWARE~P^D^/CIVIC SELF IAWRANCE CERTIFICATE �CON^ ��VLP.- K^ ONEAL ���PcL�����LL DEPTS AMUUHT 5O^0O 33,O] �55^56 7,47�,08 5,232^0O 1,4CA) ^OO 104^72 3O,OO 338^3� 3S^82 62^�� 11.625^OO too? ^17 1S^OO �,187^58 574,42 297,38 64,59 36376 26^61 3,599^O0 266,71 967^1� ,036^43 mill 1^53 24�^O0 154~O5 251,Y5O 9oil ^26 72^O� 2O1,00 182^53 13O^QO 948~O0 763^18 67^45 12O^00 1^477,5O 245^77 75^U0 53l,TV! 575,9� 1,O70^07 86^15 21,022`O2 157^24 1,S02^50 467^70 " UMl|�D CALIFUK�I� B��� ^ DATE 8/15/91 �ECK lSSUED TO �ES��IPTIQN �87v PACESETTER BUILCING : L�N CA[CKI@G �B77 PAGENET RE�TAL �ADIO PAGERS �878 P�GTER L�W CORP. �RGFESSI8NAL SE�VICE~SOBOBA A�SC^ �87� LARRY PIERCE PLUMBING �ATER �|]PPLIES POLARR1,DI6TOk �881 /^D~ PETTY CASH �`�, ��TTY CASH �882 PRE��'E�TE0�D7�� Er��LOYM�wT ADyERlISINQ '8�� S��U��� 8USIA[S`� KAC8INE �EP�ID �YPEWRITE�-P^D^ PRIMU REYMOSU E�T C[�TIFICATIOH-F.D^ kI�E��SIDE CU, �/1,PLY FLA�ES-�.D. SCJTSMAh Mo�UF��R]RI�G M;p��|Ly OFFICE LEASE-P~D^ '�6Y �ECU�ITY PEST '���TROL PEST C��TROL-CIVIC CENTER 'Gyo S�AKP �UILDI�� SU�PLY �:ILDI#G SU?PLIE3 S3^ �ALIFORNIA �AG CU;TILITI[S ��i�VE`S AUTO PA/�TS oEHICL� PARTS TAC EXTERMIN4TU�� S�RAY��Q-MU8EUM UNDERGROUND �ERVlCE �LE UTILITY FAX NDTIFICATION�WATER VALLEY RESOURCE �E@TER SGRT ��TER BILLS �ESTERN NURSE SpEC. WRITE PR[C� ^EROORPORAT��N �LG�D DRAWS-P^D. �FFICE �UPPLIES �AI�TENANCE-P,D^ �`E:��OH�[L-�CTION FORMS Prepaid Checks FINAL TOTAL FUND 10 68,192.22 FUND 37 1,580.08 FUND 14 1,166.14 FUND 40 7,799.85 FUND 18 3,756,24 FUND 42 893.71 FUND 20 4,612.25 FOND 50 23,846.44 FUND 21 161.11 FUND 85 82,708.01 FUND 24 77,52 FUND 66 14,135,41 FUND 25 5,805,42 FUND 91 51.97 FUND 31 77.02 FUND 92 750.00 FUND 32 169.17 FUND 96 7,882.16 FUND 38 665.00 TOTALS $224,129.64 AMOUNT 22�618,O0 139.7� 893^71 20^O4 92^7O 678,60 112^94 112^�6 15^00 338,3�� 862^0O �18^UO 92�^44 19,�0 434°5I 7`515.17 5,�61^72 i83^7� 37^5O 53^OO 2O6^43 3O~O0 94,54 191,46 2O3,24 k GLC81� . P& 140;[ER CIV ^UtlFEW DE/nXDS PI'lGE ^ ]TECK UN:RD CALIFDRPOJA BANK A/C 2O1398 DATE 7/31/91 ISSUED TO 0536* HEALTH NE[ �5537* HEALTH NET �5538« BLUE CROSS OF SO^ CA^ 15539* BLUE CROSS OF SO ^ CA^ 15540* S�ANDARD INS, COMPANY �5542* FIRST INTERSTATE BANK �5543� STATE OF CAiTFOK�IA �5544* FI103T INTERSTO[E 8ANK �5545n RIVERSIDE CO, EMP^ �5546* ICMA RE�JREMENT TRUST �3547* FIRST INTERSWTE BANK 5550* LEAGUE UF CAL[CITIES 5551* JAN LEAHY 5552* CITY OF HOR[N[ VALLEY 5646* PAMELA EASlER 5647* CITY OF ?EMECULA 3648* O,K0 ASSOC^ TNC^ 5649* SAN JACINTO TKEOUREWS 5650* WEDIN ENTESPRISES. IN(7-^ 3651* MACIINS ' BEE REMOMAL 5652* PUBLIC EMP` ASSOC^ 5653* S,J" POLICE ASSOC^ 5654* ICMA RE7IREMENT TRUST 5655* RIVERSIDE CO+ EMP, 5656* FIRST INTERST::iTE BANK 5657* FIRST INTEAR STYTE BAHK 5658* STATE DF CALIFORNIA 5659* U^S^ POSTMASlEM 5660* KELLY LONGS[RETH 5661* PUBLIC IMP. RET^ SYSTEM W662* CALIFORNIA MUNI GOLF 5663* GCOTT ABBE 5664* BONNIE L, CULLIMS M65* GELDER'S STUDIO 5666* CRAFTON HILLS 5667* CA^ FIRE SERVICE 5668* MICHAEL C. CHESNUT �684 1-"g�1 LOCK & KE\ 5685 A.it^Ia ATTORNEY+S 5686 j687 j688 j6S9 j69O 1691 5692 5693 5694 �695 �696 AT & T LANGUAGE LINE ALL PURE CHE�IC�L CO^ ALPHA BETA AL'S LAWNHGWER SHOP ALTA NURSERY ANADY'S TROHPIES RALPH ;WDERSON & ASSC^ LOUIS R. ARROYA, JR, B & W P1PE CO^ E+So BABCOCK Al SONS BLUE RIBBON PLUMBING BOB'S UIMPINT", DEGCFIPTION HEALTH INSURAMCE HEALTH INSURANCE�COBRA WALTH INSURANCE CQBRY~HMLTH INSURANC[ LIFE & DISABILITY INSURAHCE FEDERAL TAXES STATE T�XES FEUERAi TAXES CREHIT UNIM DFDUCTI8NS COMPD7DUCTIONS �EDICA�E CONT^ MOT BAG ^LEAHY CE:�R CONFERENCE COUNCIL�E�BERS C���E�ENCE�LEAHY �EIMBDFFICE SUPPLIES SE�I#A�^'COUNCIL REFUSE COLLECTTONS RE�LENI�H PETTY C�SH CG�3UL�lNG SERVICES REMOVAL OF BE[S �ERC ~ DEDUCTIO;4S DEFE��[D COMP^ DEDUCTIONS CREBIT UNION DED|/CTIONS FE3ER�L TAXES FE��R/\L TAXES ST�TE T�XEC PGSTAO� REI�BWATER DEPO��IT RETIRE�[NT APPL1C�1ION MEMRERSHIP H�LEAS� REIMB^ iIAILlTY CLAIM SETTLEHENT FRAMES~MISSION STMT^ SEKIINAFR~P, FIRE SEAWAFY^P^ REYNOSO`FIKE �LA�NI�C SERVICES LATCH �'. IARD~P^D^ F�GFES�IONAL SERV^—L[ABILITY CLAIH L�NGUAQ[ PHONE LINE'P^D. CHLGRI117/30DA~06iTER DGG FO�D~F^D" SER;IC� REPAIR�F,D^ RAYWOOD TREES-LLMD HAHE PL�TE~RICHARDS P5IM PkDGRAM~P^D, JANITORIAL SERVICE SAW BL�DE`f�^W^ LA� TESTS —WATER R��PAIR TOILET~C�yIC C[NTER 13EDI01IX'^P,W^ AMOUNT 18979^6O 129^55 2,557^O0 334.00 3'O92^91 13,381,84 2,812,15 1,561^96 1'S54^OO 475^O0 11^65 5O^OO 31O^0O 24^0O 6�^37 4O^O0 66,659^19 135^64 4'725^OO 4O^00 463.68 1�OOO.0O 1,100^O0 1/9O4,OO 14921,23 2,067.58 3^237`25 967,OO 25^Oi 18'266^8O i/OOO^OO 113~46 8OO.O0 31^16 12^5O 23^OO 4^617^00 11^78 295.65 25^O0 to 1^35 48^85 63^19 126007 6^12 1118,48 4^0O 6^O0 178,OO 118+17 GLCD12 . ` �LGI! 5TLR DF Q )DITED DO Nm: P/'GL� UN-LTED '—AL.I�';lA BAIN, K ISSUED TO l5698 BROWN" HARPER~ BURNS 25699 BUREAU .... BUSINESS PBACT^ 25700 BURTRONICG BUSINESS �5701 CHEROKEE LANDSCAPE �5702 MICHAEL C, CHESNUT V5703 CITRUS BELT^ IOBO �5704 COACHELLA VALLEY JOINT �57OS COM SER CO, �57O6 C^E^D^ �57O7 CONTINENTAL AI8 TUOL �57O8 THE COUNSELINu [EAM �57O9 CO� & COX �571O CREST MEDICAL INC. ��711 L.N. CURTISS Q712 GERALD DAVENMRT �3713 J`F~ DAVIDSON All 14 DEANZA~JEEP Ee;LE^ [Pm^ 15715 EASTERN MUNI.WAlER UST 0716 EASTERN MUNI.owATER VIM A717 E.M.P^ �5718 FERGUSON^PRAETa SHERMA� �5719 MERVIN 114 FEINSTElN 572O 1ST MUNICIPAL DIVI�ION 5721 FONTANA PAVINGS. lNC. 5722 GTEL 5723 8TE MODILE CO~\M, 5724 GENERAL TELEPHUNE CO^ TAMRA GERARD HEMET NE1-'jS 5727 HEMET PAINT CENTER 5728 HEMET RADIOLQGY 5729 HEMET RUBBER ST�MP 573O BRADY HILL 5731 HILLTOP SOFlWARE 5732 DAVID HOBSON 5733 HURLEY'S AUTONTIVE 5734 I,B^M^ CORP. W735 INLAND CHEVROLET 5736 INTERNA[IONAL CONF, �737 JOBS AVAILABL� A738 JUAREZ AUTO UFHSTRY &739 KAMMEYER & ASSOCIAT[S �74O CLAUDIA LAFFOON j741 JAN LEAHY -t742 LIE6RT.CASSIDY/FRIERSO� 3743 LONGS DRUG STORE 5744 MARDEN.... SUSCO 5?45 MELCOM COMMUNICATIONS 5746 MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES �747 NADEL PARTNERSHIP AN NBS/LOWRY DESCRIPTION T!ATE GE�VICES~C^F.D 3 HAND�O��S�F^D^ FILH FO� MICROFILM~P^D^ L�NDSC�PE �AINTE#ANCE DISTRICT CCPY PAFER—CIVIC CENTER �LDG° WDRKSHOP—SHIPMAN LI�BI|ITY IASU�AN�E RADIO MAI#TENANCE CONTRACT H".INTENANCE—LLMD MOWS" .W, ENPLDY[E ASST. PROGRAM LEG�L i�RA) ICES~CITf ATTORNEY O�YGEA~�^B^ E�UIPMENT—F,D^ 2010 MAMITTEE TRAFFIC ENOIPHI ERING SMALS & CASKETS—P,D^ UTILITWS SE�E� CDLLECTIONS �EDIC�L �RODUCTS~�,D L83AL SAVICES LEGAL SERVICES~P^D^ ��GG#��[EPR LEASE CL,003 2 BASE E�UIPME�T �ENTAL �O�ILE TELEPHONE ��GNE SERVICES joB AINLICATION LESIGN LEGAL �DVERTIGING~ANN[X 68 �O��TI�� OF MAP~DISPATCH E�EGC81CY^PRISONER STAMPSMEED ABATEMENT �EMINA�—P.D, P��OGRA��ING GERV^—WATER & PAY|�O|.L TUTIOp~AREST(}N VEHlCL� SMOG CHECK MAINTE��NCE`'PRINTER ;EH1CLE REPAIRS sL�� CA�CK 4��ERTISING AEPAIR LIPHOLSTERY~P,D^ L4�DSCAPE^HGFFMAN PA�K ��F��D �ATER OVERPAYMENT CONFE�[�CE�L��AY �EGGTIATIQNS FlLM�F^D^ & S\}PPLIES �EPAI�! �ADIO~P^W^ C12 MASTMPLAN OF SU1"ERBL0CK EHGI#WRING & PRINTING CERVICES AMOUNT 1,OOO,OO 193^32 301.7O 2,4OO.O0 270^91 20^00 98692^O0 812^60 3OO.11 236.62 75,O0 6+235^SO 37^5O 383^4O 7^514^�4 1^4�O^OO 1'0�4^41 1^497,17 13,O35.62 71^2O 14,455.4O 492^30 1,565^25 75°51 574^42 246^57 3269~36 332,79 432^5O 53^88 22^1O 22^98 251.00 14O^OD 200,OO 525^O0 201^O0 49^O1 6,659^28 156,O0 35^0O 1^87O^OO to5^O0 9�^79 2/843^75 2O6+41 171^79 3O^00 S,952^31 57l3^31 �6,3�O^96 GL�D12 . �5749 �575O �5751 Z5752 �5753 �5754 �575� ��756 �5757 �5�58 �5759 �576O �5762 15763 �5764 !3765 �5766 15767 �576B �5769 �577O �5771 �5772 73 5774 �5775 5776 5777 �5778 5779 578O 5781 5782 5783 5784 5785 5786 5787 5788 ' UNITED CALIFDIRHI� BA�� ISSUED TO NEWPORTWAVE SOFTWARE OVERN3011T INDUSTRIAL PACTELL CELL�LAR-LA PAGENET PAGTER L�W CORF. PIROT'S AUTOMOTIVE POLAR B�AR RADIATOR SAN JACIATO FI�E DEPT. L�WRENCE D` P�ESTON DIANA K, PROUT� QUINLAN PUBLISHING CO^ R^F, COMMUNIC�TIQNG REGIONAL TRAINTNG REMARKABLE PRODUCTS PRIMO REYNOSO RHODES INVESTlGATTUN RIVEDSIDE BLUEPRINT SAFETY~KLEEN �ORP. FRANCISCO SANCAEZ SAN BIEBO ROT��Y BRbG�� SAN JACINTD ELECTRIC SCOTIA TECHNICAL SCOTSMAN MANUFACTURIN6 SHELL OIL CO^ SOUTH C(]�ST AIR QUALITy SO^ CALIFGRNIA EDISON SO^ C�LIFORNI� GAS CO^ �PARKLETTS TAC EXTERMINATOAS TONDN PHOTQCOPY SERVli.:E TRO� VANDERWEN�E CONST^ JAMES W+ UNLAND & A8SOC VALLEY WIDE RECREATION CARL WARREN & CO. WES[E�N CITY M�GAZINE WESTERN NURSE SPEC~ WRITE PRICE WRITE PRICE XEROX COR�ORADGN ZELLER PRINTING Prepaido FUND 10 48,709.23 FUND 14 744.35 FUND 20 118,375.18 FUND 21 201.42 FUND 22 76,154.84 FUND 23 75.51 FUND 24 I10^28 DEGC�IPTION SET�P � TRAINING NETWORK SUPPLI[L DEPTS^ CELLUL�� PHOARTMENTS REKTAL RADIO PAGERS PROFES�ION1,L SERVICE-SOBOBA A�SOC. TCWIN: CHA�G�S~P~D^ RA�I���� REFAI�S PETTY C�S� SEGINA�-P,D. �ECGRDS hNGMT, SEMINAR~P,D^ G�BSCR�PTION-BLDG^ �ECALI��ATIOM RAD&�S SE'IIJPROUTY FEDERAL LAW POSTERS EMT CERTIFICATION & TRAINING~F^D, �RGFE�SIONAL SE�VIC�~RE� SILVAS L2ROY L[TTERING~P^�^ ;EHICL� MACHIAE MAI#TEU��CE �EI�D, �UPPLIES S�3OMS ~ SWEE�ER �ESET �UMPS~MISIELTOE �EPAIRDISK^^BLDG, M��THLY LEASE�OFFICE~P,D, F�EL`CITY MANAGER OF'E��TIN� PER�IT ~ SAS ENGIN[S UTILITY i�TILITY �[��THLY RENTA� SPRAYIN� AT luSEUH LEGAL �ERVICES LEGAL SERVI[ES SITE PL�N FILTRATION FI�AL ��YME#T POOL GPERATIONS IiNl R�E �DJUSTERS ADVERTISEMENT~NEW HIRE BLGGD D�AWS^P^D^ DFFICE �UP�LIES DFFIC� SUPPLIES NCE EHPLOY�NT APPLICATIONS FUND 25 5,495.88 FUND 28 2,695.00 FUND 31 5,732.51 FUND 36 8,132.76 FUND 37 1,000.00 FUND 40 3'057.86 FUND 42 21,607.17 AMOUNT 1,986^50 484.78 6O9,83 �51^17 2'316^5O Cl 312°64 43^18 21^75 41O^OO 56~?8 13�^33 237^00 7O^75 1O6^1O 1.95O.00 42^3� 228.75 7O^63 218^33 37B^62 75^OO 1,733,4O 43^05 30OOO 1'753^2� 11�~54 64^15 37.5� 511^65 25O,OO 160^2C, 4,S33~34 65O+40 795^O0 50^O0 i0O^15 1.3� 2,3�1^33 4�2^60 FINAL TOTAL 527�832^39 FUND 50 2,823,95 FUND 65 130,114.25 1,826.93 17,918.86 85,057.29 TOTAL $ 537,832.39 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development DATE: August 16, 1991 SUBJ: ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT - TRACT 23300 As you may be aware, Riverside County Flood Control District will soon be constructing Master Plan Line C between Esplanade Avenue and the Buena Vista Retention Basin. This line runs through the Skyline parking lot and between the easterly two buildings of the industrial condominium project built by Gary Spates (Tract 23300). The attached resolution accepts an offer of dedication made to the City and deeds the easement to County Flood Control. This action is necessary in order to proceed with this project. Staff recommends approval. Respectfully Submitted, BRIAN MC NABB Director of Community Development BKM:lr \memo.cc\line-c.res RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO ACCEPTING EASEMENT WITHIN TRACT 23300 AND DEEDING SAID EASEMENT TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT WHEREAS, The owner of Tract No. 23300, offered a 30- foot wide drainage easement and a 5-foot wide temporary construction easement for the construction of Line "C" of the Master Drainage Plan; WHEREAS, The City did not accept these offers of dedication; WHEREAS, Line "C" is proposed for construction by Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District between the Buena Vista Retention Basin and Esplanade Avenue; WHEREAS, The dedications must be accepted by the City and granted to Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Jacinto does hereby resolve as follows: 1. The drainage easement offered to the City on Tract 23300 recorded on November 10, 1988, in Map Book 193, Pages 18 and 19 is hereby accepted. 2. Said accepted drainage easement is hereby deeded to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 3. The City hereby grants right of entry and permission to construct in Line "C" within these easements while they remain under the City's control. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Jacinto confirms Resolution No. PASSED AND ADOPTED on t.ti day of 1991. ATTEST: Mayor Deputy City Clerk CERTIFICATE The forgoing is certified to be a true copy of Resolution No. duly adopted by the said City Council of the City of San Jacinto on the date set forth therein. Deputy City Clerk ('f'{u/7i S A N JACINTO City Manager's Office August 13, 1991 Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority 74-133 El Paseo, Suite 2 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: Claimant: Fred C. James Date of Incident: August 3, 1991 We are transmitting herewith, a copy of the above referenced new claim filed on August 9, 1991. Please advise this office of the action you recommend. We have tentatively scheduled this claim for the City Council meeting of August 20, 1991. If you have any questions please feel free to contact us at (714) 654-7337. Yours truly, Pamela L. Lee, CMC Interim Deputy City Clerk cc: Finance Director, Anna Vega City Attorney, Jim Cox a a City of San ia20t Cast i0ain Street • Sar't iacin.o. F fornia 92583 714 <:.54.7337 • FAX 714/654-3728 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO STATE OF CALIFORNIA In the matter of the Claim of ) ) FriED C .T-s ) ) 400 ANGELA WAY ) ) against the City of San Jacinto ) RECEIVED AUG 9 1991 CITY OF JACINTO The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the City of 40.00 San Jacinto in thevsum of $ and in support of said claim represents as follows: 1. When did damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) August 3 i99i 9.30-A.M. 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? Bathroom window facing Wateka St. 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details) Small branch fell from tree from city pavement area Broke bathroom window. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of City officers, servants or employees caused the injury or damage? h. A. 5. What are the names of the City officers, servants or employees causing the damage or injury? N. A. 6. What damage or injuries do you claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed) Bathroom window broken. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage) Cost of replacing window Attaclea ° bill. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors or hospitals: Fred C. James Expenditures made on account of accident or injury: Date sg 8_6_ 91 Item Window replaced Amount $40.00 Send Notices to: STATE OF CALIFORNIA' ) COUNTY OF SS being by me first duly SWOLII, deposes and says: That he is the claimant above named, that he has read the foregoing claim and knows the contents thereof. That the same is true of his own knowledge except as to those matters therein stated on information and blief, and as to those matters, that he believes it to be true. TaLEJLKte (2,1 SUBSCRIBED and sworn Xbefore me this (WA day of 19 Pi the County of of California NOTICE OFFICIAL SEAL ANNA MC MILLIN Notary WAG • Cardorria RIVERSIDE COUNTY Cornmiusion Ev. Jule 24, IC.24 - . vrt-tv Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: "Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, town, city, district, ward or village board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account, voucher, or writing, is guilty of a felony." Most claims must be presented within one hundred (100) days of the harm, unless leave to file a late claim is granted. SOLO TO ADDRESS PACKING SLIP FROM LEROY'S TRAILER REPAIR 41846 Briarwood Ave. Hemet, CA 92344 (7 5 6036 6169 SHIP TO ADDRESS 52 CUSTOMER'S QUANTITY NO. ..6-: SHIPPER'S NO. SALESMAN DESCRIPTION -�.o ' Cr.tr . & t DATE .zit .J ,£/�� a�i3/ f! 1.4.,„3 , J'Z fi^ 47„," cf,,._ ✓f1 PACMCO SY CHECKED HV CARTON-PMGS. TOTAL WEIGHT SNIPPED VIA REO+FF a 6H 639 PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY IF ERROR IS FOUND IN SHIPMENT AO/ AeENDA2.5 City Manager's Office August 13, 1991 Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority 74-133 El Paseo, Suite 2 Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: Claimant: GTE California Corporation Date of Incident: April 5, 1991 We are transmitting herewith, a copy of the above referenced new claim filed on August 9, 1991. Note this is a claim which stems from an action filed previously against the State of California. Please advise this office of the action you recommend. We have tentatively scheduled this claim for the City Council meeting of August 20, 1991. If you have any questions please feel free to contact us at (714) 654-7337. Yours truly, Pamela L. Lee, CMC Interim Deputy City Clerk cc: Finance Director, Anna Vega City Attorney, Jim Cox City of San Jacinto • 20i Easi Main Stree • Sr Jacinto, California 92583 714654-7332 • FAX 714/654-3728 . - (SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY) THOMAS J. SAMAHA-STATE BAR130418 1 WfSE, WOEZORE:, TIMMONS 6 WISE 2 IILOS A PROFESSIONALGUEROCORPORATION FCE1VEi833 SOUTH FIGUEROA STT, SUITE 64O ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 TELEPHONE (213) 628-3717 311 AUG 9- 1991 4 5 Attorneys for CITY OF SAN JACINTO CLAIMANT GTE CALIFORNIA INCORPORATED 6 7 8 In the Matter of the Claim of ) GTE California Incorporated, A ) No. 9 California corporation, ) ) 10 AGAINST THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO ) ) 11 The undersigned, on behalf of GTE California Incorporated 12�f (hereinafter "GTEC"), a California Corporation, hereby makes 13 claim against the City of San Jacinto (hereinafter, "the City") 14 for indemnity, contribution and/or apportionment of fault and 15 in support of said claim represents as follows: 16 1. On or about April 5, 1991, defendants the State of 17 California and Floyd Johnson Construction Company were served 18 with a summons and complaint in a Riverside Superior Court 19 civil action as Case no. 210977, named Worthy v. State of 20 California, et al.. 21 2. As is stated in the said complaint, plaintiff Worthy 22 alleges that he sustained injuries on June 11, 1990 at San 23 Jacinto Avenue north of Shaver St., in the City of San Jacinto, 24 in Riverside County. These injuries purportedly were 25�I proximately caused by 2' x 3' x 6' hole in the asphalt of the 26 27 28 roadway (hereinafter, "the hole"). Plaintiff alleges he lost control of his vehicle and sustained injuries when his left 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 front tire feel into the hole. Plaintiff further claims defendants negligently, recklessly and carelessly allowed this hole to exist. A copy of plaintiff's complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, not as an admission that any of the allegations therein are true, but solely for the purpose of illustrating the nature of plaintiff's claim brought against the State of California, et al., and for no other purpose. 3. On or about June 27, 1991, GTEC was served with a summons and cross -complaint in the said Riverside Superior Court civil action, Case No. 210977, named Worthy vs. State of California, et al.. As stated in the said cross -complaint, the State of California contends that cross -defendant GTEC is obligated to partially or fully indemnify the State of California from plaintiff's complaint because of GTEC's negligence or contractual liability. A copy of said cross - complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference for the sole purpose of illustrating the nature of plaintiff's claim brought against GTEC and for no other purpose. 4. Based on the complaint, GTEC is informed and believes that, at or about the alleged time and place of the injury„ the City was engaged in trenching activity to install storm drains. 5. At the time of plaintiff's alleged accident and injuries, GTEC owned telephone facilities that were near the point of the plaintiff's alleged accident. At present, GTEC 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 does not know how its facilities are alleged to have caused or contributed to the said plaintiff's alleged injuries. However, GTEC denies that plaintiff suffered any injury, damage or loss through or as a result of any fault on the part of GTEC. 6. GTEC is informed and believes that, if plaintiff's alleged injuries and damages were not caused solely by plaintiff's own inattention and negligence, they must have been caused by some negligent design defect or by negligent maintenance of the sidewalk and/or of the adjoining roadway. If a hazard did exist at the site of the referenced telephone facilities, it may have been caused by city maintenance activities, or city personnel may not have properly reported and/or corrected a dangerous condition as a result of negligence by city officers, employees and/or contractors. 7. GTEC is informed and has reasonable grounds to believe that Floyd Johnson Construction Company, a contractor, was hired by the City of San Jacinto and caused or contributed to plaintiff's alleged injuries and damages. At present, pending discovery in the referenced Riverside Superior Court civil action, GTEC does not know the identity of any other city officers, employees and/or contractors whose conduct may have caused or contributed to any of plaintiff's alleged injuries or losses. 8. Although GTEC has not completed its investigation of the above -referenced alleged incident, GTEC is informed and has reasonable grounds to believe that the cross -complaint against GTEC by the State of California may have already prompted 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 plaintiff to name GTEC as a defendant in plaintiff's case -in - chief or may have such effect in the near future, in which event the City of San Jacinto will be obligated to indemnify GTEC against plaintiff's claims stemming from this incident because the City of San Jacinto proximately caused the above - referenced incident through negligence or some other fault. DATED: ��';-c WISE, WIEZOREK, TIMMONS & WISE A Professional Corporation SEND NOTICE TO: THOMAS J. SAMAHA, ESQ. WISE, WIEZOREK, TIMMONS & WISE 888 SOUTH FIGUEROA STREET SUITE 840 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 By cP rice THOMAS J(.JSAMAHA 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANTHONY J..RUFFOLO ROBERT W. VIDOR LARRY R. DANIELSON 1605 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 700 Post Office Box 15076 Los Angeles, California 90015 Telephone: (213) 736-38Q0 CORINNE LEE, Bar Number 94100 Attorneys for Defendant and Cross -Complainant, The People of the State of California, acting through the Department of Transportation MAY 17 1991 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE JAMES NEAL WORTHY, ) NO. 210977 Plaintiff,) CROSS -COMPLAINT OF THE -vs- ) PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF ) TRANSPORTATION, et al., ) ) GTC: October 31, 1991 Defendants.) ) ) ) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,) acting by and through the Department ) of Transportation, ) ) Cross -Complainant,) -vs- ) FLOYD JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION CO., a ) business entity, CITY OF SAN JACINTO, ) a public entity, GTE, a corporation, ) and DOES ONE through FIFTY, ) Inclusive, ) ) Cross -Defendants.) ) ) Cross-camp..ainant, The People of the ,_ ate of California, 2 acting by and through the Department of Transportation, for a 3 cause of action against cross -defendants, and each of them, 4 alleges as follows: 5 6 7 8 9 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL CROSS -DEFENDANTS 1. Cross -complainant, The People of the State of 10 California, was and now is a sovereign State of the United 11 States. 12 2. The true names or capacities, whether individual, 13 corporate, associate or otherwise of cross -defendants, Does One 14 through Fifty, are unknown to cross -complainant who, therefore, 15 sues said cross -defendants under such fictitious names. Cross- 18 complainant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that 17 each of the cross -defendants designated herein as a "Doe" is 18 responsible in some manner for the events and happenings in 19 connection with the incident herein referred to and caused 20 injuries and damages proximately brought to the cross -complainant 21 as herein alleged, and leave of the court will be asked to amend 22 23 24 25 28 27 28 this pleading to show the true names or capacities when the same have been ascertained. 3. At all times material hereto, cross -defendants, and each of them, were the agents, servants, employees or joint venturers of each and the other and were engaged in the scope and course of said occupation, agency or joint venture. / / 2 Cross -Complaint 4. At a_ times material hereto, -defendants, and 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 each of them, were and are legal entities or persons having residence, adequate contacts and/or.authorized to do and doing business within the jurisdiction of this court and were and are subject to the jurisdiction of this court. 5. Prior to the filing of this cross -complaint, a complaint has been previously filed by plaintiff James Neal Worthy against this cross -complainant and others, which alleges that plaintiff sustained injuries and damages arising out of an incident alleged to have occurred on or about June 11, 1990. A copy of plaintiff's complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference solely for the purpose of illustrating the nature of the claim brought against cross - complainant and for no other purpose. 6. This cross -complainant has filed its answer to the complaint in the main action, denying all essential allegations thereof or that this cross -complainant is in any way legally responsible for the injuries and damages allegedly sustained by the plaintiff. A copy of this cross -complainant's answer is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference. 7. Cross -complainant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that cross -defendants, and Does One through Fifty, and each of them, were negligent and careless in their conduct and that said negligence and carelessness caused the injuries -and damages alleged in the complaint, or were otherwise legally responsible and liable for the injuries and damages alleged in the complaint. 3 Cross -Complaint 1 8.. That should cross -complainant .ein be found liable to 2 plaintiff, cross -complainant should be entitled to apportionment 3 and contribution from cross -defendants, and each of them, under 4 the theory of comparative indemnity commensurate with the jury 5 findings as to the percentage of .fault attributable to each of 8 said cross -defendants. 7 9. That an actual controversy exists between the parties 8 to this cross -complaint over the rights, liabilities and duties 9 of each of them. Cross -complainant contends that cross- 10 defendants, and each of them, are responsible -- totally or in 11 12 13 14 15 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 28 part -- for the damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff herein, and are required to totally or partially indemnify cross - complainant for any and all damages recovered by plaintiff from this cross -complainant by settlement and/or judgment arising out of the incident alleged in plaintiff's complaint. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL CROSS -DEFENDANTS 10. Cross -complainant hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 9 of the First Cause of Action as though fully set forth herein and with the same force and effect. 11. By way of cross -complaint against cross -defendants Floyd Johnson Construction Co., a business entity; City of San .Jacinto, -a public entity; GTE, a corporation, and Does Twenty through Fifty, cross -complainant State of California alleges: / / / / / / 4 Cross -Complaint 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 28 12,. The ue names or capacities, ss her individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of cross -defendants Does Twenty through Fifty are unknown to cross -complainant State of California, who therefore sues said cross -defendants by said fictitious names, and will ask leave to amend this cross - complaint to show their true names and capacities and state of ncorporation wheri same have been ascertained. 13. At all times herein mentioned cross -defendant Floyd Johnson Construction Co. was, and now is a business entity qualified to do business and doing business in the State of California. 14. At all times herein mentioned, cross -defendant City of San Jacinto was and now is a public entity authorized and doing business under the laws of the State of California. 15. At all time herein mentioned, cross -defendant GTE was and now is a corporation qualified to do business and doing business in the State of California. 16. On or about February 23, 1990, cross -defendant Floyd Johnson Construction Company was issued Encroachment Permit number 08-90-6-DP-0887 by The People of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation to construct a storm drain system. 17. On or about April 6, 1990, cross -defendant City of San Jacinto was issued Encroachment Permit number 08-88-N-DD-1226 by the people of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation, to have constructed and thereafter own and maintain a storm drain system within State Route 79. / / / 5 Cross -Complaint ' 18. Cross -defendant GTE was issued Encroachment Permit number 08-90-6-UT-0863. 19. The Encroachment Permits provide that the work shall be done in accordance with the current Standard Specifications, Standard Plans, and Encroachment Permit Utility Provisions. 20. Certain duties and obligations of cross -defendants are set forth in Paragraph 24 of the Encroachment Permit General Provisions. Said provisions provide that cross -complainant State of California is entitled to be held harmless and indemnified and defended by cross -defendants. 21. Cross -complainant State of California has been named as defendant in an action brought by plaintiff James Neal Worthy 1 o recover damages for injuries or to property allegedly caused by a dangerous condition created by cross -defendants in the performance of their work on State Route 79 pursuant to Permit Numbers 08-90-6-DP-0887, 08-90-6-UT-0863, and 08-88-N-DD-1226. 22. Cross -complainant is demanding of cross -defendants that they honor their obligations under Permit Numbers 08-90-6-DP- 0887, 08-90-6-UT-0863, and 08-88-N-DD-1226 and save, indemnify, defend and hold it harmless from plaintiff's action herein, all 21 _ f which cross -defendants have not yet done and fail to do. 23. Cross -complainant State of California has been required o appear and defend itself against plaintiff's complaint and to incur expenses by reason of said appearance in defense in an amount which is presently unknown, and cross -complainant State of California prays leave to insert the proper amount when such amount becomes known. / / / 6 Cross -Complaint 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 28 24: Cross -complainant State of Cali `rnia contends that cross -defendants are obligated by the provisions of said Permit Numbers 08-90-6-DP-0887, 08-90-6-UT-0863, and 08-88-N-DD-1226 to indemnify, save, defend and hold it harmless from plaintiff's complaint. 25. Cross -complainant, State of California, in informed and believes on such information and belief alleges that Cross - defendants contend that they.have no legal responsibility, obligation or liability of any kind under the provisions of said Permit Numbers 08-90-6-DP-0887, 08-90-6-UT-0863, and 08-88-N-DD- 1226. 26. An actual controversy relating to the legal rights and duties of the cross -complainant and cross -defendants under the contract exists, and cross -complainant State of California desires a declaration of its rights and of the obligations of cross -defendants under said Permit Numbers 08-90-6-DP-0887, 08- 90-6-UT-0863, and 08-88-N-DD-1226. WHEREFORE, cross -complainant prays for judgment against cross -defendants, and each of them, as follows: 1. That in the event of any judgment being entered against cross -complainant or settlement being made by cross -complainant herein, the court adjudge and decree that cross -defendants-, and each of them, are liable to cross -complainant for the full or partial amount of any such judgment or settlement commensurate with the fault of the codefendants, and that said judgment or settlement be paid in full by or in proportion with the fault of / / / 7 Cross -Complaint ) 1 cross -defendants, and each of them, -along .. ith any costs or 2 expenses incurred by cross -complainant in connection with the 3 defense of this action, including reasonable attorneys' fees; 4 2. That the court adjudge and decree that cross- 5 defendants, and each of them, are obligated to defend cross - complainant in this action, to represent cross -complainant's 7 interests herein and to hold it harmless from judgment or 8 settlement and further to reimburse it for all costs, expenses, 9 attorneys' fees and other damages incurred by it in defending 10 this action; 11 3. That under the express contract between cross- 12 defendants and the State of California, the court adjudge and 13 decree that cross -defendants are obligated to defend cross- 14 complainant State of California in this action, to represent 15 cross -complainant's interests herein and to hold cross- 16 complainant State of California harmless from judgment or 17 settlement and further to reimburse cross -complainant State of 18 California for any sum or sums which cross -complainant State of 19 California pays plaintiff herein because of any judgments or 20 settlements with plaintiff, along with all costs, expenses, 21l�attorneys' fees and other damages incurred by -cross -complainant 22 State of California in defending this action; 23 4. All costs and expenses incurred in the defense of 24plaintiff's complaint; 25 5. Costs of suit and attorneys' fees and expenses incurred 28_ herein; and 27 / / / 28 / / / 8 Cross -Complaint 6: For such other and further relief as the court deems 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 28 just and proper under the circumstances. ANTHONY J. RUFFOLO, ROBERT W. VIDOR LARRY R. DANIELSON By CORINNE LEE Attorneys for Cross -Complainant, The People of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation THIS CROSS -COMPLAINT IS DEEMED VERIFIED PURSUANT TO SECTION 446 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE; ACCORDINGLY, A VERIFIED ANSWER IS REQUIRED. Worthy3 9 Cross -Complaint CROSS — NOTICE TO. 6EFENDANT: FLOYD JOHNSON CONSTRUCTIO CITY OF SAN JACINTO, a pu corporation, and DOES ONE Inclusive, (WITH ATTACHMENT) a Acusado) N CO., a business entity, blic entity, GTE, a through FIFTY, YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLX (A Ud. le est i demandando) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF and through the Department IfliX CROSS —COMPLAINANT: CALIFORNIA, acting by of Transportation, PON COURT USE ONLY (So10 PAR4 USO Of fA coerE) You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this sum- mons is served on you to file a typewritten re- sponse at this court. A letter or phone call will not protect you; your typewritten response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case. and your wages, money and pro- perty may be taken without further warning from the court. There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may call an attorney refer- ral service or a legal aid office (listed in the phone book). Despues de que le entreguen esta citation judicial usted tiene un plazo de 30 DIAS CALENDARIOS pars presentar una respuesia escrita a maquina en esta corte. Una carta o una llamada telefonica no le ofrecera protection; su respuesta escrita a maquina tiene que cumplir con las formalidades legates apropiadas si usted quiere que la corte escuche su caso. Si usted no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso, y le pueden guitar su salario, su dinero y otras cosas de su propiedad sin aviso adicional por parte de la corte. Existen otros requisitos legates. Puede que usted quiera llamar a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede Ilamar a un servicio de referencia de abogados o a una oficina de ayuda legal (yea el directorio telefdnico). The name and address of the court is: if! nombre y direction de la corre es; SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 4050 Main Street Post Office Box 431 Riverside, California 92502 0���� r1�� , The name. address, and telephone number of defendant ea ntifff''rcttattorney, or ptijint tt without an attorney, is: fi nombre ;a direction v el numero de refer -ono del abogado del demandante. o dei demandanre que no tiene abogado e ANTHONY J..RUFFOLO, ROBERT W. VIDOR, LARRY R. DANIELSON 1605 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 700 Post Office Box 15076 Los Angeles, California 90015 Telephone: (213) 736-3800 CASE NUMBER. (hvmern del Cnol I 210977 DATE:, MAY r.v 04 4991 I FeCna t ilAl L., ISEALI ARTHUR Clerk, Act ua riO.+ NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served 1. as an individual defendant. 2. I as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify!: 3. 4. I on behalf of (specify): under. CCP 416.10 (corporation) ifCCP 416.20 (defunct corporation) CCP 416.40 !association or partnership) other. by personal delivery on (date): Deputy (Delesado. CCP 416.60 Iminorl CCP 416.70 Iconservateel CCP 416.90 (individual) 1 rom, Aeopleo by Ruhr 982 JuCiuul Count of CaG(orna 982151161 !Rev. January 1, 19841 PS 2-84 (See reverse for PTOOf of Servicul SUMMONS 7 65 818 B (R.. 1-841 1-84 RCO26 CCP 412.20 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELS I am employed in the county of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 888 South Figueroa Street, Suite 840, Los Angeles, California 90017. On August , 1991, I served the foregoing document: CLAIM FOR INDEMNITY AGAINST CITY OF SAN JACINTO on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at Los Angeles, California addressed as follows: THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO 201 EAST MAIN STREET SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA 92583 Executed on August , 1991, at Los Angeles, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. / SUSANA M. TELLO NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: (Avisoa Acusado) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Dept of Transportation; FLOYD JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.,a .California corporation and DOES 1 through 5 0,, Inclusive YOU ARE BEING. SUED BY -PLAINTIFF: (A Lid. le esti demandando) JAMES WORTHY You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this sum- mons is served on you to file a typewritten re- sponse at this court. A letter or phone call will not protect you; your typewritten response must be in proper legal form If you want the court to hear your case. If you do not file your response on time. you may lose the case, and your wages, money and pro- perty may he taken without further waming from the court. There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney. you may call an attorney refer- ral service or a legal aid office (listed in the phone book). Despucs de que le entreguen esla cilacidn judicial usted tienr un plain de 30 DIAS CALENDARIOS plra presentar una respuesta escrifa a maquina en esla torte. Una carts o una !lamada telcfdnicl no le ofreccra pmteccion; su respuesta escrita a maquina Ilene que cumplir con Las formalidades legates apmpiadas si usted quiert• que la cork cscuche su caso. Si usted no prescnta su respuesta .l :lemon, puede perdcr el c so, y le pueden quitar su salario, su dinem y olras cocas de su pmpiedad sin aviso adicional pnr patie de la cone. Existen otms requisites legllcs. Puedc que listed quiera lllmar a un abor,'ado inmediatamente. Si no cnnoce a un alxrgado, puede llamar a un servicin de referenc!a de abogados n a una nficina de ayuda legal (yea el directorio telefdnico). The name and address of the court is (El nombre y direccion de la come es) SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE •OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY. OF RIVERSIDE ., 4050 Main Street Riverside, CA 92502 CASE MidaaUIL Wrrrr .4/ 4. ~.1 2109`:i The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's anomey, or plaintiff without an attorney, is: , ftl niwnbre, la direction y el numero de Wenno del al ogado del demandanre, n del demandanre que no aerie ahogado, es) Colleen Sue Patterson,'Esq. KELLNER & YBARRONDO , 901 E. Morton Place, Ste. 1 Hemet, CA 92343.°, (714) 925-6666 I • . ii• .Ft. . , . . ., .. i •'rfi• , . •.a'.... DATE: (ferfip R - 5 1 4I Clerk, by P. 41tfiltel 1uf( Deputy (0elegJdoa .NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are -served 1. as an individual defendant. 2. i as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): 3. on behalf of (specify): under. CCP 418.10 (corporation) CCP 418.20 (defunct corporationl CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) other 4. by personal delivery on (dare): CCP 416.60 (minor) CCP 418.70 (conservatee) CCP 418.90 (individual) EXHIBIT " . » fColleen Sue Patterson, Esq. KELLNER & YBARRONDO 991•E.=Morton Place, Ste. 1 Hemet, CA 92343 ATTORNEY FOR INANE): PLAINTIFF Insert name of court, judicial dlsuict or branch court, If any. and post office and street address: SUPERIOR COURT OF TIIF. STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 4050 Main Street Riverside, CA 92502 (714) 925-6666 PLAINTIFF: JAMES WORTHY �� APR 0 5 1991 p Cork ' ,' h P. Sarrthuff e,1`e"e/`ly Deputy DEFEND ANT: gHp ONIA UD OTOncTraasp liiria corporation ® DOES 1 TO 5 :1 Torlusive COMPLAINT Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death Q MOTOR VEHICLE QOTHER (specify): QProperly Damage Q Wrongful Death [Personal Inlury Q Oth'er Damages (specify): CASE HUUaER: 210977 CFNERAL CIVIL 1. This pleading, Including attachments and exhibits, consists of the followin 2. a. Each plaintiff named above is a comnalent adult jJ Except plaintiff (name): [tea corporation qualified to do business In California Q an unincorporated entity (describe): :Da public entity (describe): pa minor Q an adult Q for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a gut Q other (specify): Q other (specify): n,rmh,r of ring NPS es Date Time Statu,s Conf Dept dL-;TRd Illem as yilif rem inkd Q Except plaintiff (name): Q a corporation qualified to do business In California Elan unincorporated entity (describe): Qa public entity (describe): IQ a minor. Q err adult Q for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad Iitem has been appointed Q other (specify): pother (specify): b. Q Plaintiff (name): is doing business under the fictitious name of (specify): and has complied with the flclitlous business name laws. . Q Information aboul additional plaintiffs who are not competent adults is shown in Complaint — Attachment 2c.' (Conllnued) Form Approvrd by INN Jumu�l Cuunc4 of C]Idnem■ rrouiIII n nrnnnrl.. n•-•..+-tnr. SHORT TITLE: WORTHY v STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL. CASE MUIIOER COMPLAINT —Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death (Continued) 7. Q The damages claimed for wrongful death and the relationships of plaintiff to the deceased are Q listed In Complaint —Attachment 7 0 as follows: 8. Plaintiff has suffered wage loss hospital and medicai expenses Q property damage Q other damage (specify): Q Ioss of use of property general damage Caloss of earning capacity 9. Relief sough) in This complaint is within the Jurisdiction of Ihis court. 1D. PLAINTIFF PRAYS For Judgment for costs of suit; for such relief as is fair, Just. and equitable; and for compensatory damages ® (Superior Court) according to proof. EV.# Q (Municipal and Justice Court) in the amount of Q other (specify): P. trip 11. The following causes of action are attached and the stalementsabove apply to each: (Each complaint must have one or more causes of action attached.) Motor Vehicle -- General Negligence Q Intentional Tort Q Products Liability Q Premises Liability Q Other (specify): Kit COLLEEN SUC PATTERSON, ?sp.,. . (Type W Nee name) i SWjitatetle et (eauHJt nt anu4neyj SHOAT TITLE: 1 CASE IIUYOER: WORTHY v STATE OF CALIFORN1 , ET AL. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION —General Negligence Page 4 (nu„bet) ATTACHMENT TO ©Complaint QCross-Complaint (Use a separate cause of action form for each cause of action.) GN-1. Plaintiff (name): JAMES WORTHY alleges Thal defendanl(name): STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Department of Transportation; FLOYD JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a California corporation IDoes 1 to 50, Inclusive was the legal (proximate) cause of damages to plaintiff. 0y the following acts or omissions to act, defendant negligently caused the damage to plaintiff on (date): June 11, 1990 et(placa):. San Jacinto Avenue north of Shaver St., City of San Jacinto._County of Riverside, State of California (description of reasons for liability): Plaintiff was travelling along and on San Jacinto Avenue in a • northerly direction in a vehicle owned and operated by Plaintiff's employer, City of San Jacinto Police Department. At that time and place, Defendants, and each of them, so negligently, carelessly and recklessly, controlled, maintained, inspected, repaired, and failed to make safe the roadway so as to allow a 2' x 3'x 6' hole in the .asphalt of a public roadway, thereby creating a dangerous condition to exist. The dangerous condition vas known or in the exercise of ordinary and reasonable care, would have been known to Defendants, and each of them, for a reasonably prudent person to warn of or make safe the dangerous condition. As a result, Plaintiff's left front tiro fell into tha hole thereby causing Plaintiff to lose control of said vehicle causing Plaintiff to sustain injuries and damages to his body and person. As a proximate result of Defendant's and each of their negligence, carelessness and recklessness, Plaintiff sustained injuries and damages as hereinafter alleged. Foan, AbblOwied by IM Juaaual Counca of Cal Io.n.a Elltcura Jammu), 1, 1982 nu4, 982.143; CAUSE OF ACTION —General Negligence CCP 425 1? C!!NRnAT. - rTUTT X -BRIT "AU ±DA MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development DATE: August 16, 1991 SUBJ: CONCEPTUAL AGREEMENT WITH ARCO ARCO is proposing to commence the construction of the AM/PM store on the northeast corner of Seventh Street and San Jacinto Avenue with the goal of occupying the store on January 1, 1992. As you may recall, the City conditioned, and ARCO agreed to, the requirement for their participation in the elimination of the dips in this intersection. In order to expedite the project, ARCO will be doing this work and the City will be both crediting fees and paying for their share of the improvements. Ultimately, these arrangements will be memorialized in an agreement. However, due to the fast pace of this project, there has not been adequate time to prepare the agreement and have it approved by ARCO Corporate Office. We have been able to agree in principal on the split of costs. The City's share is approximately 150,221 to be funded from flood control and gas tax funds. In order to submit this project to CAL TRANS with any hope of having the improvements completed by January 1st, Staff is requesting the Council authorize ARCO to proceed with the engineering and direct Staff to prepare the necessary agreement. Respectfully Submitted, BRIAN MC NABB Director of Community Development BKM:lr \memo.cc\arco.agm !Da 2 ,7 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development DATE: August 16, 1991 SUBJ: EXEMPTIONS TO THE OPEN SPACE DESIGNATION ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 1906 The attached resolution is a clarification of the temporary open space designation created by Resolution 1906 in August 1990, in a portion of the Northwest Area. The attached Staff Report to the City Council recommended exceptions granted to projects approved prior to Resolution 1906 and that projects that had been submitted, but not approved, be allowed to continue through approval provided they be conditioned to conform to the ultimately approved Northwest Plan. Resolution 1906 did not clarify these points. Exhibit "B" of the Resolution shows those projects that are exempt from the open space at this time. Exhibit "C" shows those projects that have now been approved subject to the Northwest Plan. Staff recommends the Council approve the attached resolution. Respectfully Submitted, BRIAN MC NABB Director of Community Development BKM:lr \memo.cc\open-sp.res RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO CLARIFYING EXEMPTIONS TO THE OPEN SPACE DESIGNATION ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION NO. 1906 WHEREAS, on August 7, 1990, the City Council adopted Resolution 1906 amending the General Plan by creating a Temporary Open Space Designation as defined by Exhibit "A" attached; WHEREAS, the staff reports to the Planning Commission and City Council recommended the exemption of all development that had previously been approved, from this open space designation; WHEREAS, the aforesaid staff reports recommended the exemption of development that had been submitted for processing prior to August 7, 1990, from this open space designation, provided the plans were required to conform to the yet to be adopted NorthWest Plan; WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1922 extended the open space designation; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Jacinto does hereby resolve as follows: 1. The Projects noted on Exhibit "B" are exempt from the open space designation 2. The projects noted on Exhibit "C" are exempt from open space designation provided they conform to the ultimate approved NorthWest Plan 3. Projects in Exhibits "B" and "C" may proceed through the Final Map and development stages in accordance with their Conditions of Approval and approved Public Improvement Plans. MOVED, PASSED AND ADOPTED on the day of 1991. ATTEST: Mayor Deputy City Clerk CERTIFICATE The forgoing is certified to be a true copy of Resolution No. duly adopted by the said City Council of the City of San Jacinto on the date set forth therein. Deputy City Clerk SANDERS()N A,xiUE PALM AVENUE of 0 } �NWOdD AVE VII 13 acr park EX IT "B" APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 1906 IM/T. z z 0 CO "I IONWOOD AVENUE EXHIBIT`; APPROVED 'TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS AFTER ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 1906 /TY L/AYTS 11 \ 11 11 11 II 014 MEMORANDUM ASLTZDA TO: Mayor and City Council via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager FROM: Anna A. Vega, Finance DirectorICILL SUBJECT: San Jacinto Police Officers Association Memorandum of Understanding DATE: August 20, 1991 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends acceptance San Jacinto Police Officers Association (POA) Memorandum of Understanding effective July 1, 1991, and authorize the City Manager and City Negotiator, Richard Kriesler to sign said memorandum on behalf of the City of San Jacinto. Dental and Vision coverage shall become effective September 1, 1991. BACKGROUND Richard Kriesler and Anna Vega, City Negotiators meet with the POA's negotiator and POA's board. After various meetings an agreement was reached. A copy of the Memorandum has been distributed to the City Council for review and comment. Final agreement has been reached and acceptance is being requested at this time. Hemet Racquetball Club. During the term of this agreement, the parties shall meet and confer regarding such term and condition of employment. ARTICLE XIII Savings Clause 13.1 Should any provision of the MOU, or any application thereof, be unlawful by virtue of any Federal, State or local laws and regulations, or by any court decision, such provision shall be effective and implemented only to the extent permitted by such law, regulation or court decision. But in all other respects, the provisions of the MOU shall continue in full force and effect for the term thereof. SAN JACINTO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION epresentative Representative CITY OF SAN JACINTO City Manager City Negotiator Date: g-/.5-- Date: RMK/jj/kn:129 misc\sanjac.mou -19- /Z0/71 MEMO 3 ,,,‘ .;,..‘t:..,i-,7, TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development DA1E: August 16, 1991 SUBJ: Appeal of Amendment of Conceptual Specific Plan 2-88, Rancho San Jacinto development. On July 10, 1991 the Planning Commission beard PR Equities' proposal to amend Conceptual Specific Plan 2-88 by adding an RV parking and storage area located south of Esplanade Avenue, between Mountain Avenue, Meridian Channel, and Meridian Street. The Planning Commission denied the use for an RV parking and storage area but approved the inclusion of the land into Conceptual Specific Plan 2-88. The following is the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact for denial of the RV parking and storage area: 1. No onsite manager. 2. No provision for maintenance. 3. No provision for who is to operate the RV storage yard. 4. Number of spaces provide appears to be inadequate for the number of homes proposed for Rancho San Jacinto. 5. Parking stall dimensions seem to be undersized for most recreational vehicles. 6. An RV parking and storage area is not an appropriate use at an entry into the City. Attached for your review is Staff's report to the Planning Commission and the letter of appeal to the City Council. Respectfully, BRIAN MC NABB Director of Community Development NBS- EHGI4EEPS Pt A H N E R S 0 RY H87-041.003 July 24, 1991 City of San Jacinto Planning Department 201 E. Main Street San Jacinto, CA 92583 ECEIVaD JUL 25 1991 CITY OF SAN JACINTO 1545 West Flondo Menus PO. Box 851 Hemet, Colifotnio 92343-3814 Attention: Kenson Nishino Dear Kenson: SUBJECT: SP 2-88 AMENDMENT; PROPOSED RECREATIONAL STORAGE AREA - LETTER OF APPEAL 714 658-71 I6 lel 714 652-8804 Fos This letter is being submitted to appeal the San Jacinto Planning Commission denial on July 10, 1991 of the proposed recreational vehicle storage area as it relates to SP 2-88 Amendment. Please find enclosed a fee of $75.00 to cover the fee for appeal. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Bruce Ferguson or myself at this office. Sincerely, /4 Colleen M. Mathews Project Manager BF/CMM:kb Enclosures .e STAFF REPORT TO: Chairman Ver Plank and Members of the Planning Commission DATE: June 7, 1991 SUBJECT: Amendment to Specific Plan 2-88 Proposed Recreational Storage Area APPLICANT: PR Equities 1655 E. 6th Street, Ste. A4A Corona, CA 92806 (714)272-6660 DESCRIPTION A proposed RV parking and storage facility on approximately 1.07 acres for he Rancho San Jacinto Developments located west of Mountain Avenue north of the Meridian Flood Channel. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The runoff from the proposal will flow through the channel system within SP 2-88 and should not adversely effect the environment. The project will slightly alter traffic flows as this project will become a destination for the storage users. However, they will be insignificant. DISCUSSION The subject site is a triangular piece of property with some physical constraints on it. The Meridian Channel is adjacent to the subject site along the east property line. The rear lot has an approved use for a satellite receiving station for Jones Intercable. The front lot is not only the proposed site for the recreational vehicle storage but is also the proposed site for a future city water well. In mid 1990, P-R Equities had applied for Change of Zone which would have facilitated establishment of an R.V. storage business. R-V storage is only allowed in an M-1 zone with a Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission denied that request. Because of constraints to the parcel involved and because of the interest of home buyers with the Rancho San Jacinto project, P-R Equities is proposing to construct an R-V storage for Rancho San Jacinto. Attached for your use is Dave Cottington's letter of request. His letter provides a base outline of how the facility will ultimately be maintained. The staff has reviewed the actual layout and has conditioned it to meet city standards and policies. We have also attached a copy for your review and comments. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 91- 19 recommending the City Council approve this amendment to: Specific Plan 2-88 subject to the following Findings of Fact and Conditions of Approval. Brian McNabb Director of Community Development FINDING OF FACT AMENDMENT TO SP 2-88 1. The Planning Commission denied the applicant request to change the zone to M-1, Light Manufacturing that would allow recreational parking on the subject site. 2. The Meridian Channel is adjacent to the subject site along the east property line. 3. The rear lot has an approved use for a satellite receiving station for Jones Intercable. 4. The front lot is also the proposed site for a future city water well. 5. Homebuyers in the Rancho San Jacinto development are interested in an RV storage facility near their homes. 6 The will be no significant impact on the environment with this proposal. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FIRE DEPARTMENT AMENDMENT TO SP 2-88 COMPLY WITH FIRE DEPARTMENT CHECKLIST DATED APRIL 18, 1991. TRAFFIC ENGINEER 1. Curb returns shall have a 35 foot radius. 2. Provide a minimum two space backup off the public right of way at the entrance. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. Widen existing culvert at the Meridian Channel crossing to the ultimate width of Mountain Avenue. Widen Mountain Avenue across the channel and include an 8' bikelane. 2. Construct a 8 foot sidewalk/bikelane per City standards. 3. Construct a 24 inch gutter with 6" or 8" inch curbs. Hydrology study shall determine height of the curb. 4. Reconstruct Mountain Avenue to two feet past center line. 5. Marbelite street light poles shall be required. 6. Construct curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streets per City Public Work Standards. 7. Construct handicap ramps per State requirements. LANDSCAPING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 1. A landscape plans shall be submitted for approval using drought resistant plant materials and automatic, moisture sensing watering system. (Rainbird Maxi Com) 2. All plant and landscaping materials shall be maintained in good condition for a period of one year. The city shall inspect, and if approved, accept the landscaping for maintenance. 3. Street trees shall be purchased from City for planting. O 4, Vining plants shall be planted along the decorative block wall every 10 feet. The vine shall be of a type that will naturally cling to the wall, and if possible be evergreen. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. All fencing shall conform to the Fencing Ordinance in effect at the time of the issuance of the building permit. 2. Decorative masonry enclosed trash area. 3. Pay all fees before construction. 4. Grading and public improvements shall be installed in accordance with City Standards and Specifications. 5. Install paving or other materials that will prohibit the generation of air pollutants. 6. Provide a minimum of 45 feet in front of the entry gate for RV's entering the project. 7. The angle of the parking stalls shall be changed or eliminate the first two stalls along the east property line. 8. Construct a masonry wall separating the well site from the RV parking area. 9. Provide smaller trash containers throughout the project. FIRE DEPARTME[\J 180 WEST SIXTH STREET • SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA 92383 • 714 - 654-270:c FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU CHECKLIST APPLICANT: PR EQUIT/E5 /05E, 6Th ST/2EE. .J/TE R9A MEETING DATE: RFPIL /8,/99/ COKL�IA.Cf� SITE/PLAN.# 8 -91 1) PERMITS REQUIRED BY SECTION 4.108 YES NO pr.-- 2) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD SHALL BE PROVIDED & MAINTAINED IN ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION. SECTION 10.207. YES, NO WIDTH SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 20 FEET. VERTICAL CLEARANCE UNOBSTRUCTED VERTICAL CLEARANCE OF NOT LESS THAN 13 FEET, 6 INCHES. SURFACE OF ACCESS ROADS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND MAINTAINED TO SUPPORT THE IMPOSED LOADS OF FIRE APPARATUS AND SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A SURFACE SO AS TO PROVIDE ALL-WEATHER DRIVING CAPABILITIES. 3) ROADS IN EXCESS OF 150 FEET IN LENGTH SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH APPROVED PROVISIONS FOR THE TURNING AROUND OF FIRE APPARATUS. YES / NO 4) PROVIDE PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS AS DESIGNATED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND NFPA, SECTION 10.303. YES NO 17/ 5) PROVIDE AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM PER CITY REQUIREMENTS. ORDINANCE #917. YES NO r/ 6) FULL FIRE PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED & ACCEPTED BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF FRAMING. YES NOi/ 7) PROVIDE FIRE DEPARTMENT WITH A SCALE MAP OF PROJECT. (8-1/2 x 11") YES V NO 8) KEY BOX - SECTION 10.209. KEY BOX SHALL BE A TYPE APPROVED BY THE FIRE CHIEF & SHALL CONTAIN KEYS, MAP TO SCALE, HAZARDOUS MATERIAL LIST. YES NO 1- 9) FIRE FLOWS SHALL BE / p©p GALLONS PER MINUTE AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL. OPERATING PRESSURE MUST BE AVAILABLE BEFORE ANY COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL IS PLACED ON THE JOB SITE. YES NO 10) INSTALL A SUPER FIRE HYDRANT (JAMES JONES J-3765 6" X 2-2% X y" ) WITHIN ;300' FEET OF ALL PARTS OF THE BUILDING AS DESIGNATED BY THE FIRE DEPT. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. YES NO FIRE DEPARTMENT 180 WEST SIXTH STREET • SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA 92383 • 714 - 654-2702 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU CHECKLIST (CONT'D) 11) FIRE HYDRANT SPACING IS EVERY 3cn ' FEET AS LOCATED BY THE FIRE DEPT. YES,„/NO 12) RELOCATE HYDRANTS TO YES NO ,,-'- 13) UPGRADE THE NEAREST HYDRANT TO A SUPER HYDRANT. YES NO 14) HYDRANTS TO BE PAINTED W/REFLECTIVE SCOTCHLITE S-368 * BLUE DOT ON PAVEMENT TO INDICATE FIRE HYDRANT. YES LNO 15) A COMMERCIAL HOOD SHALL BE INSTALLED IN THE KITCHEN. 16) HOUR FIRE WALLS TO BE INSTALLED, DIVIDING THE BLDG. INTO SECTIONS OF MORE THAN SQ. FEET. YES NO 17) IF A FULL MANSARD IS CONSTRUCTED, PROVIDE A LADDER TO ROOF YES NO 18) TRASH BINS MUST HAVE A DROP LID. YES 19) STANDPIPES ON THE ROOF ARE REQUIRED. YES N0 20) INSTALL A WALK OR DRIVE—THRU WITH LOCK BOX. YES NO //- 21) A SECOND EMERGENCY EXIT SHALL BE PROVIDED. YES NO 22) "NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE POSTED IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: YES NO c/ 23) POST "NOT A THROUGH STREET" SIGN AT ENTRANCES. YES NO L� 24) MITIGATION FOR FIRE PROTECTION IMPACT. $577.00 PER DWELLING UNIT. APT. OR RESIDENCE. NEW INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL $0.34 PER SQUARE FEET. YES NO 25) THE FIRE LANE SHALL BE SIGNED IN ACCORDANCE CITY & STATE REGULATIONS. YES NO r/ FIRE LANES SHALL BE DESIGNATED IN FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: DECK. 26) BUILDING ADDRESSES SHALL BE PROVIDED AND SHALL BE OF CONTRAST— YES NO ,77 ING COLOR AND BACKGROUND. THEY SHALL BE 12" FOR COMMERCIAL AND 6" FOR SUITED IDENTIFICATION AND 6" FOR RESIDENTIAL. —2— Sai, FIRE DEPARTMENT 180 WEST SIXTH STREET • SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA 92383 • 714 - 654-2702 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU CHECKLIST (CONT'D) 27) ILLUMINATED DIRECTORY - ALL CONDOMINIUMS, APARTMENT COMPLEXES, TOWN HOUSES AND MOBILEHOME PARKS SHALL INSTALL & MAINTAIN / AT POINTS OF ENTRY ILLUMINATED DIRECTORIES. YES NO k/ -3- a 27 28 :rE sec. YY.IDLE 9tOPIA* VICINITY MAP N.t.t 10 0 30 40 EA KALE. T.30' .STAFF REVIEW SITE PLAN TENT TRACT 24057 25 MATN9 MAas sill 1. Etl WUNTIla, ;A. AP 11 is 24 «IOt lyj IYa 23 Nq oae"e i4 22 21 AT P£n STAFF REVIEW SIT AMC NO MEENTSE °Ara Irye.1 ®1100RIPTION a.nv.4A1 OWNER/APPLICANT' PtACOCNIRADANER 'menu ITO. .USES (AST SIN STREET MC AAA CORONA, CA. SIM 1>u) TE-(ASG ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. SEl-SES-SES / LEGAL DESCRIPT1O PORTION Of tor I. KOCE 01 Of h03 LAND* bP RENEr LAND COMPANY, N MS OTT Of /M 4M3NTO, COURTS' OR RVERSIOE, *TAT( Of CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN *r MAP ON PILE IN SODA 1 OF MAPS. PADIS N MO 15, RECORDS Of SAID COUNTY OF MY(A8100 4l1CHT wHs LANDSCAPING: LAMDECAPINORNNIOATION PLANS TO SE I ANITIEO SUNDER SEPARATE COVER • WELL —SITE. DAME ASSESSOR'S PARCEL UNOER EAN[ OWNERSHIP SOT NOT A PART OP THIS PROJECT NB 4OWRY .wM VIN t , ACRES: LIS AC. ZONING: EXI VINC: 141 P ROPOSED:11-1 LAND USES' [MINIM VACANT PROPOSED: R.Y. KCWRD PARKING SACIUTY IPIIVATE ROM USE OF (ANC110 SAN JAOINTO NONIONIRRO ONLTI UTILMES: ELECTRI SOUTNp 4 0AIy0ry1A MOON CO. CAE: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OAS CO. TM.lPNONEj O.T.E. CALIFORNIA WATER EASTERN 0UM0PAL WATER 0ITTSOT S EWER CITY Of (AAI JACNID TELIVIS1Ott JONES INTEIICNLE GENERAL PLAN: EEIETND: COMMUNITY COMMERtlM. PROPOSED: COMMUNITY CODNWICIAL PARKS: T uD DLAW DEDICATION OR LAND OR PAYMENT Of IN UPEAT PROPOSED DRAINAGE: PATE 1I RIVDTECTED PROM M'PNtt FLOWS EY TNl [91ETINi MENDN.N C342.41.1L YE1.21 O.,to1 roe ARAN HAS OTT 0 PR NPf[0 RANC110 SAN JA6NTO FUTURE R. V. PARX1NG 0 nq-SA 001 I AA roLA.r.I flu --Revised Tentative Parcel Map No.26446 CommcovRgalth Avenue To be abandon and realigned per Tract 23963 R-1 Future Residential un-44'4'se DETAIL . tcA.V t..p CURO I GUi7ER R-1 Vacant 1414peiT.it4TNa7ny I41 AC. tl,/ I / / $.1 PI Ir VOCLJ / / perm. A .{t / rl w.fO' r _ /// LPROPO � ... Lot 1 ,' � SIRE LIGHT 0.04 ACCi_,/I t L4.O0" Ii 1-reorosto hts I O'ulltITY T !i M 1MEU. R•1'a4'!i•IV s44'. 1 Vacant Scale 1-50 0 EXISTING 40.44L' BOX CULVERT EXIS rwc re' CMLIC M 4rER EXISTING 4' WATER MAIN EXISTING 4' GAS MAIN AMENDMENTS: DATE No. DESCRIPTION 4-2.1.e, Kevin rJ.R TMTLt,PRA'OLtD 1. 1P ULt,, ACRtA41S,fl0pO140 LONIN>, DA1L ( 1.01 ,.NRL. RLLOCA1t Le ACCII% SALL MINT. S• e0.11 t ( RLOTP EVISER 000uloARY S 1 L Owner/Applicant: Peacock/Radaker Equities Ltd. 1655 East 61h Street No. A4A Corona, Ca. 91719 Land Uses: Existing: Lot 1 - TV Satellite Dishes Lot 2 - Vacant with existing irrigation well Proposed: Lot 1 - TV Satellite Dish FAIN Utilities: Gas: Southern California Gas Co. Electric: Southern California Edison Co. Telephone: G.T.E. California Cable T.V.: Inland Valley Cablevislon Water: Eastern Municipal Water District Sewer: City of San Jacinto Total Net Acres: Lot 1-0.04,Aaes Lot 2 - 1.31 Acres Legal Description: Portion of Lot 2, Block 93 of the lands of the Hemet Land Company, in the Clty of San Jacinto, County of Riverside, State of California, as shown by map on file in Book 1 of maps, Pages 14 and,15, Records of said Riverside County, Parks: No dedication of land or payment of in lieu fees proposed. Drainage: Site is protected from offsite flows by the existing Meridian Channel. Zoning: Existing: Lot 1 - R-1 Lot 2 - R-1 Proposed: Lot 1 - R-1 Lot 2 - R-1 Landscaping: Landscaping/irrigation plans to be submitted under separate cover. Lot 2 - Private R.V,/boat seared parking faality and inigaton wed March 1991 Job No. H67-041.00J rawlnp No. PM3-16393 1 1 T V PIQ lTR1¢L10 Cfl QN wP A Y1T wT0 TAACi 23283 LOT I4 T7.1 2:147 T RS 33/48-82 TENTATIVE TRACT No. 24057 T1R1:J 2 / J •SAN•JACINTO KUY MAP VICINITY MAP L00aND wan 4.m4T10V 01.0040 Tem Ow 14I4.1. ITT NCT0 .» MAIMS ®. oje 6 PMdA Men NO IMMO w1IT0c1'Y {MITI N111 Y 918 V TVM SOM. ILO Mho. 1P1R1. NOM. w 11.115015 Mr qW 1a MRW eW103 AM 11 YOU Il* WPua. .MITM MAYO 101 OM 111.1.011N NY NB TONTATIVO OWNOM APPLICANT .. MVTP51.1P — aw news wet *MIA -NPml. .A mw Ali0l10R'1 PARC144 N1'1 aro• -0SS.401 omv-wn UNCIAL D0IQRIPT10N onaa 5CT. 0*15*1t501 AVITOSIII �n.r1 a40/1.1 4 u Mu Mani e w . oammu. r4. i'w P MOM MOT Y WIYI1.1 MOO. ADR1A®0 ammo. MOTs !MAP Av. Z0NIN® 11111111401100 .•a ss.a9eas 0-1 e,AND LI118 aparna11 VMAIT MMOOOO• *OMR .e*nv 0*0 an# NY OP PRQ0O/10 LOT! w Yerwea5A41.1Tm e L15mmas San 71TII.ITX1 11t10Tm0. ®In®a mAaNOMPon P.®1 Do. T14A b1RNml OAYIgIBAW Ip woorlow11.40,11Ogo10.10.10140.1.1AB, P WM.T MMsm. PTV 011 *Aw A06.MT1 ratRIPOOMt0M.nM1.101.Mn0w9 0A01.11 TV, so.M® VY1.T 154 . 04on 11TioRAL PLAN CIPONATION aam1111.0. 1MM o1*STV nomomm7N PARK. iARMTO Dun_ 1t.\Ii mmw TM SAX 1TR11T LICIHT1 To oft smamkT1.0.1..o0o.ownt wT4. 05 I.rNI To NmU,.wvv WT cam• . TRIOS e0 as 111.01.1 aI w aWRAT1 MAK NOV _MWM PROM TO YbMuvv CRAMPON wmmw P.Me Tit ev W ANAmae www.m 1»Mra. 00014101A3L I OMMORW fP A41440041Ie MM1MV N MAO 1e.344% M1w — TI1l1mM I.aw10 MA. 19 M. MTINW _a_ pM. 11 1111,1111 1 11111111 AWRY 1111`I4'1 4'; OAT.. .};.at_ PTOAl YT'41'W n116 n.v -I.roo THE PEACOCK.. ! , R CORPORATION April 9, 1991 TO: City Staff and Planning Department FROM: Dave Cottington - PR Equities, Ltd. RE: RANCHO SAN JACINTO - R.V. STORAGE FACILITY Due to many inquiries and requests from our home builders and their homebuyers, PR Equities, Ltd. is proposing to construct a storage facility for use by homeowners within Rancho San Jacinto only. This is not a commercial venture in any way, no advertising or signage will be used. This facility is being proposed in an effort to provide a secure area for boats, r.v's. and trailers other than in front of the homes, in driveways or on the street. The site will be secured by a decorative block wall the same as used throughout our master plan with landscaping along Mountain Avenue be- tween the sidewalk and the wall and other security fencing along the back property line. Within this area is a water well which supplies the landscape water for the park and green belts throughout our master planned community which will be dedicated to the City. Access will be provided to the well and the wall will provide security for the well equipment as well. The maintenance of the interior of the facility will be the respon- sibility of PR Equities. Ltd. until such time as PR Equities, Ltd. involvement in the master planned community has ended. At that time a cooperative will be formed. The future ownership and maintenance will be by the users of the facility. Details of the structure of the co-op are under consideration by PR Equities, Ltd. 1655 E. SIXTH STREET, °A4A. CORONA, CALIFORNUI 91719 PHONE ° (714) 272-6660 FAX " (71<1) 272-3987 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Bid Award - Sewer Cleaning and Inspection NDA Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council The City Council authorized funds in the 1991-92 budget for the video inspection of City sewer lines. Accordingly, City staff requested bids from contractors capable of performing the required services. Three bids were received as follows: Company Add'l Charge for Clean & Video Root Cutting Houston & Harris $ 0.625/ft. Riverside National Plant Services 0.75/ft. Long Beach PSS, Inc. 0.80/ft. Whittier $ 0.26/ft. 0.10/ft. Based on the bids received and an estimated 30,000 lineal feet of sewer line to be cleaned and inspected, the low bid is by Houston and Harris of Riverside for $0.625 per lineal foot. The approximate cost of the cleaning and inspection will be $20,000. Funds for this purpose are budgeted in Fund 14 - Department 4600 - Account 2710. MEMORANDUM AGE !DA TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council FROM: Les Evans, Interim Public Works Director DATE: August 20, 1991 SUBJECT: Downtown Water Line Project - B & Sons On July 19, 1990 the City entered into contract with B & Sons Construction, Inc. of Oxnard, for the construction of the Downtown Waterline. The project was funded with 13th, 14th and 15th year Federal Community Block Grant (CDBG) funds. During the course of construction, B & Sons had difficulties complying with CDBG requirements and with payments to sub- contractors. At this time the project is still not complete, there are numerous Stop Notices filed against B & Sons by sub -contractors and the Riverside Economic Development Agency, which disperses our CDBG funds, has problems with the contractor's compliance with federal regulations. On August 2, 1991, City Attorney James A. Cox, put B & Sons Construction on notice that failure to comply with the terms of the contract would result in the City terminating the contract and completing the work by other means at B & Sons' expense. The City Attorney will meet with B & Sons on August 20, 1991 prior to the Council Meeting. Should a satisfactory plan to complete the Downtown Waterline project not result from the August 20 meeting, staff recommends that the City Council suspend the operation of the contract and order the work to be completed by separate contract and deduct the cost of such work from their contract. THOMAS M- COX JAMES A. COX BEVERLY M. CAMPER August 5, 1991 COX, COX 8c CAMPER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW BO5 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE HEMET, CALIFORNIA 92343 Marsha Hamasaki Law Office of Albert Galisky 4399 Santa Anita Ave, Suite 200 El Monte, California 91731 TELEPHONE AREA CODE 714 cEi tErIAX (6714) 6520-03990 AUG 6 1991 CITY OF SAN JAW. Re: Laboror's Trust v. City of San Jacinto Dear Ms. Hamasaki, Thank you for your call this afternoon. I am writing to confirm our conversation. You called to inquire as to the City's answer to the complaint you served on July 1, 1991. I have checked with the City office and they have no recollection of the service and cannot find a copy of the complaint. Never -the -less, you have kindly agreed to allow the City an extension to answer the com- plaint until September 1, 1991. You have also very graciously offered to allow us further extensions to answer if the need arises. I informed you that this project has not yet been completed by the contractor and ae have not filed a notice of completion. Accordingly, the time to file further stop notices has not yet run. We are hoping that the job will be completed shortly. I will keep you advised. As there are other actions filed in this matter (one in the Riverside Superior Court), I may be requesting your cooperation in stipulating to a joinder of all actions in the Superior Court. It is my hope that once the time for the filing of stop notices has expired, we may be able to reach a stipulation for the division of the retention among all stop notice claimants. Thanks so much for your professional courtesies. Sincerely James A. Cox cc: Jolene Shaw MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager FROM: Anna A. Vega, Finance Directo4.0.-- SUBJECT: Employee Fitness Program DATE: August 20, 1991 RECOMMENDATION City Council approve City employees participation in the Hemet Racquetball and Fitness Center and allow such to be included in the Memorandum of Understanding with the four various employee groups. Amounts have been budgeted throughout each department in the 1991-92 fiscal year under Employee Benefits. BACKGROUND At your August 6 study session, Debra Casky, Chairperson for the employee programs committee made a presentation on the fitness program. City Council informally extended the program until August 20. Council supported the program and directed Staff to put it on the August 20 agenda for approval. Ms. Casky asked Hemet Fitness Center if employee's family could enjoy the lower cost. The Center stated that the membership fee would be waived and the only cost, at employees and family expense, would be the monthly dues. The City will not participate in funding this program for family members. The lower cost program is also available for City Elected Officials. gp o I MEMORANDUM ACE: TO: Mayor and City Council via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager FROM: Anna A. Vega, Finance Directo SUBJECT: Defeasance of Certificates of Participation DATE: August 20, 1991 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve attached resolution ordering the defeasance of the $3,580,000.00 and $5,000,000.00 Certificates of Participation issues (C.O.P.). Also, approve the cost not to exceed $20,000.00 for de Crinis & CO. Inc. as financial advisors and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe as bond counsel for the purposes of implementing the provisions set forth on attached resolution. BACKGROUND At your August 6 City Council study session, Curt de Crinis made a presentation and discussed the various alternatives and approaches to handle the two existing C.O.P. issues. Council directed staff to prepare the necessary paperwork to initiate a defeasance and to place a resolution ordering such defeasance on the august 20 agenda. City Attorney Jim Cox has prepared the attached resolution for Council approval. This will commence said defeasance and will give authority to the City Manager to employ legal, financial and such other counsel which may be necessary to effect the defeasance in a timely and efficient manner. These necessary services shall not exceed $20,000.00. It is estimated that said legal defeasance and escrow account (necessary per bond laws and regulations), will be in place and funds transferred within three to four weeks. $820,000.00 is available as of June 30, 1991 in the Redevelopment Debt Service Fund. These funds will provide the necessary amount needed in order to create the defeasance escrow account. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AUTHORIZING THE DEFEASANCE OF THE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION ISSUES WHEREAS, on December 29, 1987, the City of San Jacinto, pursuant to a lease agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Jacinto, caused to be issued Certificates of Participation in said lease agreement for the City's Administrative Facility Project in the sum of $3,580,000.00; and WHEREAS, on November 15, 1988, the City of San Jacinto, pursuant to a lease agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Jacinto, caused to be issued Certificates of Participation in said lease agreement for the 1988 Fire Station Project in the sum of $5,000,000.00; and WHEREAS, completion of the proposed projects have not been made due to budgetary and other constraints beyond the control of the City and Redevelopment Agency; and WHEREAS, changes in the economic market have rendered inadvisable the completion of such projects under the terms of such Certificates of Participation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, AS FOLLOWS: 1. The facts stated above are found to be true and correct. 2. The City Manager, in consultation with the Director is directed and authorized to employ legal, such other consultants as are necessary to effect the the above -referenced Certificates of Participation. 3. The law firm of ORRICK, HERRINGTON & appointed as bond counsel and C.M. de Crinis & appointed as financial consultant for the purposes of provisions set forth above in this resolution. City Finance financial and defeasance of SUTCLIFFE is Co. Inc. is effecting the PAGE TWO C.O.P. RESOLUTION PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of August 1991, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ASSENT: Mayor ATTEST: Maurice A mster, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk The foregoing is certified to be a full, true and correct copy of Resolution No. adopted by the City Council of the City of San Jacinto, California on the day and date set forth above. Maurice Amster, City Clerk Dated: Deputy City Clerk San Jacinto Police Department 160 West 6th Street San Jacinto, CA. 92583 1VIEMORANDUM To: From: Chief of Police J4 Date: August 18, 1991 Subject: Evaluation and Recommendation of Telephone Proposal Honorable Mayor and Council Members via City Manager General Telephone Company, GTEL and PACTEL were asked to provide a proposal for upgrading the Public Safety Departments present antiquated 1960 telephone system. After further review an amended request for proposal was requested to determine the feasibility of expanding the upgrade to all city department links in order to "standardize" the telephone system throughout the city. At this time the Public Safety Departments are serviced by GTE and GTEL. The balance of the city's departments have an independent system where the telephone lines to the various buildings are provided by GTE and the internal system is owned by the city and presently serviced by ComSerCo, an independent communication company out of Riverside. After review of the "overall" system it was felt "standardization" for the entire city was the best approach and that the upgrades to be provided to the Public Safety Department be extended to each of the other departments. The following information in a condensed format is provided for your consideration: 1. The proposed CentraNet Centrex 3000 System coupled with the Norstar Key Telephone Equipment will provide to the City a flexible and economic system through which; (1) city employee's efficiency should increase; (2) customer satisfaction through less lost calls will improve; (3) the ability to leave messages for the city employee directly when he or she is unavailable without the need to link up with another person; (4) automatic "least cost" routing of toll/long distance calls; (5) WATS access and power failure emergency wiring, and many other features. 2. Another feature unique to the system is the ability to link all city departments on one system through the Memorandum - Telephone Proposal August 18, 1991 Page 2 CentraNet terminals eliminating the need to dial outside as is the case now when Public Safety Departments try to contact City Hall Public Works or the Community Center. In addition, call conferencing can be completed from any station within the city. An added feature sure to please is "music on hold." There are many other features also which are standard and many which can be purchased as needed. The entire CentraNet System is state of the art and the Norstar hardware is well built and durable for the intended purpose, also with many unique features. The following cost breakdown is provided for your information. CentraNet System The CentraNet 3000 System installation cost for the entire city is $1700.55 and the monthly rate is $1,051.10. Norstar Equipment Lease Costs GTEL Cash Price 36 Mo. 48 Mo. 60 Mo. City Hall Annex $ 6,964.49 $224.00 $178.69 $153.59 Comm. Dev/Life Safety $ 6,024.77 $182.84 $145.82 $125.35 Police/Fire $14,364.08 $481.94 $380.57 $321.53 Corporation Yard $ 5,839.02 $199.72 $158.30 $134.28 Community Center $ 2,170.37 $ 76.44 N/A N/A GTEL Total Costs $35,362.73 $1,164.94 $863.38 $734.75 Norstar "Startalk" Voice Mail (Optional) $10,396.13 $1,433.54 $1,127.23 $948.10 PACTEL City Hall/Comm. Dev. $10,253.92 $324.74 $254.30 $216.97 Police/Fire $13,359.20 $423.08 $331.31 $216.68 Corporation Yard $ 5,723.62 $181.27 $141.95 $121.11 Community Center $ 1,959.05 $ 62.04 $ 48.58 $ 42.69 PACTEL Total Costs $31,295.79 $1,341.94 $1,049.98 $948.10 Memorandum - Telephone Proposal August 18, 1991 Page 3 Norstar "Startalk" Voice Mail (Optional) With Battery Backup $11,203.30 $350.81 $273.84 $229.06 Warranty on both systems are as follows: GTEL 2 Years Parts and Labor PACTEL 1 Year Parts and Labor Both systems have quoted costs which include tax, installation and training. Summary Based on the comparison of equipment and prices it is recommended the City of San Jacinto switch to the GTE CentraNet 3000 System from the present systems within the City and it is further recommended the City enter into a lease purchase agreement with PACTEL Business Systems for the Norstar Telephone System. Both systems to be in accordance with submitted quotes. Sufficient funding is available within the 1991/1992 fiscal year budget for the systems proposed. Itommonsavemosavay., aramossompaRommos., MAIL LOCATION NAME-(First. I 0 are TELF.PHONE NO. ( WAX NO. FACMILE MESSAGE IL FOLLOW Please complete all sections a help in dell of facsimile mesSage. TOTAL NUMBER OP PAGES (InctU0s Com TIME BENT COMPANY NAME, AREA. LO ON OR FEPARTMF.NT (r1 HON E I. LOCATION ( 7/y IF YOU HAVE ANY TROUBLE OROLIZSTIONSWi ON CALL City of San Jacinto Breakdown of ChargQs Page 1 Installation Monthly Site: Police and Fire Departments CentraNet Lines; 18 Cost for CentraNet $560.00 $377.10 Lease of Norstar: (Cash Price - $14,364.08) 36 Months - $481.94 48 Months - $380.57 60 Months - $321.53 Norstar capacity 128 Porte. Equipped for 20 CentraNet Lines and 40 Stations. Site: City Hall Annex CentraNet Lines; 9 Cost for CentraNst $180.55 $180.00 Lease of Norstar: (Cash Price - $6,964.49) 36 Months - $224.00 48 Months - $178.69 60 Months - $153.59 Norstar Capacity 128 Ports. Equipped for 20 CentraNet Lines and 40 Stations. City of San Jacinto Breakdown of Charges Page 2 Site Community Development CentraNat Lines: 8 Cost for CentraNet Lease of Norstar: (Cash Price - $6,024.77) 36 Months - $182.84 48 Months - $145,82 60 Months - $125.35 $160.00 Norgtar Capacity 128 Ports. Equipped for 16 CentraNet Lines and 24 Stations. Site: Coporation Yard CentraNet Lines: 8 Cost for centraNet Lease of Norstar: (Cash Price - $5,839.02) 36 Months - $199.72 48 Months - $158.30 60 Months - $134.28 $160.00 Norstar Capacity 128 Ports. Equipped for 8 CentraNet Lines and 24 Stations. City of San Jacinto Breakdown of Charges Page 3 Site: Community Center CentraNet Linos: 4 Cost for CentraNet Lease of Nerstar: (Cash Price - $2,170.37) 36 Months - $76.44 48 Months - N/A 60 Months - N/A $80.00 $83.80 Norstar Capacity 24 Ports. Equipped for 4 CentraNet Lines and 8 Stations. Other Charges: CantraNet Automatic Route Selection Programming Charge (One Time Only) $350.00 N/A Intra-LATA WATs Line Charges $210.00 $75.00 Norstar "StarTalk" Voice Mail Cash Price - $10,396.13 Lease Options: 36 Months - $1,433.54 48 Months - $1,127.23 60 Months - $948.10 TO: DATE: FROM: TOTAL 4 OF PAGES: / PACTEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS 4344 LATHAM ST. SUITE 100 RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 714 782-8000 FAX 714 782-8080 TRANSMII1AL COVER SHEET RE: MESSAGE: PAC ri TEL., usinez3 S y stems A 0,,,5,cr, fPacTei iY5:arr" VI 111, J.,.11 1 wk./ 11 *1....11,, I If A.. VI 1 J. V 11111 HVe 1 VC_ 8-22-91 PACTEL. BUSINESS SYSTEMS SALES AGREEMENT "A PacTel Business Systems, hereinafter referred to as ''PacTel", agrees to sell and the CUSTOMER named below (the "Customer'') agrees to purchase the equipment desCribed below (the "Equipment") subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. CUANTITY MODEL DESCRIPTION 1 A0365885 Norstar Modular Main Cabinet (20X40) 1 A0370673 Centrex Software Cartridge 1 A0338794 2 Port Expansion Cartridge 1 DPI 253 Surge Protector 1 A0338798 Trunk Module (3TC-CAP) 3 A0366477 Trunk Cartridge (4 Lines) 1 A0338808 Station Module (16 Port) 25 8 Button Display Speakerphone [2 FREE thru Aug. 31, 1991] 1 24 Button Display Speakerphone 1 Key Lamp Module 1 A0341146 Station Aux. Power Supply 1 10 watt Amplifier 1 Page Horn The Purchase Price of the Equipment shall be subject to adjustment in the event of any mutually agreed changes made to the above Fist. including Vie addition or deletic:3n of items of Equipment or any changes in specifications, attachments or features, PURCHASE PRICE, The Purchase Price of the Equipment Is $ 12,765,60 plus S 593.60 sales tax for a total of $ 13,359.20 This Purchase Price includes shipping, handling and does a does not include installation. C CASH PUIPCI-4.ASE TERMS. The Purchase Price is payable; 20% ( 2,671 PR .-4 ) upon execution of this Agreement by the Customer. 60% ( 8 3 015.52 ) upon the earlier of delivery of the Equipment or commencement of installation, and 20 0/a ( 2,671.84 ) on the cutover date, as defined on the reverse. if Customer terrninates this Agreement for any reason other than for Material nonperformance by PacTel of its Otications nereunaer, PacTel shall be enuted to retain $ 2,671.84 pad to PacTel upon execution of this Agreement_ *See Attached 'ALEASE/FINANCE, Subject to Section 5 on the reverse, PacTel will use its best efforts to obtain, for Customer, financing of The Purchase Price from an Independent third-party leasing company or financial Institution ("Lesser/Lender") for a term of months with a monthly payment of approximately $ .A deposit in an amount equal to $ is payable upon the execution of th is Agreement by Customer. If Customer decides to pay PacTel In full ano not to use third-party financing, the deposit Shall be apple.d to said payment, If and when PacTel obtains financing on behalf of Customer, the deposit shall become non- refundable and shall be applied to the first monthly payment due to Lessor/Lender, if financing Is obtained by PacTel on behalf of Customer and Customer does not enter into the proposed leasing or financing arrangement for any reason other than the material nonperformance of PacTel of its obligations under this Agreement, PacTel shall be entitled to retain the above-described deposit, ADDIT'ONAL TEF1to.$ & CONDITIONS INCLUDED ON THE FEVERSE ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS AGREEMENT City of San Jacinto Fire Deportment. PACTEL SUSNESS SYSTEMS CuSlomer Adrifess San Jacinto, CA Inscallation Address Te,plicne Name Name T ;t:e Title SicraturE, Dale Sigr1.5(i ire .Da:e PACEITEL. Business Systems •• • .1 LI. ILL.J • *J1.4 4741, 41,1 • 1 VS./ d-a-91 SALES AGREEMENT "A" CONTINUATION SHEET QUANTITY MODEL DESCRIPTION Digital Audio Recordex City of San Jacinto Police & Fire Department cu5tomer Billing Address Installation Addrese Name Titie Signature Date PACTEL BUSINESS SYTEMS Telephone Name Title Signature Date IHU id:14 1Viiv UH1U f-.AX NU 114 ]'-28U8U P, 06 8 -22 -91 PACTEL. SALES AGREEMENT BUSINE - SYSTEMS PacTel Business Systems, hereinafter referred to as "PacTel", agrees to sell and the CUSTOMER named below (the "Customer") agrees to purchase the equipment described below (the "Equipment") Subject tO the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. QUANTITY MODEL DESCRIPTION I A0342283 Norstar Compact Cabinet 1 DPI 253 Surge Protector 4 8 Button Display Speakerphone 1 Training Tape 1 Digital Audio Recorder The Purchase Price of the Equipment shall be subject to adjusunent in the event of any mutually agreed changes made to the above list, including the addition Or deletion of items of Equipment or any changes in specifications, attachments or features. PURCHASE PRICE. The Purchase Price Of the Equipment is $ 1 87 2.00 plus $ 87.j5 sales tax for a total cf $ 1,959.05 . This Purchase Price includes shipping. handling and does 12 does not include installation. I I CASH PURCHASE TERMS. The Purchase Price is payable; 20% ( 391.81 ) upon execution of this Agreement by the Customer. 60% ( 1 , 175.43 ) upon the earlier of delivery of the Equipment or commencement of instailation. and 20% ( 391.81 ) on the Gutover date, as defined on the reverse. If Customer terminates this Agreement for any reason other than for material nonperformance by PacTel of its obliciattcns hereunder, PacTel shall be enbTied to retain $ 391.81 paid to PacTel upon execution of this Agreement. *See Attached tEASE/PINANCE. Subject to Section 5 on the reverse, PacTel will use its best efforts to obtain, for Cu.stomer, financing of the Purchase Price from an independent third-party leasing company or financial Institution ("Lessor/Lender") for a term of months with a monthly payment of approximately $ A deposit in an amount equal to $ is payab:e upon tine execution of this Agreement by Customer. If Customer decides to pay PacTel in full and not to use third-party financing, the deposit Shall be applied to said payment. If and when PacTel obtains financing on behalf of Customer, the deposit shall become non- refundable and shall be applied to the first monthly payment due to Lessor/Lender. If financing is obtained by PacTel on behalf of Customer and Customer does not enter into the proposed leasing or financing arrangement for any reason other than the material nonperformance of PacTel of its obligations under this Agreement, PacTel Shall be entitled to retain the above-described deposit. ADDITIONAL TERMS & CONDITIONS INCLUDED ON THE REVERSE ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF HIS AGREEMENT ---77777777-acinto Community Center Customer Billing Addre8s San Jacinto, CA Installation Address TeDnone Name Name Titie Title Sigttatute ;1)2te S4l a W ri. PACTEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS v r4 PACTEL. SALES AGREEMENT Mai1 E3USINES.S SYSTEMS PacTel Business Systems, hereinafter referred to as "PacTel", agrees to sell and the CUSTOMER named below (the -Customer' ) agrees to purchase the equipment desonbed below (the "Equipment") subject to the terms and conditionS set forth in this Agreement, QUANTITY MODEL DESCRIPTION _ . 1 A0365885 Norstar Modular Main Cabinet (8X24) 1 A0370673 Centrex Software Cartridge 1 DPI 253 Surge Protector 7 8 Button Display Speakerphone 1 10 Button Plus Display Speakerphone [Free thru Aug. 31, 199 1 End User Tape 1 Digital Audio Recorder 1 10 watt Amplifier 1 Page Horn The Purchase Price of the Ec.luipmont shall be subject to adjustment In trio event of any mutually agreed changes made to the above list, Including the addition or deletion of Items of Equipment or any changes In specifications, attachments or features. PURCHASE PRiCE. The Purchase Pnce of the Equipment is $ 55469.30 plus S 254..32 sales tax for a total of s 5,723.62 . This Purchasa Price includes shipping, handling and does E does not r! include instal!azion. 0 CASH PLJRC.,HASE TERMS, The Purchase Price is payable: 20% ( 1 1 144.72 ) upon execution of this Agreement by the Customer. eo.vo ( 3,434.18 ) upon the earlier of delivery of the Equipment or commencement of installation. and 20% ( 1 , 144.72 ) on the dutcver date. as defined on the reverse, If Customer terMinateS this Agreement for any reason other than for material nonperformance by PacTel of obligabonS hereunder PacTel snail be entitled to retain $ 1,144.72 paid to PacTel upon execution of this Agreement. *See Attached *LEASE/FINANCE. Subject to Section 5 on the reverse, PacTel will use Its best efforts to obtain, for Customer, financing of the Purchase Price frcm an independent third -party leasing company or financial institution ("Lessor/Lender") for a term of months with a monthly payment of approximately 5 . A deposit in an amount equal to Is payable upon the execution of this Agreement by Customer. If Customer decides to pay PacTel in full and not to use third-party financing, The deposit shall be applied to said payment. If and when PacTel obtains financing on behalf of Customer, the deposit shall become non- refundable and shall be applied to the first monthly payment due to Lessor/Lender. If financing iS obtained by PacTel on behalf of Customer and Customer does not enter into the proposed leasing or firlanCing arrangement for any reason other than the material nonperformance of PacTel of its obligations under this Agreement, PacTel shall be entitled to retain the above-described deposit. ADDITIONAL TERMS & CONDITIONS INCLUDED ON THE REVERS ARE AN INTEGRA ART OF THIS AGREEMENT City of San Jacinto Corporation Yard PACTEL BUSINESS SYST S Customer Billing Aadres$ San Jacinto, CA Installalion Address Teleollone Name Name Title Tiie Siorvacure SiaqalurG AcIREZ:- IC AEt El °:'"HE TEPM$ OF THE ATTACHED cr77..'4P:' 7i7",-;TiT.. ,J;;:==,:Y INflnPCiPAT7 -i ;1' P'S S.15PIRev. 41 9 1 ) 41,e, tgvu PACTEL. BUSINESS SYSTEMS SALES AGREEMENT PacTel Business Systems, hereinafter referred to as "PacTel", agrees to sell and the CUSTOMER named below (the "Customer") agrees to purchase the equipment described below (the "Equipment") subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. QUANTITY MODEL DESCRIPTION 1 A0368753 Star Talk Voicemail Model B 4 Ports 2 Hrs, 45 Min Storage MM3 OOS S/lA Battery Back-up The Purchase Price of the Equipment shall be subject to adjustment in the event of any mutually aoreed chances made to the above list, inolUding the addition or deletion of items of Equipment or any changes in specifications, attachments or features. PURCHASE PRICE. The Purchase Price of the Equipment 55 10,705.50 plus S 4L 80 Sales tax for a total of $ 11,203.30 . This Purchase Price Includes shipping, handling and does a does not L_j include installation. CASH PURCHASE TERMS. The Purchase Price is payable. 20 0/Q ( 2,240.66 ) upon execution of this Agreement by the Customer. etY./o ( 6,721.98 ) upon the earlier of delivery of the Equipment or commencement of InStallatIcn, and 2004 ( 2,240.66 ) on the outover date, as defined on the reverse. If Customer temninates this Agreement for any reason other than for material nonperformance by PacTel of its cbfigatcns hereunder. PacTel shall be entitled to retain S 2,240.66 paid to PacTel upon execution of this Agreement. n *See Attachment L_J '''LEASE/FINANCE. Subject to Section 5 on the reverse, PacTel will use its best efforts to obtain, for Customer, financing of the Purchase Price from an Independent third-party leasing company or financial institution ("Les.sor/Lender") for a term of months with a monthly payment of approximately $ . A deposit in an amount equal to S Is payable upon the execution of this Agreement by Customer. If Customer decides to pay PacTel in full and not to use third-party financing, the deposit shall be applied to said payment. If and when PacTel obtaIns financing on behalf of Customer, the deposit shad become non- refundable and shall be applied to the first Monthly payment due to Lessor/Lender. If financing is obtaine.d by PacTel on behalf of Customer and Customer does not enter into the proposed leasing or financing arrangement for any reason other than the material nonperformance of PacTel of its obligations under this Agreement, PacTel shall be entitled to retain the above-described deposit, -- ADDITIONAL TERMS & CONDITIONS INCLUDED ON THE REVERSE ARE AN INTEGRAL PART CF THIS AGREEMENT _ . City of San Jacinto RAC:7E-1_ BUS!NESS SYSTEMS Customer B'rling Address San Jacinto, CA insiallat on Address TelePrlOne Name Name Title lit Is S4-13 lure uaLe Sig l atu re PTES 29-1E3P (Rev 4/P it ..rucTnm;7 ; TiT; 1 ,1--.4 7;" Tw7wc AT-Trn 431.1 LairAm Strew., Suom 100 RNersirie, CaliforiPa 92501 rri PACTEL. 141 BUSINESS SYSTEMS CITY OF SAN JACINTO True Lease Options 36 48 60 Months Months Months Police & Fire Department: City Hall & Community Development: Corporation Yard: Community Center: Voicemail OPTION: $423.08 $324.74 $181.27 $ 62.04 $350.81 $331.31 $254.30 $141.95 $ 48.58 $273.84 $216.68 $216.97 $121.11 $ 42.69 $229.06 $1,341.94 $1,049.98 $891.68 Total Purchase Price [Good thru Aug. 31, 1991] $31,295.80* Total Purchase Price including Voicemail [Good thru Aug. 31, 1991] $42,499.10* *Includes tax, installation, training and one year warranty on all parts and labor. (Additional maintenance years 2-5 can be purchased tor additional Cost: $2.87 per phone per month). [Minor material kits and current protectors included]. NOTE: All lease options require 10% down as first payment, wIth 59 payments remaining, If the City of San Jacinto expands more than what the "Norstar System-Centrex" can handle, PacTel does offer a depreciating scale over 3 years (60% first year, 30% second year and 10% third year) on equipment costs against the purchase of a larger system. At this time a new lease schedule would be formulated. City Council via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager Ross Chadwick, Fire Chief Lease of "Old" Library San Jacinto Fire Department 1,,TEMO August 27, 1991 TO: FROM: SUBJECI': RECOMP ' Er 'DATION: Approve the terms of a lease agreement with Jeff Divine and direct staff to prepare a lease agreement for execution by the Mayor. BACKGROU As you know the City has already begun construction on this building and we are moving right along. We estimate completion the first week of September. However, as a matter of legality the City must enter into a lease agreement with Jeff Divine for this space. He is offering the City a very fair lease agreement. Attached is a draft copy of a lease for the new City offices in Jeff Divine's building prepared by City Attorney Jim Cox. THOMAS M. COX JAMES A. COX BEVERLY M. CAMPER COX, COX 8c CAMPER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 805 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE HEMEL CALIFORNIA 92343 TELEPHONE AREA CODE 714 652-1400 FAX (714) 652-3990 August 21, 1991 Ross Chadwick, Chief San Jacinto Fire Dept. 160 W. Sixth Street San Jacinto, CA 92583 ' Dear Chief Chadwick, - Enclosed is a draft copy of a lease for the new City offices in Jeff Divine's building. I called Jeff to get the basics of the terms for the lease, since you were on vacation. ,4 04A Pam Easter asked me to provide the draft tqfor first review. If the lease is acceptable to you, then send it over to Pam for her review. If both of you approve, then the lease can be presented to Jeff Divine for his approval. Thanks. Jim Cox LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE is entered into by and between H.E. DIVINE and MAXINE DIVINE, husband and wife (referred to in his this Lease as "Landlord") and the CITY OF SAN JACINTO, a Municipal Corporation, (referred to in this Lease as "Tenant"). Landlord hereby leases to Tenant on the terms and conditions set forth in this lease the real properly located in the County of Riverside, California, described as follows: Approximately 2400+ square feet of office space known as 312 and 316 East Main Street, San Jacinto, California. together with the building and improvements located on the real property, all of which are collectively referred to in this lease as "the Premises". 1. TERM: The term of this lease shall be for a period of two years commencing at 12:01 A.M. on August 1, 1991, and ending at 12:01 A.M. on August 1, 1993. 2. OPTION TO EXTEND TERM: Tenant shall have an option to extend the term of this lease for an additional period of one year commencing on expiration of the original te/m specified in paragraph 1 of this lease, provided: (a) Tenant has fully and faithfully performed all the terms; covenants and conditions of this lease for the original term of this lease. (b) Written notice of Tenant's election to renew the term of this lease as delivered by Tenant to Landlord at least 30 days before expiration of the original term specified in paragraph 1, above. (c) The renewed telm of this lease shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as are contained in this lease. The rental shall be subject to a cost of living adjustment as provided in Paragraph 3(a) herein. 3. RENTAL: For the period from August 1, July 31, 1992, the rentalohall be One Thousand 407/100 Dollars (4-,--a5S--4-040Per month, payable on the each month. In the second and any following year within which this lease shall be in effect, rental shall be increased/decreased in proportion to any increase/decrease in the consumer price index, but in no event shall monthly rental be any amount less than that paid during the first year of the initial term. Monthly rent adjustments shall be computed on each anniversary of this lease as follows: (a) Rent adjustments shall be based on percentage increases or decreases of the Consumer Price Index (base year 1982-1984=100), for all Urban Consumers - Los Angeles, Anaheim, Riverside, California, published by the U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (b) The annual adjustment of rent shall be computed by multiplying the previous year's monthly rental figure by the percentage increase or decrease in the Index during the preceding year. The percentage increase shall be deteLmined by the annual increase in the latest published figure as of each anniversary of this lease. 4. ADDITIONAL RENTAL: As and for additional rental, Tenant shall reimburse to Landlord one-half (1/2) of the ad valorem taxes and/or assessments made upon the real property so occupied in accordance with the terms of this lease. The amount to be paid by Tenant shall be pro-rated for the actual period of time occupied by Tenant. Additional rental shall be paid within 45 days after submittal by Landlord to Tenant of a copy of the property tax bill, with receipt or other evidence of payment. Should the tax bill encompass other land or buildings, not part of this lease, Tenant's responsibility shall be pro-rated to effect only such portion of the land and/or buildings taxed as are occupied by Tenant. 5. REPAIRS BY LANDLORD: During the term of this lease and any renewal or extension of the term of this lease, Landlord shall, at Landlord's own cost and expense, keep the exterior roof, sidewalls, structural supports, and foundation of the building of the Premises in good repair and make all necessary repairs to, or replacements of, the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems on the Premises; provided, however, Landlord shall not: (a) Be required to make any repairs to the exterior roof, sidewalls, structural supports, and foundations of the building on the Premises that are rendered necessary by the negligence of or abuse of that property by Tenant or any employees, agents, subtenants, or permittees of Tenant. 6. REPAIRS BY TENANT: Tenant shall, at Tenant's own cost and expense, during the term of this lease or any extension of the term of this lease: -2- (a) Keep and maintain the Premises in good order, repair, and tenantable condition, including building glass and windows. (b) Regularly employ or self-employ a heating and air conditioning maintenance firm to service and maintain, except for major repairs and replacements, the heating and air conditioning system on the Premises in good working order. 7. TENANT ALTERATIONS: Tenant may make non-structural alterations or improvements to the interior of the building deemed necessary by Tenant for Tenant's business without Landlord's approval, provided that Tenant notifies Landlord in writing at least three days before the date construction for alterations or improvements is to commence so that Landlord may post and record a notice of non-responsibility, and further provided that all construction complies with the requirements of all appropriate government agencies. Before making any non-structural alterations or improvements to the interior of the building that are estimated to exceed in cost i the sum of $15,000.00, or any structural alterations or improvements to the interior of the building or any alterations or improvements to the exterior of the building or before constructing any new improvements on the Premises, Tenant shall submit to and obtain Landlord's written approval on final construction plans and specifications for the alterations or improvements. Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold approval. All improvements or alterations made by Tenant on the Premises shall comply with the requirements of any federal, state, or municipal authority having jurisdiction. 8. TENANT FIXTURES: Any permanent and stationary alterations, improvements, or installations made by Tenant to the Premises shall at once become a part of the realty and belong to Landlord. On expiration or earlier termination of this lease, Tenant shall surrender the Premises and all improvements thereon to Landlord in good, sanitary, and neat order, condition, and repair, excluding ordinary wear and tear. (a) Tenant shall have the right to remove its trade fixtures, furniture, modular units, and other movable items from the Premises at the expiration or earlier termination of this lease term provided Tenant is not then in default under this lease and provided that Tenant shall repair any damage to the Premises caused by that removal. 9. RIGHT OF INSPECTION: Landlord or Landlord's duly authorized agents may enter the Premises at any and all reasonable times during the tern of this lease, including any extended term, to determine whether Tenant is complying with the terms and conditions of this lease or to perform any other acts authorized by -3-- this lease to be performed by Landlord or reasonably necessary to protect Landlord's rights under this lease. 10. SURRENDER OF PREMISES: On expiration or earlier termination of this lease, Tenant shall promptly surrender possession of the Premises to Landlord in as good condition as the Premises are on the date of this lease, reasonable wear and tear expected. 11. PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED USES: Tenant shall use the Premises for office purposes and for any other purpose with the Landlord's consent. Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold consent. Tenant shall not use or cause to be used on the Premises any hazardous or toxic substances or materials, or store or dispose of any such substances or materials on the Premises. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW: The Premises shall not be used or permitted by Tenant to be used in violation of any law or ordinance. Tenant shall maintain the Premises in a clean and sanitary manner and shall comply with all laws, ordinances, rules and regulations applicable to the P emises, enacted or promulgated by any public or governmental authority or agency having jurisdiction over the Premises. 13. SIGNS: Tenant may erect and maintain any signs on the Premises relating to Tenant's uses on the Premises provided the signs so erected comply with any law or ordinance applicable to such signs and are removed at the sole cost and expense of Tenant without damage to the Premises upon expiration or sooner teLwination of the lease. 14. FIRE INSURANCE: Landlord shall, at Landlord's own cost and expense, at all times during the full term of this lease and any extended term of this lease, keep all buildings, improvements, and other structures on the Premises insured for their full replacement cost against loss or destruction by fire and other perils, including vandalism and malicious mischief, commonly covered under the standard extended coverage endorsement in Riverside County, California. Should the building and improvements be destroyed, during the first three years after the effective date of this lease, and should any proceeds be paid for the value of permanent improvements made by Tenant to the Premises, Tenant shall be entitled to recover a pro-rata share of such recovery based upon a three year life of such improvements. City shall be named as an additional insured for the enforcement of this provision. Tenant shall insure its own personal property located upon the Premises and Landlord shall have no liability for the destruction of the same. 15. LIABILITY INSURANCE: Landlord acknowledges that Tenant is a public entity, who is currently self insured for liability for public liability up to certain limits and is -4- thereafter insured through the Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority. Landlord acknowledges that Tenant may make changes in its insurance arrangements, including the purchase of greater or lesser amounts of coverage and/or becoming totally self- insured. Such changes to Tenant's insurance status shall be at the sole discretion of Tenant. Tenant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold Landlord harmless for any injury or damage occurring on the leased Premises which is the result of the negligence of Tenant or its agents, officers or employees. Landlord will defend, indemnify and hold Tenant harmless for any injury or damage occurring on the leased Premises which is the result of the negligence of Landlord or his agents or employees. 16. DESTRUCTION OF PREMISES: If any improvements, including buildings and other structures, located on the Premises are damaged or destroyed during the telm of this lease or any renewal or extension thereof, the damage shall be repaired as follows: (a) If the damage or destruction is caused by a peril against which fire and extended coverage insurance is required to be carried by Paragraph 14 of this lease, Landlord shall repair that damage as soon as reasonably possible and restore the Premises and improvements to substantially the same condition as existed before the damage or destruction, regardless of whether the insurance proceeds are sufficient to cover the actual cost of repair and restoration. (b) If the damage or destruction is caused by a peril against which insurance is not required to be carried by this lease, Landlord, subject to its right to terminate this lease described in Paragraph 17, shall repair that damage as soon as reasonably possible and restore the Premises to substantially the same condition as existed before the damage or destruction. 17. TERMINATION FOR CERTAIN LOSSES: (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this lease, if any improvements located on the Premises are damaged or destroyed to such an extent it will cost more than $100,000.00 to repair or replace them, and the damage or destruction is caused by a peril against which insurance is not required to be carried by this lease, Landlord may terminate this lease by giving Tenant written notice of the termination. The notice must be given within 14 days after occurrence of the damage or destruction. -5-- (b) Tenant or Landlord shall have the right to terminate this lease under either of the following circumstances: (1) If the Premises are damaged or destroyed from any cause whatsoever, insured or uninsured, and the laws then in existence do not permit the repair or restoration of the Premises provided for in this Article; or (2) If the Premises are destroyed from any cause whatsoever, insured or uninsured, during the extended term of this lease. (c) Either pat y may terminate this lease by giving written notice of termination to the other not later than 14 days after occurrence of the event giving rise to terminate under subsection (b), and termination shall be effective as of the date of the notice of termination. (d) If this lease is terminated pursuant to either subsection (a) or (b) above, rent, taxes, assessments, and other sums payable by Tenant to Landlord under this lease, shall be prorated as of the telmination date. If any taxes, assessments, or rent has been paid in advance by Tenant, Landlord shall refund it to Tenant for the unexpired period for which the payment has been made. 18. COMPLETION OF REPAIRS: Any and all repairs and restoration of improvements shall be commenced by Landlord or Tenant, as the case may be, within a reasonable time after occurrence of the damage or destruction requiring the repairs or restoration; shall be diligently pursued after being commenced; and shall be completed within a reasonable time after the loss. If Landlord is required under this lease to perform the repairs and restoration, Landlord shall cause the repairs and restoration to be completed not later than 120 days after occurrence of the event causing destruction or Tenant shall have the right to terminate this lease. 19. ABATEMENT OF RENT: Rent shall be abated during that period of time within which Tenant is denied occupancy of the Premises by reason of destruction of the Premises and during which reconstruction or repair is being made. 20. DEFAULT BY TENANT: All covenants and agreements contained in this lease are declared to be conditions to this lease and to the term hereby leased to Tenant. The following constitute a material default and breach of this lease by Tenant: (a) Any failure to pay rent when due when the failure continues for five days after written notice to pay that rent or surrender possession of the Premises is served on Tenant by Landlord; or -6- (b) Any failure to perform any other covenant, condition or agreement contained in this lease when the failure is not cured within 20 days after written notice of the specific failure is given by Landlord to Tenant. (c) The abandonment or vacating of the Premises by Tenant (which, for purposes of this lease, shall mean Tenant's failure to occupy and operate the Premises for business for a period of at least 30 consecutive days. 21. REMEDIES ON TENANT'S DEFAULT: If Tenant breaches this lease or breaches this lease and abandons the Premises before the natural expiration of the term of this lease, Landlord, in addition to any other remedy given Landlord by law or equity, may: (a) Continue this lease in effect by not te minating Tenant's right to possession of the Premises, in which case Landlord shall be entitled to enforce all Landlord's rights and remedies under this lease, including the right to recover the rent specified in this lease as it becomes due under this lease. (b) Terminate this lease and recover from Tenant: (1) The worth, at the time of award, of the unpaid rent that had been earned at the time of termination of the lease; (2) The worth, at the time of award, of the amount by which the unpaid rent that would have been earned after termination of the lease until the time of award exceeds the amount of rental loss that Tenant proves could have been reasonably avoided; (3) The worth, at the time of award, of the amount by which the unpaid rent for the balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amount of rental loss that Tenant proves could be reasonably avoided; and (4) Any other amount necessary to compensate Landlord for all detriment proximately caused by Tenant's failure to perform the obligations under this lease; or (c) Terminate the lease and, in addition to any recoveries Tenant may seek under paragraph (b) of this section, bring an action to reenter and regain possession of the Premises in the manner provided by the laws of unlawful detainer then in effect in California. 22. TERMINATION BY LANDLORD: No act of Landlord, -7-- including but not limited to Landlord's entry on the Premises or efforts to relet the Premises, or the giving by Landlord to Tenant of a notice of default, shall be construed as an election to terminate this lease unless a written notice of the Landlord's election to terminate is given to Tenant or unless termination of this lease is decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction. 23. CUMULATIVE REMEDIES: The remedies granted to Landlord in Paragraph 21, above, shall not be exclusive but shall be cumulative and in addition to all other remedies now or hereafter allowed by law or authorized in this lease. 24. WAIVER OF BREACH: The waiver by Landlord of any breach by Tenant of any of the provisions of this lease shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent default or breach by Tenant either of the same or a different provision of this lease. 25. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING: Tenant shall not encumber, assign, or otherwise, transfer this lease, any right or interest in this lease, or any right or interest in the Premises or any of the improvements that may now or hereafter be constructed or installed on the Premises without first obtaining the written consent of Landlord. Tenant shall not sublet the Premises or any part of the Premises nor allow any other person, other than Tenant's agents, servants, and employees, to occupy the Premises or any part of the Premises without the prior written consent of Landlord. Any encumbrance, assignment, transfer, or subletting without the prior written consent of Landlord, whether voluntary or involuntary, by operation of law or otherwise, is void and shall, at the option of Landlord, terminate this lease. 26. UTILITIES: Tenant shall pay all charges incurred for the furnishing of gas, electricity, water, telephone service, garbage or refuse service, and other public utilities to the Premises during the term of this lease. All payments shall be made directly to the service provider before their delinquency. 27. NOTICES: Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all notices or other communications required or pelmitted by this lease or by law to be served on or given to either party to this lease by the other party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served and given when personally delivered to the party to whom it is directed or to any managing employee or officer of that party or, in lieu of personal service, when deposited in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, addressed to Tenant at California or to Landlord at California. Either party, Landlord or Tenant, may change its address for purposes of this section by giving written notice of that change to the other party in the manner provided in this section. -8- 28. ATTORNEYS' FEES: If any litigation, including arbitration proceedings, is commenced between the pa r t i e s t o t h i s lease concerning the Premises, this lease, or the righ t s a n d d u t i e s of either in relation to this lease, the party prevai l i n g i n t h a t litigation shall be entitled, in addition to any othe r r e l i e f t h a t may be granted in the litigation, to a reasonable su m a s a n d f o r its attorneys' fees in the litigation, which shall be d e t e r m i n e d b y the court in that litigation or in a separate action b r o u g h t f o r that purpose. 29. BINDING ON HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS: This lease shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of t h e h e i r s , executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of e a c h L a n d l o r d and Tcnant, but nothing contained in this sectio n s h a l l b e construed as a consent by Landlord to any assignment o f t h i s l e a s e or any interest in this lease by Tenant. 30. TIME OF ESSENCE: Time is expressly declared to be of the essence in this lease. 31. SOLE AND ONLY AGREEMENT: This instrument constitutes the sole and only agreement between Landlo r d a n d T e n a n t respecting the Premises, the leasing of the Premises t o T e n a n t , a n d the lease terms contained in this lease, and correctl y s e t s f o r t h the obligations of Landlord and Tenant to each othe r a s o f i t s date. Any agreements or representations respecting the P r e m i s e s o r their leasing by Landlord to Tenant not expressly set f o r t h i n t h i s instrument are null and void. EXECUTED at LANDLORD: H. E. DIVINE MAXINE DIVINE TENANT: CITY OF SAN JACINTO By: MAYOR -9- MEMORANDUM DATE: August 26, 1991 TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: Pamela L. Lee, Interim Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda and Packet for August 27, 1991 Special Meeting In view of the need to conduct a special meeting to complete the business of the Regular August 20, 1991, meeting, we have attached, herewith, a supplemental agenda and supplemental material for your review: 1. Supplemental Agenda with revisions highlighted. 2. Consent Calendar Item 2.1 - Revised minutes of August 6, 1991 (redlined for your reviewing ease). 3. City Departments Item 5.3 - Staff reports. 4. City Departments Item 5.6 - Staff report. PLEASE NOTE THE STARTING TIME FOR THE MEETING IS 6:00 P.M.