Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Agenda Packets - Regular Meeting 7/18/1995AGENDA SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY DATE: July 18, 1995 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE: COMMUNITY CENTER 625 SOUTH PICO SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA 1.0 CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Prayer of Invocation - Pastor Louis Arroyo Pledge of Allegiance 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2.1 Employee Service Awards - (5 Years) - Pam Easter, Jolene Shaw 2.2 California Highway Patrol 10851 Awards Senior Officer Curtis Curtiss Senior Officer Glenn Stotz Senior Officer Mike Lynn Senior Officer Bryan Vig Officer Julian Pollitt Officer James Waters 2.3 Proclamation - National Night Out 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person may address the Council on any subject pertaining to city business not listed on the agenda, during this portion of the meeting. A limitation of three (3) minutes shall be set for each person desiring to address the Council. 1 Adjourn the Redevelopment Agency in joint session with the City Council for consideration of the following items: 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4.1 Amendment to the Jordan and Shaver Apartment Conversion Architectural Design Contract RECOMMENDATION: Acting in the capacity of the Redevelopment Agency, authorize an additional $1,700.00 for architectural services necessary to convert five dilapidated apartments into three detached single-family dwellings, for a revised contract amount not to exceed $13,100.00. Adjourn the Redevelopment Agency and continue acting in the capacity of the City Council for the remainder of the agenda. 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 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. Speakers should limit comments to three (3) minutes. 5.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 6, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 6, 1995, as presented. 5.2 Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 20, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 20, 1995, as presented. 5.3 Warrant Register RECOMMENDATION: Approve warrant numbers 40829 through 40942 dated July 15, 1995 in the amount of $384,569.21 and Payroll check numbers 5488 through 5579 dated June 23, 1995. 2 5.4 Claim - Patrick Perez - JS 95-20 RECOMMENDATION: Reject the claim as presented pursuant to Government Code Section 913 as recommended by the claims adjustor. 5.5 Award of Bids - Water Line Replacement RECOMMENDATION: Award the bid for the Water Line Replacement Project to David T. Wasden, Inc. of Corona, for $88,829.75, subject to approval by the Riverside County Economic Development Agency. 5.6 Amicus Participation RECOMMENDATION: Approve participation of the City of San Jacinto in the matter of Loder v. City of Glendale. 5.7 Surplus Property Procurement Programs RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 95- permitting the City of San Jacinto to participate in Federal and State surplus property procurement program, and Resolution No. 95- permitting the City of San Jacinto to participate in the Federal Surplus Property Program. RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AUTHORIZING THE PARTICIPATION OF THE SAN JACINTO POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE CALIFORNIA COUNTER DRUG PROCUREMENT PROGRAM OF FEDERAL PROPERTY RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO PERMITTING THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY PROGRAM END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by: Seconded by: to approve consent calendar items 5.1 through 5.7 and adopt Resolution No. 95- through Resolution No. 95- 3 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 UNADVERTISED - Regulation of Ice Cream Trucks - Holmes RECOMMENDATION: Waive the reading in full and read by title and introduce (First Reading) Ordinance No. establishing regulations governing the operation and retail sale of ice cream, confections, and other frozen dessert products from motor vehicles. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE OPERATION AND RETAIL SALE OF ICE CREAM, CONFECTIONS, AND OTHER FROZEN DESSERT PRODUCTS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 7.1 Flashing Lights in Advance of the Intersection of Ramona Dspresswav and Chase Street - Evans RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff whether or not to proceed with design and installation of flashing lights atop the Intersection Ahead advance warning signs at Ramona Expressway and Chase Street. 7.2 Vector Control Services - Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control District - McNabb RECOMMENDATION: Receive for information and provide direction to staff, as appropriate. 7.3 Police Department Staffing Update - Holmes RECOMMENDATION: Receive oral report and provide direction to staff, as appropriate. 7.4 Public Safety Finance Alternatives, Citizens Committee - McNabb RECOMMENDATION: Give staff direction on preferred committee size and membership, application and selection process and committee purpose/timeline. 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 8.1 Potential Cancellation of August22, 1995 Study Session 8.2 Formation of Council Sub -Committee Regarding Realignment of Highway 79 4 9.0 CLOSED SESSION 9.1 Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: Superblock Negotiating Parties:Wolf, Lamsen Under Negotiation: Price and terms. 9.2 Conference with Labor Negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 Agency Negotiator: Cox, Kreisler Employee Organization: San Jacinto Police Officers Association, San Jacinto Firefighters Association, Public Employees of Riverside County (PERC), and Management/Confidential 9.3 Public Employee Performance Evaluation pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 (Continued from 7/5/95) Title: City Manager 10.0 ADJOURNMENT Motion by: Seconded: Action: to adjourn. Vote: I, Bob Wilson, City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto, do hereby certify that I caused to be posted the foregoing agenda this 13th day of July, 1995, as required by law. (\lr: eputy City Clerk w� 5 STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members sitting as the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE JORDAN AND SHAVER APARTMENT CONVERSION ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONTRACT RECOMMENDATION Acting in the capacity of the Redevelopment Agency, authorize an additional $1,700.00 for architectural services necessary to convert five dilapidated apartments into three detached single-family dwellings, for a revised contract amount not to exceed $13,100.00. BACKGROUND On April 4, 1995, the Agency approved an $11,400.00 design contract with Herron and Rumansoff Architects for the conversion of the five apartment units at Jordan and Shaver. The proposed change to the contract amount is to cover revisions to the site plan and construction documents. The revisions are directly related to the relocation of the driveways to eliminate a potentially hazardous situation. The architect was initially directed by Staff to retain as much of the on -site buildings and parking structures as possible, in order to reduce demolition and construction costs. Based upon this direction, the architect prepared construction drawings which retained the existing carports on the south sides of each of the properties. After the building plans were well under way, Staff met on -site with the project engineer to review the proposed public improvements. In the course of this meeting, it was noted that the existing driveway for the southern most unit was too close to the intersection of Shaver and Jordan. After reviewing several alternatives, the preferred solution was to relocate the driveway to the northerly property line, away from the intersection. Initially, the architect felt that this would require the modification of only the southern unit. However, after analyzing the revision in greater detail, it became necessary to revise all the plans as there was not enough room between the units to accommodate two garages and a joint driveway. Attachments: Addendum to Contract Original Site Plan Revised Site Plan H: CCRPT-95\JRDNSHAV. DS1 JORDAN AND SHAVER DESIGN CONTRACT ADDENDUM NO. 1 ARTICLE 3. COMPENSATION Maximum Compensation 3.01. In consideration for the services to be performed by Contractor, Client agrees to pay to Contractor an amount not to exceed $13.100.00 $11,400.0O. PLAN /at7 LAN 4-A / 44 UN 4A PLAN 2/ 2 ALIP1ua4TE - SHAVER - SITE PLAN PREPARED PURSUANT TO CONTRACT DeVcirsiaY 114 &4E 7so..1 tumantoff _oalrteds._nc 5.3)4lira !tee Hard cdlono92543 50965743 9096520:0 66/23,95 1 ,2, ik n r n r SI g n. s. oir f REVISED SITE PLAN, WITH ACCESS SHIFTED TO THE NORTH, AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION Ate--,gD� .`. r-, 5.1 Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Coucnil FROM: Pamela L. Lee, Deputy City Clerk Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 RE: Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 6, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 6, 1995, as presented. MINUTES SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY JUNE 6, 1995 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 7:40 P.M. by Mayor Solorio in the Community Center, 625 South Pico, San Jacinto, California. Present: Councilmembers Leahy, Oaks, Williams and Mayor Solorio Absent: Council Seat Vacant A Moment of Silence was Observed for Reflection The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Solorio 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Debbie Cornett stated she was distressed to hear the news reports on the City Budget, of which she obtained a copy, and her concerns related to the Council considering the adoption of the same budget and the possibility of a tax increase as the first alternative, rather than as a last resort. Posed the following questions to Council: 1. How could Council adopt the prior budget knowing the previous year was a fiscal loss? 2. How could Council consider a tax increase before cutting expenses? 3. Did Council consider expense reductions in personnel by combing top management positions where there was a duplication of responsibility, and allow competent support level employees to do the work? 4. Did Council analyze the profits carried out by developers, aided by approval of fee waivers on development fees, and what was the difference, no development, no fees for development? Felt developers took their profit out of the City and the City was left to bear the burden of providing public services. 1 June 6, 1995 5. Had Council actively sought sales tax revenue sources? Did the City have a competent sales tax monitoring program? Only after Council reviewed these options, and saw no possible answers and no possible solutions, could they reach an informed decision to down size until the economic conditions changed. She saw the additional tax as a last resort and not the first choice, and the need to look at other revenue producing opportunities. Urged Council to put on their creative thinking caps and push staff to find other viable solutions to protect the City of San Jacinto, which was not their city, it belonged to the voting citizens of San Jacinto. Fay Loomis advised of the PeacePrayer planned for noon the following day and provided handouts for more information. Basically it was a 15 minute period of silence and prayer for the children of the valley, to offer one solution to violence in the community. The event would be conducted at churches throughout the area, and individuals could also participate privately from wherever they might be. Stephen Rebovich stated he felt his neighbors seemed to be above the law. Citing incidents of vandalism at his home, and that another individual had identified the perpetrators in a deposition, but nothing had been done. Felt the police report was not timely and there was no action taken. Threatened to take the law into his own hands if something was not done within 30 days. In response to Mayor inquiry, advised that eight police reports had been filed. Mayor Solorio requested that Police Chief Holmes meet with Mr. Rebovich. Les Rowlett felt that Council should consider more carefully the award of contract for landscaping maintenance (consent calendar item 5.6), because of the existing problems at Rancho San Jacinto and at Shaver and Old Mountain, thinking the existing contract was with the same company. City Clerk Wilson advised that the areas in question by Mr. Rowlett were not yet accepted by the City, so the existing contractor was not responsible for that maintenance. Acting City Manager McNabb, further responding to Mr. Rowlett, clarified that the areas in question would have to be brought up to standard by the developer prior to acceptance by the City. The City had done some weeding in the past and perhaps that was needed again. 2 June 6, 1995 Councilmember Oaks requested that staff answer the questions in writing by Debbie Cornett. Mayor Solorio suggested that they may be answered under agenda item 8.1, but if not, that would be appropriate to respond to her. Mr. McNabb indicated a response would be made if staff had gotten all the questions. Ed Walker stated his opposition to the increased trash pick up. Did not see why the new system could not be cut back from the three times a week to save the City and citizens money. Finally, noted concern for the school kids crossing De Anza and the speeding at 50-60 MPH in a 25 MPH zone. Mayor Solorio advised the matters had been brought to Council attention and suggested staff get with Mr. Walker to address the status. 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY None 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY At the hour of 7:55 P.M. Convened the Redevelopment Agency in joint session with the City Council for consideration of the following items: A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, acting in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council, to approve the consent calendar as presented. Motion carried on a 4-0 with one Council Seat Vacant. 5.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 2, 1995 Approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 2, 1995, as presented. 5.2 Warrant Register Approved warrant numbers 40460 through 40468, dated May 31, 1995, in the amount of $673,322.23 and Payroll check numbers 5231 through 5313, dated May 12, 1995. 5.3 Treasurer's Report - April 1995 Received and filed. 3 June 6, 1995 5.4 Change Order - Assessment District No. 94-1 (Soboba Road Improvement Project) Approved a Change Order with Nottson Construction in the amoun Df $8,993.76 for the installation of an inlet structure to protect the exi :. ng 54" pipe downstream of the new 10' x 7' box structure from filling with mud. 5.5 Change Order - Esplanade Avenue Street Widening and Water Line Project Approved a Change Order with Nottson Construction, in the amount of $9,281.07, for the removal and replacement of approximately 1,400 square feet of asphalt roadway on Esplanade Avenue adjacent to the Entertainment Center. 5.6 Award of Annual Landscape Maintenance Contracts Awarded the contract for Landscape Maintenance to D&J Landscape, of Winchester, for a bid of $99,936.00. 5.7 Update on Community Garden Received and filed. 5.8 Consultant Services Agreement with Kimlev-Horn and Associates for Design of Traffic Signals at State Street and Ramona Boulevard and at State Street and Cottonwood Avenue Approved the Consultant Services Agreement with Kimley-Horn Associates, of Orange, for the design of traffic signals at State Street and Ramona Boulevard and at State Street and Cottonwood Avenue, for a fee of $16,500.00. 5.9 Adoption of Resolution Declaring the Intention to Levy and Collect Assessments in Landscaping. Lighting and Park District No. 1 for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year and Setting Times and Place for Public Hearings and Approving the Preliminary Engineering Report Adopted Resolution No. 95-27 declaring the intention to levy and collect assessments in Landscaping, Lighting and Park District No. 1 for the 1995-96 fiscal year and setting times and place for public hearings and approving the preliminary engineering report. 4 June 6, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 UPDATE OF LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND PARK DISTRICT NO. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 2, DIVISION 15 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE, AND ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING THEREON At the hour of 7:56 P.M. Convened the Redevelopment Agency and continued acting in the capacity as the City Council for the remaining business. 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 Sale of Redevelopment Agency Land Location: Northeast Corner of Third Street and San Jacinto Avenue Mayor Solorio opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Hults made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Noted that additional terms had been included to identify volunteer labor, like Habitat for Humanity, in the event of the need. Noted also that one lot had been reserved for a future Habitat for Humanity site. Councilmember Leahy voiced concern that proceeding with the proposal would be in conflict with the Brown Street project. Inquired how long Council could delay the proposal and not default on the grant? Mr. Hults advised the City had already obtained an extension from the County and if the City did not follow through, the property could revert to the County since they put up the funds for the purchase. Ms. Leahy inquired what the specific time frame was, based on her concern that the applicants for both projects would be the same and the proposal was for less expensive facilities, which would be in direct competition with Brown Street? 5 June 6, 1995 Mr. Hults explained that there was a different strategy by using a Real Estate Broker and they were considering doing the same with the Brown Street properties. Noted one Brown Street property was expected to close escrow that day, and another closing very soon. With professional help they expected to see more activity on the property. He did not have an actual time limit. In response to further inquiries, advised the commission was a figure being negotiated and the amount stated was the potential maximum, but felt it would be a good deal less than the 6% cited. Noted a delay for continued negotiation would only reduce the cost of construction. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Solorio closed the public hearing. Community Development Director McNabb noted the following changes necessary to the agreement. 1. Page 14, insert the sales price shall be the greater of $69,900, or wording that currently existed in paragraph b. 2. Pertaining to the property tax structure, which was phased, that the City could pay the taxes up to 6 months from the date of transfer of the property, instead of up to December 31, 1995, to relieve some of the tax burden during the construction. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Williams, to continue the public hearing decision to the meeting of June 20, 1995, at 7:30 P.M., or as soon thereafter, to allow staff to find out the time limit for approval and make the necessary changes to the agreement. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 7.1 Community Facilities District #2 Improvement Fund Public Works Director Evans made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Clarified the tot lot improvements were needed to comply with ADA. The irrigation improvements would result in a net savings of $30-40,000 in water costs. The bike path improvements were needed to complete the missing link in the path. 6 June 6, 1995 Council needed to decide if they wished to utilize CFD #2 funds, delete projects or provide other direction. In response to Council inquiries, advised the CFD #2 funds were for dedicated purposes. Outlined the full course of the bike path. A speaker from the audience questioned the justification for expenditures. Councilmember Leahy noted the tot lot was required to meet ADA requirements while the bike path was not necessary. Supported completing the tot lot and irrigation system. Councilmember Williams voiced concern that it had been discussed in the past that the Rancho San Jacinto Park was a community park and not a neighborhood park and should be funded as such, not just a burden on the CFD account. Mr. Evans clarified the only other source of funds were park development funds, but they were not intended for that purpose and it would be stretching it to use them for that purpose. In response to Council inquiry, advised that funds left in the CFD could be used to pay the bond. Speaker from the audience complained that the problems should have been resolved and dealt with prior to the developer signing off on the park. Additional concerns were voiced from the audience in an inaudible manner. Mr. Evans, in response to Council inquiry, explained the safety concerns of the bike path and that staff was awaiting FEMA funds to make repairs for damage during the rains. The water system was adequate and the proposal was merely an option to save on the cost of water presently and in the future. In response to shouts from the audience, advised the City had no way of knowing how expensive water would become in the future. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, to direct staff to prepare plans and specifications and advertise for bids for additional public improvements in CFD#2 (Rancho San Jacinto), including Irrigation System Improvements, and Playground Equipment Improvements, deleting the Bicycle Path Improvements. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Williams dissenting and one Council seat vacant. June 6, 1995 7.2 City -Wide Computer Networking Fire Chief Price made an extensive presentation as outlined in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Responding to Council inquiries, suggestions and comments, advised that the College would be a source of training, but there was also the problems of freeing up enough staff at one time for a session to justify the cost. There was also a program through the County and the opportunity to bring a trainer on site. Finally, there was the possibility to train a few staff and have them come back and provide training on site. As for making the system accessible to the public, found that process was quite costly, unless the City wanted a simple mailbox system. Staff target date for presentation of proposals would be the first meeting in August. Councilmember Oaks felt the report was very in depth and he was satisfied there was a need to improve the system and agreed with an RFP. Councilmember Williams desired to see a component for public access and add opportunities for employees working from home, and in the event of disaster preparedness. Acting City Manager McNabb clarified the report would actually come back to Council August 15, 1995. Further, the proposal contained two parts, one to consider an RFP and the order would be the actual purchase. Mr. Price suggested a phasing in, with purchases phased in. The time for putting something together was fast approaching and he could see the first year costing $55,000 and the remaining in the following year. Mr. McNabb asked for a motion to phase in. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, to direct staff to prepare an RFP only to engineer the computer system for the City. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Mr. Price, addressing the issue of funding, explained the City had collected over $120,000 on building permits since 1987/88 which were restricted for computer improvements. 8 June 6, 1995 Mr. McNabb clarified this funding would not come from the General Fund. 7.3 Adoption of Policy Regarding Amicus Curiae Participation (Friend of the Court) City Attorney Cox made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Mayor Solorio felt the wording was ambiguous and left much to interpretation. Councilmember Williams was concerned that Council would not have the opportunity to provide input on a particular item and the City Attorney alone would decide. Councilmember Leahy understood the urgency nature of issues and felt that if Council were appraised of a situation, they would still retain the right to override the decision. Could not imagine the Council totally disagreeing an a matter of just support, and anything with a recommendation would required a recommendation from the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, and finally, anything involving cost would come to the Council as a whole. Mr. Cox explained the process identified by Ms. Leahy, and the need to watch court interpretations and timely lend the city's name with no financial obligations. To delay, a chance may be missed on occasion. Mr. Solorio felt that with 250 cities lending their name, if San Jacinto missed one on occasion it would not make much difference. Mr. Cox suggested that he revise the resolution and place it on the consent calendar for the next meeting. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to direct the City Attorney to make changes and bring the matter back to Council. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. June 6, 1995 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 8.1 General Fund/Service Level Issues Councilmember Oaks stated he was opposed to any tax increase of any kind until all avenues of city revenue had been exhausted, including pay cuts and personnel. In that area, he would like to see a comparable wage study made by the City management showing what top level department heads earn in other cities, to respond to people who have questioned wages of top management, showing where the City was in the scale. Mayor Solorio, in trying to clarify the comparable wage study, assuming that what Mr. Oaks was saying was, if the wages were below the standard of other cities, the issue of pay cuts would not be a consideration? Mr. Oaks indicated if that was the case, they probably would not. He was looking to reassure citizens and respond to their questions and whether to raise or lower pay. Councilmember Leahy indicated that she had run into comparable studies several years prior with the Police and Fire from ten cities. To date she would still debate why the particular ten cities were selected out of 120. Felt the study would not be productive and would take a lot of time. Felt Council should look at where they were and what San Jacinto could afford. Previously the study considered only recruitability and retainability and she felt the equation should include affordability, as important in the equation. As for beautification of the City, there came a time to determine what the City could afford. Agreed with Mr. Oaks, there was a need to look at top management. She had been approached by people asking why they had to pay more taxes while the city was paying high salaries. Concerned how a comparison would be made, to those smaller or comparable in size, and do they have the revenues to pay the salaries. Felt it would be nice if the City had the time and money for a comparable study, but again, who would select the cities to compare, and Council would have to be very involved in the process. Mr. McNabb indicated if the City did a comparable study, the full Council would have to agree on the parameters and the selection of cities to compare. 10 June 6, 1995 Councilmember Williams reiterated prior statements that the Council needed to get focused. Since there were only 5-8 top management out of 90 employees and a $5 million annual budget, of which 60% was labor and on the fat side was $3 million. If they decided to cut 10% that would be $300,000. Staff had identified the need to cut $1.5-1.9 million. Some salaries were easy to try and pick but the problems were much greater than the few top management. Council had, at one time or another, approved the salaries and they were not created overnight. There was a need to look at the totality of the problems. Ms. Cornett's questions had been asked by the City Council and other members of the community before. The reality of the issue was revenue. He was sure the members of the school board could appreciate the dwindling revenues, while the services had remained the same, or increased. Then for Council to go after employees to carry out their goals, would question the service the City would get from them since they did not cause the problem. Concerned that the City honored long term employees and they would say, "by the way we're going after you too". Cautioned Council to look at the totality of circumstances and keep their eyes on the issue of revenue and either cut services, layoff and reduce service levels, but not target one group of employees, because that would not solve the problems. Ms. Leahy agreed Council should not single out one group of employees and should look at the total picture. However, it was a small part of the picture and to not review it would be remiss of the Council. Felt some cuts would be better than lay offs. Noted in the past the option had been given to reduce benefits or lay off, and the union opted to lay off, while other organizations took a reduction in benefits. Felt it was a shame that some lost jobs because of the lack of willingness to make concessions. To not look at salaries would not be looking at the whole picture, so Council should not just look at lay offs and cutting services. Mayor Solorio pointed out some of the legal ramifications regarding management employees, and the existing contracts, as well as the meet and confer obligations. Just felt that Council should not close their eyes, but that they would have to make an informed decision. Cited statistics on the staffing levels of the past years for comparison and the various actions already taken by employees to reduce costs. Felt the subcommittee needed more direction from Council. Felt it was unfortunate that the public safety funding came mostly from the General Fund, the same source from which the state withdrew funds. June 6, 1995 Explained the ERAF had taken back more than the City had received, with no end in sight. Did not think anyone would enjoy the ultimate solutions, but Council would have to keep their eyes open to everything. Donald Peters was tired of hearing about new taxes without a vote of the people, and it needed to stop. Cited that the City should not have gone into the home building business and use government funds to provide individuals a livelihood. Did not feel utilities should be taxed, something everyone needed, but rather tax records, disc players and recreational events, something that people could do without. Gene Hutcheson was responding to a Hemet News article, noting he would like to come to more meetings because there was more comedy at the meeting than on TV. Suggested the City take the same approach with the state, that the state took with federal, pertaining to unfunded mandates. Cited some of the statistics of the report and the use of the word "revenues" not "taxes", and questioned, with the substantial population increase, how revenues had dropped? Acting City Manager McNabb outlined the revenue sources for the city, the various levels for different years, noting that sales tax for home improvements was down, along with construction. All the per capita figures were down except Vehicle In Lieu. Mr. Hutcheson questioned why? Mr. McNabb cited the lack of retail outlets within the City. Mr. Hutcheson inquired if anyone was tracking the sales tax? Mr. McNabb advised that staff had, but only minor errors were found. Mr. Hutcheson felt there should be some comparison made with other agencies and the decrease accounted for. Mr. McNabb cited the recession, which was felt by all agencies, including the County, however the figures quoted showed the percentage of decrease to be greater in San Jacinto. Noted that the decrease in development receipts was not related to fee waivers from the general fund, but came from special funds. 12 June 6, 1995 Mr. Hutcheson stated he did not understand why every level of government was always crying for more money but never gave the citizens that pay the taxes and fees a detailed explanation of expenditures. The elected officials owed that to the citizens who were paying the bills. Ms. Leahy clarified that the Committee was giving various alternatives and not recommending anything specific. Felt there were different communications through the news and appreciated the public attending to get the information first hand. Mr. Hutcheson voiced concern with the drop in sales tax revenue, and suggested looking into the matter. Mayor Solorio appreciated his concerns. Allen Pace, San Jacinto Police Officer's Association, came to speak in support of law enforcement, citing the growth, influx of young families, and the greater physical size, as well as population, which he felt jeopardized the quiet life in the community. Noted the corresponding decrease in sworn officers and urged a long term community commitment of financial resources, by some means, to augment the budget deficit. Identified the past support by their association and the sacrifices made for the budget, and pledged future support. Did not support taxes or assessments which lacked the people's right to vote. Mayor Solorio advised there would be no vote presently, the matter would come back for consideration. Glenn Stotz, Senior Police Officer, reiterated information by Mr. Paced. Noted the result had been an increase in overtime and the stacking of calls. There was also low morale in the department as a result, which jeopardized officer safety. They were forced to reduce service levels, but a long term solution was needed with a commitment of financial resources. Urged Council to consider an additional tax to augment the budget deficit. They did not support a tax for the purpose of achieving higher salaries, but to improve service levels . Mr. Oaks indicated Council still did not have a feel for the amount of funding necessary. Figured about $1.5 million was needed. Until it was clear, no action could be taken. Had already cut $300,000 and there was still a lot of work to do. 13 June 6, 1995 Ms. Leahy noted the deadline to meet the November ballot, but they also needed to know exactly what the wish list was, what could be afforded and what the cost would be. They would need the next couple weeks to meet the deadline. The subcommittee was still researching. Mr. Solorio met with the Gas Company to discuss their concerns about a utility tax. An in depth report would be needed to determine the amount, if that alternative were chosen. Would have to address an equal distribution amongst the utilities and address the issue of another agency undercutting a utility. Mr. Williams concerned that more answers were not forthcoming as to the needs and their related costs. Concerned that only some individuals were supporting public safety via an assessment, which he felt should be shared community wide, and there was a need to educate the public. Hoped the Council would make a decision, not cutting public safety, and find the methodology to raise revenue. In reality, people would not vote to raise taxes. It was up to the Council to provide leadership and governance in a difficult situation. Rather than cause layoffs, Council needed to set priorities and provide direction with a cohesive plan. The officer levels were currently the same as 1986, which was more than an officer safety issue, but also service. If the situation were to get drastic enough, it was suggested that officers not respond to non -injury traffic accidents. Previously there were four public meetings with this discussion, with no one in attendance, but finally obtained some response at the current meeting, but with no solutions. Council needed to move swiftly. Did not see Council raising taxes, but rather, needed to give staff clear direction to go to work with their marching orders, whether by full Council or a subcommittee, and get on with it. Hated to see employees lose jobs, but they were faced with the real threat and the issue would not be easy. Needed to realize the global picture, Council would not raise taxes and the community was not going to approve raising taxes. Lacking other alternatives, needed to look at service and lay off people. Mr. Solorio did not want to lay off police officers. Inquired what percentage of the general fund was for public safety? Mr. McNabb advised 85% of the general fund was public safety, leaving 15% as discretionary. 14 June 20, 1995 Mr. Solorio suggested staff go back and make the cuts in pay or personnel to meet the mandates of the budget. Ms. Leahy inquired if Council was giving up on a utility user tax or assessment? Mr. Williams suggested the subcommittee come back with clear expectations, with alternate revenue sources and make a recommendation to solve the issues and move on. Ms. Leahy noted staff time was valuable and the issue should not be prolonged un-necessarily. Did not think a utility tax was the way to go, nor would it pass on the ballot. They set out to determine what they were looking at fee wise and establishing a wish list. Realistically, it was a matter of what the citizens could afford, whether it meant cutting service or salaries. Rather than just saying no to a utility tax or assessments, felt it should be on the ballot to find if it could be another source of revenue. If Council would rather do that, and gather more information. Mr. Oaks felt they were not ready for a ballot vote, they lacked enough information. Mr. Williams noted again his concerns about the inequity of the CFD. Supported reduction of such things as grass trimming and pot holes. Rather than a general tax, would like to see something tied to a public safety mechanism. Suggested staff focus on public safety and determine the numbers for what could be generated and what it would equate to in service, which would be different than general taxes which were sucked into a black hole with no actual defined programs. The funds would be committed to the specific services, of putting bodies on the street, and not salaries and benefits. It was a matter of fairness to the entire community, and guarantee the funds would go to a specific purpose and not be lost in the shuffle. That was his recommendation to the subcommittee. Mr. McNabb clarified for the Mayor that it would take an election to combine the existing CFD #3, with a 2/3 majority vote. Mr. Williams clarified it would take an elimination of CFD #3 and put a fee across the board towards public safety. 15 June 6, 1995 Mr. McNabb advised the City could create another special assessment targeted specifically for public safety, with a rate determined by Council. If approved, they could eliminate CFD #3, but it would still require a 2/3 public vote. Again clarified it could not be done through the budget process, but only by a 2/3 vote. Pointed out that the funding would be determined annually, which could change with each Council, whereas a utility tax could be set with a rate or percentage and a cap. Chuck Webb, felt the matter should be presented to the voters with reasoning and rationale. Indicated he would not be opposed to an increase for increased services. The issue was the perception, that there would be a tax without the opportunity of voters having a say in the matter. Needed some rationale and answers as to why revenues were down and costs up. Stephen Rebovich suggested that home businesses diverted sales tax revenue from the City. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Williams, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to direct the subcommittee to reconvene and report back to Council on June 20, 1995, with a report to address specifically public safety financing, with the elimination of CFD #3, and a flat rate special assessment city wide to finance public safety, for placement on the November ballot. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Mr. Solorio advised they would need input from staff on the bottom line in order to bring the matter back to Council. Ms. Leahy noted the importance of the education process on where the City made cuts and saved money, showing the whole process and how frugal they were with all funds. Mr. Williams agreed that was important, along with the need to stay focused on the true issues, noting that certain funds could not be used for other purposes and were restricted. Public safety was the primary focus and general services was another discussion. This was strictly public safety, and the resolution would remove some burden on the general fund, freeing up funds for other programs. 16 June 6, 1995 Mr. McNabb obtained clarification that Council wanted this based on service levels of 1.3 officers per 1,000 residents, but could show a range, with hard numbers and the justifications. 8.2 Request for Opposition to Federal Transit Cuts Councilmember Oaks advised that the RTA General Manager had requested that Councilmembers sign letters to legislators advocating the maintenance of transportation funds, arguing the fact that if federal funds put people back to work, they would need transportation. Those wishing to send letters should contact staff to prepare the necessary letters for them. Mayor Solorio commented that the City did not need any more funds to be removed from the City. COUNCIL CONSENSUS to endorse the letters. At the hour of 10:15 P.M. Council recessed. At the hour of 10:30 P.M. Council reconvened with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, for the purpose of a closed session pursuant to the following: 9.0 CLOSED SESSION 9.1 Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation (1 case) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) 9.2 Conference with Labor Negotiator, Regarding San Jacinto Police Officers' Association, San Jacinto Firefighters' Association and Public Employees of Riverside County (PERC), pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 9.3 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (California Farm Bureau and State Resources At the hour of 10:42 P.M. Council reconvened in open session, with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, and announced no reportable action being taken. 17 June 6, 1995 10.0 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned. The hour of adjournment being 10:43 P.M. Submitted by Bob Wilson, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk Approved David Solorio, Mayor 18 2 N A A 1 S S Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Coucnil FROM: Pamela L. Lee, Deputy City Clerk Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 RE: Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 20, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 20, 1995, as presented. MINUTES SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY JUNE 20, 1995 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 7:45 P.M. by Mayor Solorio in the Community Center, 625 South Pico, San Jacinto, California. Present: Councilmembers Leahy, Oaks, Williams and Mayor Solorio Absent: Council Seat Vacant Prayer of Invocation by Pastor Bob Ferguson Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Solorio Mayor Solorio announced there were a number of urgency issues which arose following the posting of the agenda, and called for a vote of the Council to consider the matters as follows: 1. Add to City Departments, designation of staff as agent for San Jacinto for the State of California Office of Emergency Services A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to add item one above to City Departments on the agenda. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 2. Add to City Departments letter of opposition to SB 1073, Housing Element Reform A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to add item two above to City Departments on the agenda. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 3. Add to City Departments an ABC License Permit on Main Street. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy to add item three above to City Departments on the agenda. Motion failed for lack of a second. 1 June 20, 1995 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Les Rowlett voiced concern that utility billings had included the cost of recycling prior to receiving service, and he had written a letter of protest, requesting the charge be removed. Acting City Manager McNabb advised staff would contact the City of Hemet first thing in the next morning to inquire why they did not have their bins yet, and would in turn advise Mr. Rowlett. Stephen Rebovich felt that City staff had advised a neighbor of his complaints, which resulted in vandalism to his property. Felt the City should take responsibility for the repairs. Again threatened to take the law into his own hands. Mayor Solorio requested that Mr. Rebovich curtail his language so as not to infringe on his right to speak. Suggested, again, that he direct his issues to the Police Chief. Sybil Gibbons, Senior Nutrition Program, requested that an additional four handicap parking slots be added at the community center. The existing spots were insufficient for the needs of those using the center. Staff advised the parking lot was already scheduled for re -striping to meet ADA requirements, that evening. Additional spaces could be added if desired by Council. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to add the additional handicap parking spaces to the agenda under City Departments, since the re -striping was already scheduled and the matter was brought up after the agenda was posted. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. At the hour of 8:00 P.M. convened the Redevelopment Agency in joint session with the City Council for consideration of the following items: June 20, 1995 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4.1 Proposed Actions to Stimulate Sales at the Courtyard Classics Development on Brown Street Community Development Director McNabb made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. In response to Council inquiries, if it would be listed in the multiples?, did not know, but all brokers would be notified. The commission would only be paid upon sale of the units. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Williams, acting in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency, to allocate an additional $6,400.00 for the purpose of a real estate commission, to stimulate sales at the Courtyard Classics development. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Councilmember Leahy, acting in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council, to approve the consent calendar as presented. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 5.1 Minutes of Special Meeting of May 16, 1995 Approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of May 16, 1995, as presented. 5.2 Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 16, 1995 Approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 16, 1995, as presented. 5.3 Warrant Register Approved warrant numbers 40609 through 40722, dated June 15, 1995, in the amount of $600,016.32, and Payroll check numbers 5314 through 5402, dated May 26, 1995. 5.4 Extension of Subdivision Aqreement for Tract No. 21943 - Village I, Soboba Springs Location: North of Lake Park Drive, east of the San Jacinto River Granted a two year extension of time for the subdivision agreement for Tract 21943 to June 20, 1997. 3 June 20, 1995 5.5 Adoption of Resolution Ordering Foreclosure Action Regarding Assessment District 87-1 Adopted Resolution No. 95-30 ordering foreclosure action regarding Assessment District 87-1. RESOLUTION NO. 95-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO ORDERING FORECLOSURE ACTION REGARDING ASSESSMENT 87-1, RELIEVING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR OF OBLIGATION TO COLLECT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT THEREON 5.6 Utilization of Remaining Water Bond Funds Authorized staff to utilize the remaining funds in the Water Improvement Certificates of Participation (COP) for Electrical Improvements at the Bath Well, the Purchase of a Standby Generator for the Bath Well and Purchase of a Portable Generator for the Grand Avenue Well and other Emergency Use. 5.7 Community Center Renovation Project, Rejection of Bids Rejected all bids for the Community Center Rehabilitation Project and authorized staff to re -advertise the project. 5.8 Use of Hofmann Park for Christian Concert Approved the request of Calvary Chapel's Just For You Ministries, of Hemet, for the use of Hofmann Park between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. on the following Saturdays; 7/1,7/15,7/22,7/29,8/12,8/26 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 Proposed Farming Overlay Area, Article 14E Project No. 95-04 Zoning Ordinance Amendment 1-95 - (Continued from 5/16/95) Senior Planner Hults made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Outlined the various revisions as noted in the report. Mayor Solorio opened the public hearing. 4 June 20, 1995 Community Development Director McNabb, in response to inquiry regarding the relation of Esplanade/Hewitt and agriculture to the proposal, advised it did not change the zone of the property in question, but would include it in a controlled farming area, with some restrictions. Robert Zambon voiced concern that the area could continue to farm and spray the area without notifying residents within 300 feet, of the zone change. Mr. McNabb advised there was no legal requirement to notice all owners. Staff placed a display ad, 1/8 page with a map and description. Mr. Zambon requested the hearing be delayed until residents on his street could be notified, since they were told the month before the hearing would be the second meeting in June. Noted that many residents were bothered by asthma, and farming was causing them discomfort. Stated residents had complained over the years regarding the spraying and chicken fertilizer. There being no further speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Solorio closed the public hearing. Mr. McNabb, in response to Council, stated the only provision for spraying was aerial and there was no odor to the chicken fertilizer. Ms. Leahy was concerned about the effects on residents with asthma. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Mayor Solorio, to adopt a Negative Declaration; waive the reading in full and read by title only and introduce Ordinance No. , establishing Article 14E as well as the Controlled Farming Area (CFA) Map, and amending Article 19, Section 19.05 related to non -conformities. Motion failed on a 2-2 vote with Councilmembers Leahy and Williams dissenting and one Council seat vacant. 6.2 Sale of Redevelopment Agency Land - (Continued from 6/6/95) Location: Northeast Corner of Third Street and San Jacinto Avenue Senior Planner Hults made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Noted an additional extension could cause funds to be reprogrammed. Outlined the changes noted in the report and as previously discussed. 5 June 20, 1995 Councilmember Leahy voiced concern regarding the impacts she perceived for the Brown Street project. Concerned, in view of the economic status, that another project was not cost effective. Felt the action was premature. Councilmember Williams thought it would make more sense to go forward utilizing the grant funding rather than that of the City, with the time and effort already committed. While there may have been some cost to the City, it would be better to take advantage of the grant. Acting City Manager McNabb advised that staff could write a letter to the County explaining the situation, with the notation that the City was prepared to proceed if an extension was not granted. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Williams, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, acting in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency, directing staff to send a letter of explanation and request an extension. However, if in the event an extension was not granted, approve the sale of the Redevelopment Agency property, and the approve the Disposition and Development Agreement with Western American Design and Development. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Councilmember Oaks requested, and granted, a reconsideration of agenda item 6.1. 6.1 Proposed Farming Overlay Area Article 14E Project No. 95-04 Zoning Ordinance Amendment 1-95 - (Continued from 5/16/95) Community Development Director McNabb explained that the proposal was a part of the request in the process of settlement with the State Farm Bureau, as a regulation to protect the right to farm vacant land. Even though there were state regulations, some city regulations were not specific enough to all properties. Input had been received from a number of individuals, and the position was, it was a rural area and the farming and dairy activities were a part of the quality of life, so only a few concerns needed to be addressed. The area was largely in the central area of San Jacinto. Aerial spraying would be prohibited and dust control was required, same as weed abatement. There would be a committee, including members of the neighborhood Beautification Committee, to mediate complaints from the neighboring residents. The residents of Las Brisas and Parkhill Collection did not have concerns with the proposal and looked at it as a positive aspect. 6 June 20, 1995 Councilmember Oaks felt the farming was preferable to weeds in the already open fields. Numerous sessions on litigation were held, and the proposal was the best deal that could be struck. Urged Council support. Councilmember Leahy lacked confidence the ordinance had the necessary teeth to address the concerns of residents and was sympathetic to the impact on neighbors, particularly seniors with breathing problems. Was opposed to giving farming carte blanche on fertilizers. Mr. Oaks indicated he knew for a fact there were no problems with chicken fertilizers and that Mr. Minor was experimenting with natural ingredients to keep weeds down. Mr. McNabb indicated activity earlier in the day was a combination of chicken fertilizers and other additives. They agreed to do the best they could, but did not want the City telling them how to manage. In response to Council inquiry, advised that without the proposal, the Farm Bureau would not settle. Councilmember Williams pointed out the amount of tax dollars spent to oppose the City, and to come up with the regulations. Failure to settle . would just result in continued spending of community money. Was opposed to the actions, but would be forced to vote in the affirmative to prevent the further expenditure of public funds. Mr. McNabb indicated it was sad the community had to spend the funds, when the matter could have been resolved outside the RDA issue. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Mayor Solorio, to adopt a Negative Declaration; waive the reading in full and read by title only and introduce Ordinance No. 1010, establishing Article 14E as well as the Controlled Farming Area (CFA) Map, and amending Article 19, Section 19.05 related to non -conformities. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Leahy dissenting and one Council seat vacant. June 20, 1995 ORDINANCE NO. 1010 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 1-95, THEREBY AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 340, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ESTABLISHING ARTICLE NO. 14E, THE FARMING OVERLAY ZONE AND THE CONTROLLED FARMING AREA, AND AMENDING ARTICLE 19.05(3), OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO 6.3 Resolution Confirming Diagram and Assessment for 1995-96 Fiscal Year Landscaping, Lighting and Park Maintenance District No. 1 Public Works Director Evans made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Advised there were minor changes and basically it was the same as last year, only slightly more to help with the $60,000 delinquency of the past two years. Explained the protest process and the requirements. Mayor Solorio opened the public hearing. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, the public hearing was closed. City Clerk Wilson advised that no protests had been received. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to adopt Resolution No. 95-28 confirming a Diagram and Assessment for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year in Connection with Landscaping, Lighting and Park Maintenance District No. 1. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. RESOLUTION NO. 95-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT FOR THE 1995-96 FISCAL YEAR IN CONNECTION WITH LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND PARK DISTRICT NO. 1 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 2 OF DIVISION 15 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE At the hour of 8:45 P.M. adjourned the Redevelopment Agency and continued acting in the capacity as the City Council for the remainder of the agenda. 8 June 20, 1995 At the hour of 8:45 P.M. recessed the City Council. At the hour of 8:55 P.M. reconvened the City Council with all members present, except one Council seat vacant. 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 7.1 Ramona Expressway & Chase Street Las Brisas/Corsica Subdivision Public Works Director Evans made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Essentially the intersection did not meet the CALTRANS warrants. Ms. Carlson-Buydos would continue to work with staff to address the safety issues and another report would be made in the future. In response to Council inquiry, advised the widening would be done in advance of a signal installation. Advised there was funding in the amount of $130,000 in Regional Transportation Funds. Widening would be at the discretion of Council. Funding to do so would come from City controlled regional and local funds. To use Measure A funds would require a revision to the current application. The signal would come from the signal mitigation fund. The Measure A funds were matching funds applied for Warren Road, which would also fall short of the need. The other projects awaiting funding were Lake Park Drive, which still lacked enough and also the missing link of Romona Expressway. Councilmember Leahy advised she was abstaining on the matter due to a possible conflict of interest. A MOTION was made by Mayor Solorio, to widen the intersection and install a signal. Motion failed for lack of a second. 7.2 Residential Sprinklers Fire Chief Price suggested that staff continue meeting with Mr. Peacock and bring the matter back at a later date. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to table the matter. Motion was withdrawn to hear comments from Mr. Peacock. 9 June 20, 1995 Steve Peacock, Peacock Financial Corporation, advised they were building a couple tracts which would be impacted by fire sprinklers. Felt the report presented a limited view of the benefits and did not analyze other issues. Had been advised from legal counsel, based on previous legal decisions, the proposal was illegal by requiring sprinklers in residential. Noted the safety factors could be presented a number of ways, but that more fire fatalities were caused by smoke and not fire, so only smoke detectors were needed. There were two versions, that of the BIA, and that of the Fire Department. Ultimately the cost impact on the housing market would hinder sales and would not allow the market to be competitive with the County and City of Hemet. Desired a forum to review all sides, make a determination and then bring back to the Council. Councilmember Leahy desired more information on the claims and access to pertinent information before making a decision. The motion was reinstated: A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to table the matter until staff met with Mr. Peacock, and also obtained legal counsel comment on the ramifications. City Attorney Cox advised that approximately a year ago, a trial court determined that the Health and Safety Code did not permit amendment to the building and safety rules regarding sprinklers. A couple months ago, the trial court ruled otherwise, and there was not a reported decision from the appellate courts. As he read it, it appeared if the City made the proper findings, which the City did, he believed the ordinance proper, and the BIA was pushing to appeal the court decision. MOTION carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Williams dissenting and one Council seat vacant. 7.3 Conditional Use Permit Application Fee Agreement Applicant: Mr. Glenn Vodhanel - Park Manor Corporation Senior Planner Hults made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. 10 June 20, 1995 John Palmer, Jr. cautioned that the proposal would set a dangerous precedent for any for profit business in the City, having trouble paying the CUP, Business License, whatever. If they could not pay it was not fair to other businesses in the community. Urged Council not to approve the proposal. Councilmember Leahy provided the history of the request and the service provided to the community, which warranted special consideration. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to approve the agreement regarding Conditional Use Permit Application Fees with Park Manor Corporation, thereby allowing the applicant to pay the CUP application fee over thirty-six months at a monthly rate of $77.75. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Councilmember Williams dissenting and one Council seat vacant. 7.4 Amicus Participation - Friend of the Court City Attorney Cox made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. There were three actions with recommendations. The fourth came up just prior to agenda posting and did not have a League recommendation. However there was a short period for response on an issue dealing with NPDES, and he urged participation. In response to Council inquiry, advised that League sanction was not necessary, it was at the discretion of the Council. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Councilmember Williams, to direct staff to participate in Ehrlich v. City of Culver City, Behrens v. Pelletier, and Vickie Edwards v. City of Santa Barbara. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. City Attorney Cox advised he would bring the fourth matter back for Council consideration if approved by the League. 7.5 Fire Department Alternatives Fire Chief Price made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Outlined the various aspects and detailed the comparison of the two proposals. Both agencies had representatives available for questions. In response to Council, advised the employee payoff costs in total were unknown. 11 June 20, 1995 Council sought clarification of many issues addressed in the proposals. Ted Hewitt noted, based on his experience pertaining to the agencies and their training, felt either way, the City would still have dedicated crews. Service levels were based on mutual aid and the utilization of outside services. Hoped the City would utilize the County proposal, based on the size of the County and the state backing, which would allow for more specialized services than the City of Hemet or San Jacinto could provide. Urged that the City assure the employee benefits promised upon transfer. Recommended against the sale of the engine in the event the City wished to resume services. Jim Smedley felt it was a shame for San Jacinto to lose their identity, which could mean losing control. Felt the issue was putting the cart before the horse, in light of the earlier agenda item regarding a tax increase for public safety. Inquired, why not address fire in the same fashion as the police? Noted the CFD called for a fire station and an engine, and wondered it anyone had looked at the legality of the bonds being sold and a fire station being required in CFD #1, and the purchase of one engine. The funds were loaned to the CFD #2, had anyone addressed the issue of how to reimburse them for the engine. If fire were vacated, who would be responsible for reimbursing the funds loaned? Acting City Manager McNabb advised that the funds had been either totally, or mostly paid back. Stated the tax discussion analysis of keeping the Fire Department, and if chosen by the City, that would change the funds needed for public safety. Councilmember Leahy was impressed with the depth of the proposals. Felt it would be premature to sell equipment, and did not realize it was purchased with CFD funds. The City's fire personnel were leaning toward the county proposal, and felt there should be a Council subcommittee to work with staff to enter negotiations. Councilmember Williams felt Mr. Smedley's comments were interesting, but that not with standing, the issue was to maintain the levels of staffing and service to the community. The need was to look at the financial side, since the purpose was to be more cost efficient. It was a decision not to take lightly and would be for an extended period of time. The Fire Department was one of the most active in the County and had done a tremendous job with minimal resources. The reality was the fiscal 12 June 20, 1995 picture and the need to maintain levels while providing relief for the activities. The CDF proposal went a long way to that end, and offered additional services. Noted the various aspects which would be included and could not be obtained by the existing City services. A second station was needed and would be a tremendous burden on resources. Would support the County proposal, which was weighed heavily by the firefighters themselves. Councilmember Oaks felt the County was the best alternative in the long run, considering the economic scale, and training factors. It was unfortunate that the fiscal situation brought that about, but would also support the County. Mayor Solorio noted that the City identity would be there in the form of the City logo on the engines and San Jacinto would still have a fire station. The firefighters would remain, but could transfer if they desired. Would not support the sale of equipment, in the event the City wanted to revert to running a City Fire Department. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to direct staff, and a Council Ad Hoc subcommittee of Oaks and Williams, to negotiate with County for fire services. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Councilmember Leahy suggested the City have information forms available to the public to bring them along in the process. 7.6 Designation of Staff as Agent for San Jacinto with the California State Office of Emergency Service (Added By Previous Action of Council) Acting City Manager McNabb advised that prior to each incident, the proposed action had been taken. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to adopt Resolution No. 95-29, designating the Fire Marshal and Public Works Administrator as San Jacinto's designated agents for Flood Assistance, Disaster No. 1046, Federal PA No. 065- 67112, which occurred on February 13, 1995. Motion carried on a 4- vote with one Council seat vacant. 13 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-29 DESIGNATION OF APPLICANTS AGENT RESOLUTION 7.7 Housing Element Reform SB 1073 (Added By Previous Action of Council) Senior Planner Hults advised that it was suggested a letter of opposition be sent to local assemblymen to oppose SB 1073, the housing element reform. The legislation had been going on for some time and the League of Cities was working with the author of the bill to streamline the housing element. The legislation would make it easier for local agencies to adopt the housing element. Realtors were heavily involved in the bill negotiations and it could end up to be something significantly different. The senate had approved SB 1073 and next it would go to the assembly to hold hearings. In response to Council inquiry, advised that the housing element adopted by the City two years ago, which complied with the requirements at that time, could be overturned by the state presently, for any number of reasons, and would regulate local zoning. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Mayor Solorio, to direct staff to send a letter of opposition to SB 1073 to appropriate local legislators. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 7.8 Additional Handicap Parking - Community Center (Added by Previous Action of Council) Acting City Manager McNabb advised that it was unclear, but it was possible that just adding the spaces may not meet the ADA requirements and there be may be an issue of the need for more ramps, etc. There were already issues with the existing four spaces, and the additional four spaces could result in additional costs. If acceptable, the additional spaces would be at a minimal cost. City Attorney Cox would have to research the legal liability ramifications of adding the additional spaces. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Williams, to direct staff to add the additional striping for four more handicap parking spots at the community center, in conjunction with the existing project. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 14 June 20, 1995 At the hour of 10:00 P.M. Council recessed. At the hour of 10:15 P.M. Council reconvened with all members present, except one Council seat vacant. 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 8.1 Budget Schedule Acting City Manager McNabb made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Councilmember Leahy requested that press releases be made on the schedule. Councilmember Oaks noted that in a review of the actuals, there was a $317,000 shortfall and desired a serious look at the status of income and outgo and desired that unencumbered funds go back to the general fund. As an example, cited the $5,243 in travel, uncommitted and not included in public safety. Suggested looking at other sources which were uncommitted and that they be placed back in the budget to balance it. He would review it further and report back at the next meeting, and will provide a copy of Mr. Williams. Did not advocate the budget of last year, which was already $300,000 in debt. Mr. McNabb advised that the Finance Director could be prepared to address the specifics of the budget figures later. Finance Director Weaver stated expenditures were on track, and some had not yet been spent, which Council may wish not to spend. Currently they were running the figures for the budget, which showed the anticipated general fund revenues about $175,000 less. The budget process would make the expenditures match. Budget adoption was not mandatory and was discretionary by the Council. If the budget were adopted, then the City could continue to work on the budget specifics. It was customary for Council to adopt a preliminary budget based on estimated revenues and at a point in time later, establish a true budget. Mr. McNabb advised staff was seeking dates for review, noting the approximate time per session was 2-3 hours. 15 June 20, 1995 COUNCIL CONSENSUS to set budget sessions on August 1, 1995 from 4-6 PM, August 2, 1995, from 4-6 PM, August 8, 1995, at 4 PM and August 9, 1995, at 4 PM. 8.2 League of California Cities - Proposed Splitting of Division Council Comments: 1. Advantage would be more common goals. 2. Costs for split unknown and more information was needed. 3. Would like to know the League's position on the issues. 4. Would like to know the motives behind the organization. Did not know what they did and what their value was to the City. COUNCIL CONSENSUS to direct staff to obtain more information and bring the matter back the first meeting in July. 8.3 Public Safety Service and Funding Levels Acting City Manager McNabb made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk, utilizing overhead projections, showing the various percentages and how they were used. The largest percentage of general funds went to public safety, and there was no explanation for the reduction in sales tax revenue. Using the desired figures, and based on a home value of $100,000, the public safety tax would be about $250-257, and fire service would take a .25 increase, but previous Council action would substantially alter the figure. Responding to Council concern, the commercial and industrial would have to be cut down to balance and make it more equitable. Mayor Solorio indicated the Police Chief had indicated anything less than what was calculated, would be useless, and he felt that unless the figures dropped, he seriously doubted it would get a 2/3 vote of the population. Suggested holding off for six months and looking at it again. The subcommittee needed to go back over the figures again, looking at the fire savings and to look at all the amounts impacting the general fund before getting to the wish list. The goal was to get the police at an acceptable level to manage the department needs, which were not met at the present time. 16 June 20, 1995 Councilmember Oaks was opposed to any tax increase until all avenues were exhausted, i.e., city expenses, staff reductions, marginal services and salaries, if appropriate. Needed a review of current financial standing before asking citizens to approve a tax increase, and a public safety tax seemed out of the question. Councilmember Williams felt that no matter what service level for police, there was a need, and to trim in various places to reach the goal, but the reality was the need for a revenue stream. Did not support a utility tax because of the inability to tie it to a specific use. Was not opposed to a tax designated for public safety, citing the situation and cost currently of the CFD. Supported a flat rate spread across the entire community to have officers in the field and a service level, which at best, was minimal. Identified the existing staffing situations, which were unacceptable levels. Did not agree with the subcommittee recommendations. Suggested a public safety committee be formed of impacted residents, business owners and vacant land owners, about 10-12, to get into the numbers themselves and see the needs and have input. If the committee was satisfied with the level of service he would be surprised, but if they say a need could support a special tax for public safety and then try for another ballot. In response to Council, Deputy City Clerk Lee advised the next ballot would be March, 1996. Councilmember Leahy thought a postponement was inevitable. The biggest problem was the most equitable way to do the tax. Thought the committee was a great idea, which would give more time to formulate plans. A vote of the people was important and something was needed before November in order for the City to plan. She did not have a complete grasp of what was going on financially. Agree to have a plan for the March ballot because it could not be ready for November. Councilmember Oaks agreed with Mr. Williams on a citizens committee to look and give data for a solution to implement as soon as possible. John Ishkanian felt he had a lot to say but would limit it in light of the hour. Felt the agenda item should have been at the beginning of the agenda when more people were present. Concerned that annexations were done and now those individuals would be asked to pay more taxes. Felt there must be some other method of cutting expenditures to help the situation. 17 June 20, 1995 Jim Smedley congratulated Council for a very good discussion, which was on the right track. Had to realize that San Jacinto, as throughout the County, all single family homes dropped in value 20-30% and more were asking for reassessments. It was bad timing for a tax increase, and to saddle people with homes worth less than they owe, and then have the additional tax. Tax increases were never popular, but some were successful if done right, by showing the people the cuts to the bare bones and the need for public safety. In recent years, bureaucracy had been bloated by high salaries and important staff positions, added when the recession was the worst since the depression. Proposition 13 was a message to elected officials that the community did not want to allow more than 2% growth in agencies. People were told the CFD would solve the safety and fire issues, and it did not. In a recent Chamber meeting the elimination of CFD #3 was discussed, in the event of a tax increase, and it was wondered what happened to CFD #2? The city needed to get all the pieces in order or to go to the polls in November. If not it would cause a revolt. Wise to take the lead from those who had done it successfully. City Attorney Cox clarified for Council that the two CFD's were not the same. Mayor Solorio noted Council was trying to address the best way to meet the needs of the community, and presently it was not equitable nor shared equally by the residents. Needed to create a new district which encompassed the entire community. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Williams, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to direct staff to come back with a committee plan to specifically address public safety financing, with the recommended size of the committee, the duration and their goals, within 30 days. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Councilmember Leahy requested the issue of once a week trash pick up be addressed in the next month or so. She had been attending City Museum meetings and anticipated clarification of the city rules. The Child Care Playhouse auction was a success. Would discuss problems related to the alley behind First Street, with staff. Noted the nightclub on Main Street had been through licensing changes 3-4 times and she would be personally sending a letter to the ABC to request denial. The apartment complex had lost tenants because of the activity and thought it a shame the City would allow the activity to be perpetuated, and asked the rest of Council to join her. 18 June 20, 1995 At the hour of 11:20 P.M. Council recessed. At the hour of P.M. Council reconvened with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, to conduct business pursuant to the following: 9.0 CLOSED SESSION 9.1 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Maclin Markets vs. City of San Jacinto) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 9.2 Conference with Labor Negotiator Regarding San Jacinto Police Officers' Association, San Jacinto Firefighters' Association and Public Employees of Riverside County (PERC)Lpursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 9.3 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Genesis Construction vs. City of San Jacinto) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 9.4 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Keslar et al., vs. City of San Jacinto) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 9.5 Conference with Real Property Negotiator - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: 269 & 271 Brown St. Negotiating Parties: Sharon Chambers and City of San Jacinto Under Negotiation: Price and terms. 9.6 Public Employee Discipline/Release, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 At the hour of P.M. Council reconvened in open session, with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, and announced no reportable action being taken. 19 June 20, 1995 10.0 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned. The hour of adjournment being P.M. Submitted by Bob Wilson, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk Approved David Solorio, Mayor 20 A6Z1DA 5 STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and City Council FROM Lary L. Weaver, Interim -Finance Director Via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager SUBJECT: Approval of Register of Audited Demands and Payroll Checks DATE: July 18 , 1995 RECOMMENDATION Approve warrant numbers 40829 through 40942 dated July 15, 1995 in the amount of $384,569.21 and Payroll check numbers 5488 through 5579 dated June 23, 1995. SUMMARY A listing of accounts payable warrants is attached for your review and approval. Payroll information is available for your review in the Finance Department. :EF'ARED 0'7/11/ 95. 8:35:06 :OGRAMt GM313ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Tr *E LIST )ROUF' NUMBER - 00398 F'REF'AIDS ACCOUNTING PERIOD. 12/1995 iROUP USER ANNE 'RANSO TRANS BATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER JESCF.IFCION 7 DESCRIPTION 2 100 06/30/1995 005948 STAFF ASSISTANCE 200 06/30/1995 005949 .EPLACE CK0 40699 300 06/30/1995 005950 'ERS RETIREMENT 400 06/30/1995 005951 =TREFIGHTER ASSOCIATION 500 06/30/1995 005952 "'OL.ICE OFFICERS' 00 010-1.1.10-411.34-05 DEPUTY CITY CLERK 00 065-0000-201.08--64 PAINT K-9 UNIT 00 085-0000-202.21-28 CONTRIBUTIONS 00 085-0000-202.21-45 DUES City of San ...4A.z.into PAGE 1 REPORT NUMBr 33 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK: CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 00 085-0000-202.21-42 ASSOCIATION DUES 600 06/30/1995 005953 _IFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 700 06/30/1995 005954 PERC ASSOCIATION DUES 800 06/30/1995 005955 POSTAGE —WATER QUALITY 900 06/30/1995 005956 UNITED WAY CONTRIBUTIONS 1000 06/30/1995 005957 REPLENISH PETTY CASH FUND 1100 06/30/1995 005958 REPLENISH PETTY CASH FUND 1200 06/30/1995 005959 REPLENISH PETTY CASH FUND • 1300 06/30/1995 005960 REPLENISH PETTY CASH FUND 1400 06/30/1995 005961 REPLENISH PETTY CASH FUND 1500 06/30/1995 005962 REPLENISH PETTY CASH FUNB 00 085-0000-202.21-85 00 085-0000-202.21-43 00 050-9000-450.21-10 BROCHURES 00 085-0000-202.21-00 00 010-1100-411.21—:L0 00 010-1200-412.31-20 00 010-1210-412.21-10 00 010-2500-425.21-10 00 010-3210-431.21-35 00 010-7400-425.33-10 AMOUNT 0000686 F'AMELA LEE 00/00/0000 0040839 07/05/7.995 STMT N 0001908 RIV. CO. OFFICE ON EDUCAC REG 00/00/0000 0040838 07/05/1995 N 0000830 PERS 00/00/0000 0040830 06/26/1995 0000495 S.J. FIREFIGHTERS ASSOC. 00/00/0000 0040831 06/28/1995 REO N RED N 0000912 S.J. POLICE ASSOCIATION REG 00/00/0000 0040832 06/23/1995 N 0000987 MASS. GENERAL LIFE INS. C REO 00/00/0000 0040833 06/20/1995 N 0000828 PUBLIC EMP. ASSOC. 00/00/0000 0040834 06/28/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040835 06/28/1995 0000377 UNITED WAY OF HEMET 00/00/0000 0040936 06/28/1995 STMT N REG' N REG N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REG 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REO 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REG 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REP 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REG 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REG 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 N 1.263.99 300.00 7,299.37 135.00 1,683.40 191400 127.60 600.00 129416 1. 55 :1.2.00 3.95 53.76 6.47 :1.2.90 'OGRAM: GM3131J .ROLIF' NUMBER : 00398 FREF'AIDS ACCUUNTINO PERIODS 12/1995 IROUF'_USER ANNE 'FANS: TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER IESCRIFTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 `1600 06/30/1995 005963 00 019-3100-431.30-90 :EPLENISH FETTY CASH FUND 1700 06/30/1995 005964 00 021-4150-410.33--30 :EPLENISH FETTY CASH FUNII 1800 06/30/1995 005965 00 025-7100--410.21.-10 :EPLENISH PETTY CASH FI.INI: 1900 06/30/1995 005966 00 050-9000-450.21-10 :EPLENISH PETTY CASH FUND 2000 06/30/1995 006077 00 010-1400-414.34-05 :NTER:CM-FINANCE DIRECTOR COUNT: AMOUNT: GROUP TOTALS 20 15,205.62 00/00/0000 0040843 07/07/1995 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE BATE CHECK CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 00/00/0000 0040837 06/29/1995 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REO N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REQ N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REP N 0001034 CITY OF SAN JACINTO PETTY REO N 0001831 L.ARRY WEAVER REO N AMOUNT 13.90 16.92 16.67 2.16 3.331..88 ROORAM: 8M313jJ_.. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UF.'II TE LIST REPORT NUMBER_ 33 GROUP NUMBER 00400 ACCOUNTS PAYABLES ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/1995 GROUP USER ANNE TRANS4 TRANS LATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 L'DESCRIPTION 2 100 06/30/1995 CHI._ORINE.. CYLINDERS 200 06/30/1995 CHLORINE CYLINDERS 300 06/30/1995 AUTO PARTS 400 06/30/1995 BEACON LIGHTS 500 06/30/1995 COMPUTER PAPER 005967 00 050-9000--450.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT 005968 00 050-9000-450.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT 005969 00 019-4150-41.0.33-50 005970 00 024-4150-410.33-30 COTTONWOOD a. STATE 005971 00 010-1400-414.21-10 600 06/30/1995 005972 COMPUTER PAPER 700 06/30/1995 005973 ANNUAL WATER QUALITY 800 06/30/1995 005974 OFFICE FURNITURE 900 06/30/1995 CHLORINE CYLINDERS 00 010-1400-414.21-10 00 050-9000-450.21-10 REPORT 00 062-3100-431.33-10 POLICE DEPARTMENT 006078 00 050-9000-450.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT COON I' z AMOUNT: GROIJF' TOTALS 9 10.671.1.8 F'RO,J P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER LUE LATE CHECK CHECK LATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000924 ALL PURE CHEMICAL. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000924 ALL PURE CHEMICAL 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000597 QUALITY AUTO PARTS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001740 HI -WAY SAFETY 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000420 STAPLES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000420 STAPLES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000958 SAWMILL GRAPHICS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000405 SYSTEMS SOURCE INC. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000924 ALL PURE CHEMICAL. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 AMOUNT 1.49850 N 149B49 N STMT N 69739 N F193227001 N F200140001 N 8771 N 34121 N 4,476.49 627.37 132.38 1,000.00 4 .44 226.22 536.60 1,992.31 151132 1.227.37 N ROORAMI GM313U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE L.IST REPORT NUMBER 33 GROUP NUMBER 00402 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIODS 12/1995 GROUP USER ---- ANNE-_--- - ---- TRANS@ TRANS DATE VOUCHER }K ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 100 06/30/1995 005977 TV DINNERS -PRISONERS 200 06/30/1995 005978 TEMPORARY/RECEPTIONIST 300 06/30/1995 005979 TEMPORARY/RECI_'P EIONIST 400 06/30/1995 005980 BACTERIAL ANALYSIS 500 06/30/1995 (>05981 PARK/LLMD ADMINISTRATION 600 06/30/1995 005982 H & S ANALYSIS 700 06/30/1995 005983 TOWING OF UNIT 0109 900 06/30/1995 (>05984 TOWING OF UNIT 4105 900 06/30/1995 005985 CITY ATTORNEY 1000 06/30/1995 005986 CITY ATTORNEY 1100 06/30/1995 005987 CITY ATTORNEY 1200 06/30/1995 005988 CITY ATTORNEY 1300 06/30/1995 005989 CITY ATTORNEY 1400 06/30/1995 005990 BLUEPRINTING SERVICE: 1500 06/30/1995 005991 BLUEPRINTING SERVICE':: 00 010-3100-431.21-11 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 066-8051-450.34-05 CASHIER 00 050-9000-450.34-05 CASHIER 00 050-9000-450.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 025-7256-410.30-90 00 010-3100-431.30-90 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-3100-431.34-11 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 019-3100-431.21-72 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 020-2200-419.30-90 LEGAL SERVICES 00 025-7260-410.30-90 LEGAL SERVICES 00 081-9100-450.30-90 LEGAL SERVICES 00 010-1111-411.30-90 LEGAL SERVICES 00 096-9700-470.30•-90 LEGAL SERVICES 00 041-41.55-41.0.40-01 00 081-9100-450.30-90 PROD P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE BATE CHECK* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000996 ALPHA BETA 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 42198 N 0001878 APPLE -ONE EMPLOYMENT SERV 1816410 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001070 APPLE -ONE EMPLOYMENT SERV 1.81641.0 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000949 E.S. BABCOCK & SONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 7336 0000925 TODD BAGLEY LANDSCAPE 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 22484 N 95-6-03 Y 0001182 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 977034 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000210 CASTELLANO'S TOWING SERV. 21613 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000218 CASTELLANO'S TOWING SERV. 21124 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000251 COX & COX 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000251 COX & COX 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000251 COX & COX 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000251 COX & COX 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000251. COX & COX 07/15/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N 0000275 DE BROS BLUEPRINTING SERV 20179 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000275 DE BROS BLLIEF'RINTING SERV 20181 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N AMOUNT 44.90 285.56 285.56 50.00 2.167.00 90.00 85.00 35.00 3,270.00 60.00 20.00 3.022.93 20.00 5.17 62.23 ROGRAM: GM31.3IJ..,,. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE URDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER GROUP NIJMBER - 00402 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/1995 I3ROUF USER ANNE TRANS* TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 1600 06/30/1995 005992 00 010-1700-417.21-1.0 BLUEPRINTING SERVICES 1700 06/30/1995 005993 00 062-3200-431.40-45 ELECTRICAL WORK TO WATER HEATER -FIRE. DEPARTMENT 1000 06/30/1995 005994 (>0 010-3200-431.33-30 MEDICAL EOIJIPMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT 1900 06/30/1995 005995 00 021-4150-410.30-90 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 2000 06/30/1995 005996 00 041-4155-410.40-01 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 2100 06/30/1995 005997 00 050-9000-450.30-90 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 2200 06/30/1995 PUBLIC WORKS 2300 06/30/1995 PUBLIC WORKS 2400 06/30/1995 F'IJBLIC WORKS 2500 06/30/1995 PUBLIC WORKS 2600 06/30/1995 PUBLIC WORKS 2700 06/30/1995 PUBLIC WORKS 2000 06/30/1995 PUBLIC WORKS 2900 06/30/1995 FEDERAL_ EXPRESS 3000 06/30/1995 PHONE SERVICES 005995 00 001-9100-450.30--90 ADMINISTRATION 005999 00 046-8000-450.30-90 ADMINISTRATION 006000 00 025-7256-410.30--90 AI}MINISTRATION 006001 00 055-4170-450.30-90 ADMINISTRATION 006002 00 025-7260-410.30-90 ADMINISTRATION 006003 00 029-8661-440.34-05 ADMINISTRATION 006004 00 010-4100--410.30-90 ADMINISTRATION 006005 00 021-4150-410.30-90 MAILING 006006 00 010-2500-425.35-16 PROJ F.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000275 DE BROS BLUEPRINTING SERV 20169 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001929 DOVEYS ELECTRICAL SERVICE 4231 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000304 DYNA MED INC. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS h ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS-it-ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000477 EVANS & ASSOCIATES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000404 FEDERAL EXPRESS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 13101.20 N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N AMOUNT 5-523-10904 N STMT N 1.'7.46 45.00 69.61. 675.00 300.00 975.00 225.00 562.50 225.00 525.00 600.00 150.00 975.00 13.00 30.24 'KUUKHMG UMJ.LGU MULUl.1Nlb t'H THJ7Lt. UYUA1G LJ.b1 REF'URI NUMBER GROUP NUMBER 00402 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING F'ERIOLIL 12/1995 GROUP USER ANNE TRANS* TRANS HATE VOUCHER LIK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 3100 06/30/1995 006007 PHONE SERVICES .3200 06/30/1995 006000 CONSULTING SERVICES 3300 06/30/1995 006009 CONSULTING SERVICES 3400 06/30/1995 006010 CONSULTING SERVICES 3500 06/30/1995 006011 CONSULTING SERVICES 3600 06/30/1995 006012 CONSULTING SERVICES 3700 06/30/1995 006013 CONSULTING SERVICES 3800 06/30/1995 006014 CONSULTING SERVICES 3900 06/30/1995 006015 CITY TO CITY RECYCLING 4000 06/30/1995 006016 PIPE & SIJF'PLIES 4100 06/30/1995 006017 REPAIR GUNLOCK 4200 06/30/1995 006018 WATER -POLICE DEPARTMENT 4300 06/30/1995 00601.9 FILM PROCESSING 4400 06/30/1995 006020 FILM PROCESSING 4500 06/30/1995 006021 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00 010-3100-431.34--06 00 042-8501-450.30-90 A.D. 87-1 00 043-8501-450.30-90 A.D. 94-1 00 044-8700-450.30-90 C.F.D. 41 00 046•-0800-450.30-90 C.F.D. *2 00 037-3100-431.30-90 C.F.D. #3 00 042-8501-450.30-90 A.D. 87-1 U0 043-SSO1-450.30-9U A.D. 94-i 00 066-0051-450.34-06 PROGRAM 00 055-4170-450.33-30 SEWER DEPARTMENT 00 010-3100-431.34-50 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-2500-425.21-10 00 010-3100-431.21-85 I''OI_ICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-3200-431.21-10 FIRE DEPARTMENT 00 010-1200-41.2.21-1.0 PRIJJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE_. CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 25-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE_ GROUP 25-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 24-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 24-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 24-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE_ GROUT' 26-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 26-IN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000 553 CITY OF HEMET REO 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000502 HEMET VALLEY PIFE & SUFPL. 28226 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000589 HI STANDARD AUTOMOTIVE.. 2672 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001590 HORIZON WATER STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000595 HOT SHOTS 1 HOUR PHOTO STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000595 HOT SHOTS 1 HOUR PHOTO STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000600 HUBBS STATIONERY STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N AMOUNT 1.70. 7:L 106.83 L06. 04 209.00 681..03 478.17 186.83 186.84 20,575.40 80.32 132.06 105.00 135.77 69.54 65.96 ROORAM: OM313IJ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NIJMDER 33 HROUFNUMBER 00402 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNT/NU PERIO_D:12/1995 OROUF• USER ANNE TRANS4 TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 4600 06/30/1995 006022 00 01.0-1110-41:L.21-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4700 06/30/1995 006023 00 010-1400-414.21-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 41300 06/30/1995 006024 00 010-2500-425.21-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 4900 06/30/1995006025 00 050-9000-450.21-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES 5000 06/30/1995 006026 00 01.0-2500-425.34-05 AS400 SUPPORT LINE 5100 06/30/1995 006027 00 055-4170-450.33-30 AS400 SI.IF•F•ORT LINE 5200 06/30/199U 006028 00 050-9000-450.33-30 AS400 SUPPORT LINE F'ROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE_ CHECK.* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 5300 06/30/1995 0060'29 00 016-3100-431.21-10 BOO T'AOS & HOOKS FOR LICENSES -POLICE DEPT. 5400 06/30/1995 006030 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENT 5500 06/30/1995 006031 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENI 5600 06/30/1.995 006032 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENT 5700 06/30/1995 006033 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENT 5800 06/30/1995 006034 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENI 5900 06/30/1995 006035 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENT 6000 06/30/1995 006036 00 010-3210-431.30-96 WEED ABATEMENT 0000600 HUBBS STATIONERY STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000600 HUBBS STATIONERY STMT 07/1.5/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000600 HUBBS STATIONERY STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000600 HUBBS STATIONERY STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N AMOUNT 0000605 I.B.M. CORP. 6586982 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000605 I.B.M. CORP. 6586982 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000605 I.B.M. CORP. 65W6982 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001930 THE J.F. COOKE COMPANY 462416 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ. DBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ. DBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. DUCHWITZ, DBA STMT 07/1.5/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ, DBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ. SBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ, DBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000646 KARL E. BUCI-IWITZ. DBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 77.58 35.56 47.78 83.36 92.40 33.60 42.00 14'2.57 225.00 168.75 202.75 358.50 1.45.25 990.00 505.00 ROGRAM: I3M313IJ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER 33 3ROUP NUMBER ACCOUNTING PERIODS 3ROUP USER ANNE 00402 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE_ 1.2/1995 FRANSC TRANS DATE VOUCHER Bk ACCOUNT NUMBER CDESCRIPT'ION 1 1:DESCRIPTION 2 6100 06/30/1995 JEER ABATEMENT 006037 00 010-3210-431..30-.96 6200 06/30/1995 006038 00 010-1110-411.31-20 4IL..EAOE REIMBURSEMENT 6300 06/30/1995 7.ITATIONS 006039 00 010--3100-431.34--05 POLICE DEPARTMENT 5400 06/30/1995 006040 00 021-4150-410.30-90 REMOVE TREE G 312 E. MAIN 6500 06/30/1995 006041 =IRE EQUIPMENT 6600 06/30/1995 006042 SERVICE CALL -IRRIGATION 6700 06/30/1995 006043 REPAIR TENNIS COURT 6800 06/30/1995 006044 TRASH CANS 6900 06/30/1995 006045 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 7000 06/30/1995 006046 UTILITIES 7100 06/30/1995 006047 UTILITIES 7200 07/07/1995 006048 UTILITIES 7300 07/07/1995 006049 UTILITIES 7400 07/07/1995 006050 UTILITIES Y500 07/07/1995 006051 UTILITIES 00 010-3200-431.. 2 1--35 00 025-7258-410.34-05 CONTROL. 00 025-7100-410.34-05 LIGHTS -RANCHO S.J. 00 025-7100-410.33-30 MISTLETOE PARK 00 010-2500-425.31.-2(> 00 025-7254-410.35-14 00 025-7260-410.35-14 00 025-7260-410.35-14 00 025-7260-410.35-14 ----- -- - 00 010-2500-425.35-14 00 010-3100-431.35-14 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 F-'ROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK. CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ, DBA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N . 0001091 LAURIE MORA STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001517 PHOENIX GROUP 8964-00 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000837 QUASI TREE SERVICE STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001931 RICHARDSON FIRE E(IUIPMENT 5227 07/15/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000907 SAN JACINTO ELEttRit7 13430 N 0000907 SAN JACINTCI ELECTRIC 1.3429 N 0000822 SHARP BUILDING SUPPLY 506857 N 0000824 JOLENE SHAW REO N 0000447 80. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0000447 SCI. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N AMOUNT 11.0.50 19.80 89,10 850.00 168.36 45.00 131.05 105.51 20.40 22.08 5.384.86 1.080.49 226.L7 1,004.37 583.92 ROMAN: GM313.I. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NLIME}EP- 33 1 ROtJP NUMBER 00402 ACCGUNTG FAYABL_E: ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/1995 GROUT' USER ANNE TRANS4 TRANS DATE VOUCHER NI{ ACCOUNT NUMBER IIESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 7600 07/07/1995 006052 00 010-3200-431.35-14 UTILITIES 7700 07/07/1995 006053 00 010-4150-410.35-14 UTILITIES 7800 07/07/1995 006054 00 010-6100-425.35-14 UTILITIES 7900 07/07/1995 006055 00 010-7400-425.35-14 UTIL.ITIES 8000 07/07/1995 006056 00 025-7100-410.35-14 1111L.ITIES 8100 07/07/1995 006057 00 025-7250-410.35-14 I.ITIL.ITIES 8200 07/07/1995 006058 00 025-7254-410.35-1.4 UTILITIES 8300 07/07/1995 UTILITIES 8400 07/07/1995 I.ITILITIES 8500 07/07/1995 PROPERTY DATA DISC 8600 07/07/1995 PROPERTY DATA DISC 8700 07/07/1995 FAX NOTIFICATIONS 006059 00 025-7256-410.35-14 006060 00 025-7260-410.35-14 006061 00 010-3210-431.30-90 006062 00 010-3210-431.30-90 00606'3 00 050-9000-450.30-90 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK CHECK DATE 'TYPE LAST TRANS AMOUNT 000044'7 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 S0. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/1.5/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EIDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 000044'7 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001294 TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA 1611713 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001294 TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA 1609690 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000373 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 95060565 WATER DEPARTMENT-JUNE 95 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 8800 07/07/1995 006064 00 010-8400-425.34-'05 SALLEE POOL OPERATIONS 8900 07/07/1995 006065 00 010-3100-431.11-10 COLLEGE COURSE REIMB. 9000 07/07/1995 006066 00 050-9000-450.21-'35 I-IAND HELD RADIOS FIJBLIC WORKS At WATER 0000340 VALLEY WIDE RECREATION STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000998 BRYAN VIG 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001059 WEBB COMMUNICATIONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 REG N 1169 N 1.150.90 38'7.82 61.97 697.24 1,040.12 52.80 32.45 717.66 1.602411 100.00 20.00 45.00 4.833.:3:3 123.84 774.00 h013RAM: GM31.3U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE: L.IST REPORT NUMBER 33 GROUP NUMBER : 00402 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE aCCOUNTIN O PERIOD: 12/1995 3ROUF' USER ANNE TRANS: TRANS BATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER L'DESCRIPTION 1 (.DESCRIPTION 2 9100 07/07/1995 006067 SAND HELD RADIOS 9200 07/07/1995 006060 -(AND HELD RADIOS 9300 07/07/1995 006069 -BAND HELD RADIOS 9400 07/07/1995 006070 -1AND HELD RADIOS 9500 07/07/1995 006071 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT 9600 07/07/1995 006072 COPIER (-.EASE AGREEMENT 9700 07/07/1995 006073 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT 9800 07/07/1995 006074 UTILITIES 9900 07/07/1995 006075 UTILITIES 00 055-4170-450.21-35 PUBLIC WORKS & WATER 00 025-7100--410.21-35 PUBLIC WORK & WATER 00 021-4150-410.33-30 PUBLIC WORKS & WATER 00 010-4150-410.21-35 PUBLIC WORKS & WATER 00 010-3100-431.34-05 00 010-7400•-425.34-05 00 010-4150-410.34-05 00 050-9000-450.35-14 00 025-7265-410.35-14 10000 07/07/1995 006076 00 055-4170-450.35--14 UTILITIES COUNT: AMOUNT: GROUP TOTALS 100 83.990.01 PROD F.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0001059 WEBB COMMUNICATIONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001059 WEBB COMMUNICATIONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001059 WEBB COMMUNICATIONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001059 WEBB COMMUNICATIONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000307 XEROX CORPORATION 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000307 XEROX CORPORATION 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000307 XEROX CORPORATION 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 1169 N 1169 N 1169 N 1169 N 47156309 N 47156321 N 47156322 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SD. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N AMOUNT 431.99 431.99 431.99 431.99 25(.11 77.50 77.50 18.737.96 16.98 33.79 11 -1\U{.'lll Hl-1 . 1.l.l.3.L .J1.1 HLLULINI`1 YHLHYII_.t UML1FIIt L1t11 KLF•'UR I NUMIILI-< 33 GROUP NLIMEIEI 1 00403 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIODS 12/1995 GROUP USER ANNE TRANSO TRANS DATE VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 IIESCRIPTION 2 1.00 06/30/1995 006079 CITY VEHICLE WASHES 200 06/30/1995 006080 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 300 06/30/1995 006081 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH A00 06/30/1995 006002 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 500 06/30/1995 006083 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 600 06/30/1995 006004 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 700 06/30/1995 006005 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 800 06/30/1995 006086 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 900 06/30/1995 006087 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1000 06/30/1995 006008 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1100 06/30/1995 006089 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1200 06/30/1995 006090 REIMBURSE WATER/'TRASH 1300 06/30/1995 006091 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1400 06/30/1995 006092 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1500 06/30/1995 006093 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 00 019-3100-431.33-50 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.00--67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.00-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.00-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000--229.00-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-000E-229.08-67 LDEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08--67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.08-67 ❑EPOSIT PRO.J P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 00002:1.6 CAR WASH DEPOT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001934 MARTA QUEJALIA 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001935 H.R. GLEASON 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001936 HARRY H. ZARBOCK 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001937 JACKIE L. CRANE 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001938 WENDAL DEGARMO 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001939 ANITA THIEMROLIT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001940 NELSON BRUEDERLE 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001941 LLICIO FELIX 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001942 LOIS DRYER 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001943 NANCY LUDO 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001944 ERIC BROWN 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001.945 BLANCA VELASQLIEZ 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001946 CHRISTOPHER C. DEES 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001594 BLORIA CHACON 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 29 N REQ N REQ N REQ N REQ N REQ N REG N REQ N REG N REQ N REQ N REQ N REQ N REQ N REG N AMOUNT 49.00 5.50 15.56 19.11 3.03 20.22 1.:15 7.29 15.71. 8.50 3.20 13.26 19.4:L 13.19 9.05 .I muul\Hn. unaao�I GROUP NLJMBER 00403 ACCOUNTS PAYAIILE ACCOUNTING PERIOLI: 12/1995 13ROUF' USER ANNE. TRANS* TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 1600 06/30/1995 006094 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1700 06/30/1995 006095 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 1800 06/30/1995 006096 DRAIN POOL--409 ROSARIO 1900 06/30/1995 006097 UNIFORM REPLACEMENT 2000 06/30/1995 006098 VEST/RESERVE OFFICER 00 065-0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT 00 065-0000-229.00-67 DEPOSIT 00 010--0000-308.06-94 PRO..J F.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 00 010-•3100-431.21-35 WATERS/POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-3100-431.21-35 HORKEL/POI..I CE DEPARTMENT 2100 06/30/1995 006099 00 010-2500-425.33-10 FLOOR MATS 2200 06/30/1995 006100 FLOOR MATS 00 010-3200-431.33-10 2300 06/30/1095 006101 66 010-7400-425.33-10 FLOOR MATS 2400 06/30/1995 FLOOR MATS 2500 06/30/1995 FLOOR MATS 2600 06/30/1995 UNIFORM CLEANING 2700 06/30/1995 UNIFORM CLEANING 2800 06/30/1995 UNIFORM CLEANING 2900 06/30/1995 UNIFORM CLEANING 3000 06/30/1995 UNIFORM CLEANING 006102 006103 006104 006105 00 010-3100-431.33-10 00 010-1700-417.33-10 00 010-4150-410.21-35 00 019-4550-410.21-35 0061.06 00 010-4100-410.21-35 006107 00 055-4170-450.21-35 006108 00 010-4/50-410.21-35 0001947 I-IE:RTBERTO V. YBANEZ RF-O 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001948 RAYMOND MC CORKLE REO 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 000:1.075 IIOUGLAS POOL SERVILE RE0 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N AMOUNT 0000618 LONG BEACH UNIFORM CO. 157096 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000618 LONG BEACH UNIFORM CO. 160:1.1B 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/000(> N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 22.21. 32.28 50.00 15.43 465.43 36.92 55.41 21.10 47.48 J.2.34 75.40 152.66 3:3•50 33.40 125.61 'K1 ,KAM: LiM4.1.4U HL.L.L.RJNIb YHTMtjL-t. Ur'UMI t. Llb1 KGr'UK 1 NUMt'tK a,5 GROUP NUMBEF ACCOUNT114U F'ERIUIIS GROUP USER ANNE. 00403 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 12/1995 TRANS TRANS HATE VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 3100 06/30/1995 UNIFORM CLEANING 3200 06/30/1995 IJNIFORM CLEANING 3300 I.INIFCIRM :3400 SERVICE 06/30/1995 CLEANING 06/30/1995 MOTORCYCLE 3500 06/30/1995 BOOKING FEES/AFRIL 3600 06/30/1995 006109 00 050-9000--450.21-35 006110 00 010-3300-431.21-35 006111 00 010-3210-431..21--35 006112 00 010-3100-431.33-50 POLICE DEPARTMENT 006113 00 010-3100-431.30-19 & MAY POLICE IIEPARTMENT 006114 00 019-3100-431.33-50 REPAIRS TO POLICE VEHICLE 3700 06/30/1995 BLOOD DRAWS 3800 06/30/1995 TIRE & REPAIRS :3900 06/30/1995 TIRE & REPAIRS: 4000 06/30/1995 TIRE & REPAIRS 4100 06/30/1995 TIRE & REPAIRS 4200 06/30/1995 PHONE SERVICES 4300 06/30/1995 PHONE SERVICES 4400 06/30/1995 PHONE SERVICES 006115 00 010-3100-431.30-90 POL.ICE IEPARTMENT 006116 00 019-3100-431.33-50 006117 00 019--4150-410.33-50 006118 00 010-3210-431.34-50 006119 00 019-3200-431.33-50 006120 00 010.2500.425.35-16 006121 00 01 0-3100-431. 35- 16 006122 00 010-3200-431.35-16 4500 06/30/1995 0061.23 00 010-41.50-410.35-16 PHONE SERVICES PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENIIOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE HATE CHECN4 CHECK DATE TYPE I...AST TRANS 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000732 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICES STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001475 PALM SPRINGS HARLEY DAVILI 4003 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001022 RIVERSIDE CO. SFIERIFFS 10712.:L0734 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001933 TURNER TRANSMISSIONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000317 WESTERN NURSE.. SPEC. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000483 EVANS TIRE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000483 EVANS TIRE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000483 EVANS TIRE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000483 EVANS TIRE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N STMT N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL. TELEPHONE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N STMT N STMT N STMT N AMOUNT 163.25 33.50 33.50 786.70 3,091..20 1.284.74 150.00 2,885.79 1,823.FJ2 581.74 22.50 425.62 627.:I.7 160.89 44.95 ROGRAMI GM313U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REF'URT NUMBER 33 GROUP NUMBER 1 00403 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD! 12/1995 GROUP USER ANNE TRANS. TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 4600 06/30/1995 006124 PHONE SERVICES 4700 06/30/1995 006125 PHONE SERVICES 4800 06/30/1995 006126 PHONE SERVICES 4900 06/30/1995 006127 PHONE SERVICES 5000 06/30/199 PHONE SERVICES 5100 06/30/1995 PHONE SERVICES 5200 06/30/1995 PLUMBING 6 HARDWARE 5300 06/30/1995 PLUMBING & HARDWARE 5400 06/30/1995 PLUMBING 6 HARDWARE 5500 06/30/1905 UTILITIES 00 010-7400-425.35-16 00 010-2500-425.35-16 00 010-3100-431.35-16 00 010-4150-410.35-16 006128 00 050-9000-450.35-16 006129 00 055-4170-450.35-16 006130 00 024-4150-410.33-30 SUPPLIES 006131 00 024-4150-410.33-30 SUPPLIES 006132 00 050-9000-450.33-30 SUF'F'LIES 006133 00 5600 06/30/1995 006134 00 TRW PROPERTY DATA CHECK 5700 06/30/1995 006135 00 TRW PROPERTY DATA CHECK 025-7260-410.35-14 010- 3210-431.. 30--90 010-3210-431.30-90 5800 06/30/1995 006136 00 010-2500-425.36-25 PIJBLLICATION-CALIFORNIA COZIES COUNT' AMOUNT: GROUP 'TOTALS 58 15.547.72 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 F'ROJ P.D. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000526 GENERAL TF.:LEF'HONE CO. STMT N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE. CO. STMT N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT N 0000807 LARRY PIERCE PLUMBING 24289 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000807 LARRY FIERCE PLUMBING 24272 N 0000007 LARRY PIERCE PLUMBING 24276 N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0001294 TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA 1619071 N 0001294 TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA 1621170 N 0000324 WEST P-'UBLISHING CO. 79077631 N AMOUNT 110.62 397.09 629.20 156.73 128.82 46.62 27.25 75.89 413.93 121..42 20.00 100.00 47.35 KGMira::.11 1,. rY 11/ 1YV.J. 1:1.au. V r ROGRAMt 111T V1 11 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 1"' TE , LIST REPORT NUMB """" 1 i.iROI.JP NUMBER ACCOUNTING PERIODS GROUP USER ANNE 00001 F'REF'AIL'IS 01/1996 TRANS. TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 100 07/06/1995 000002 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 200 07/06/1995 000003 t'IET PAYROLL 300 07/06/1995 000004 CREDIT UNION DEDUCTIONS 400 07/07/1995 000008 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 500 07/10/1995 000036 COBRA/DENIAL-MAX FERRY 600 07/10/1995 000037 DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUM 700 07/10/1995 000038 DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUM 800 07/10/1995 000039 COBRA INSURANCE 900 07/10/1995 000040 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 1000 07/10/1995 000041 VISION PREMIUM 1100 07/10/1995 000042 COBRA INSURANCE 1200 07/10/1995 000043 HEALTH INSURANCE 1300 07/10/1995 000044 DEFERRER COMP 1400 07/10/1995 000045 DEFERRED COMP 1500 07/10/1995 000046 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 00 085-0000-202.21-39 JULY 1995 00 085-0000-202.21-30 JULY 1995 00 085-0000-202.21-41 JULY 1995 00 010-1400-414.34-05 00 065-0000-201.08-64 00 085-0000-202.21-31 JULY 1995 00 085-0000-202.21-32 JULY 1995 00 065-0000-201.08-64 MAX PERRY 00 085-0000-202.21-39 Jt11..Y 1995 00 085-0000-202.21-35 JULY 1995 00 065-0000-201.00--64 I:IAVE WARREN 00 005-0000-202.21-39 JULY 1995 00 085-0000-202.21-29 CONTRIBUTIONS 00 085-0000-202.21-29 CONTRIBUTIONS 00 085-0000-202.21-27 JULY 1995 00/00/0000 0040850 07/07/1995 00/00/0000 0040849 07/07/1995 00/00/0000 0040848 07/07/1995 00/00/0000 0040846 07/01/1995 0000149 HEALTH NET 00/00/0000 0040847 07/01/1995 0000149 HEALTH NET 00/00/0000 0040847 07/01/1995 00/00/0000 0040845 07/01/1995 00/00/0000 0040845 07/01/1995 00/00/0000 0040844 07/01/1995 00/00/0000 0040844 07/10/1995 00/00/0000 0040844 07/01/1995 00/00/0000 0040842 07/07/1995 00/00/0000 0040841 07/06/1995 00/00/0000 0040840 07/06/1995 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK* CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS AMOUNT 0000988 BLI.IE CROSS OF CA. STMT 00/00/0000 0040829 07/01/1995 0000235 CITY OF SAN JACINTO REO N 0000069 RIVERSIDE CO. EMF'I...OYEES STMT N 0001068 RAY BOUZA REO N 0000279 DENTI CARE OF CALIFORNIA STMT N 0000279 DENTI CARE OF CALIFORNIA STMT N 0000279 DENTI CARE OF CALIFORNIA STMT N 0000969 AETNA HEALTH PLANS OF STMT N 0000969 AETNA HEALTH PLANS OF STMT N 0000472 EYE CARE OF AMERICA STMT N STMT N STMT N 0000691 LINCOLN NATIONAL STMT N 0000607 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST STMT N 0000995 AFLAC STMT N 3.645.00 94.122.:L8 4,266.27 721.08 16.9"2 539.82 1,522.84 179.60 2.280.85 566.03 291.60 17. '704.26 1.260.46 1,176.84 1.013.12 ROORAM1 UM31:3FJ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER 1 GROUP NUMBER 00001 PREF'AIDS ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 01/1996 GROUP USER ANNE. TRANS* TRANS DATE VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMBER PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER AMOUNT DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIF'TIDN 2 GROUP TOTALS COUNT: 15 AMOUNT: 129.367.87 DUE DATE CHECK: CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS " ROGRAM: 0M31:.41.L. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UP-LIATE LIST REPORT NIIMBP.P. GROUP NUMBER 00002 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIODS 01/1996 C4ROUF LJSE R ANNE. TRANS4 TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 100 07/06/1995 000005 OFFICE LEASE-312 E. MAIN 200 07/06/1995 000006 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP 300 07/06/1995 000007 CRIS USERS SUPPORT FEE 400 07/07/1995 000009 JANITORIAL. SERVICES 500 07/07/1995 000010 PROFESSIONAL. SERVICES 600 07/07/1995 000011 PROPERTY INSURANCE. 700 07/07/1995 000012 PROPERTY INSURANCE. 800 07/07/1995 000013 1/2 LIABILITY INSURANCE 900 07/07/1995 000014 1ST QUARTER (1F WORKERS 1000 07/07/1995 000015 PHONE SERVICES 1100 07/07/1995 000016 POLICE CHIEF DUES 1200 07/07/1995 000017 AS 400 LEASE/PURCHASE 1300 07/07/1995 000010 ICMA MEMBERSHIP 1400 07/07/1995 000019 FILM PROCESSING :i.500 07/07/1995 (>00020 SERVICE CONTRACT 00 010-2500-425.34-05 JULY 1995 00 010-2500-425.31-20 00 010-3100-431.34-05 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-7400-425.34-05 COMMUNITY CENTER-JULY 00 025-7260-410.34-05 LLMU 00 050-9000-450.37--05 00 010-2500-425.37-05 00 020-2200-419.37-05 DEPOSIT 00 018-2260-419.37-05 COMPENSATION DEPOSIT 00 010-4150-410.35-1.6 00 010-3100-431.30-16 00 010-2500-425.34-05 00 010-1200-4:1.2.31-20 CITY MANAGER 00 010-3100-431.21-85 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-3100-431.34-05 POLICE DEPARTMENT PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK4 CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000296 DIVINE REAL ESTATES REO 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000904 S.J. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001245 T.L. CREATES, INC. SJPD160 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000935 LOUIS ARROYO 95 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 STMT N 0001928 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR 96114 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001271 COACHELLA VALLEY INSURANC STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001271 COACHELLA VALLEY INSURANC STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N _ 0000180 C.V J.F'.I.A. 15 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000180 C.V.J.P.I.A. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001932 IACF' STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001093 I.H.M. CORPORATION-5T4 I953567 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001063 ICMA 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000696 LONGS DRUG STORE 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001755 NORTEL COMMUNICAT:LONS 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 308994 N 073-91791- N SY S 70382288 N AMOUNT 1,1.50.9! 55.00 5,550.00 625.00 5,200.00 1,000.00 2, 18'7.00 - 57.906.50 35,913.00 26.79 100.00 3,214.40 700.30 13.63 - 1,180.80 KUURAMG 611.51. JU 1"I4_I. UTAIY I J r 1'11 nc4_c ur a!n I C. LJ. 1 i.u_a Y.H. 1 ....n I...u. ,l GROUP NUMBER 00002 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 01/1996 GROUP USER ANNE TRANS 4, TRANS DATE VOUCHER DESCRIPTION 1 1600 07/07/1995 000021 ALARM SE:I:VICES 1700 07/07/1995 000022 PAGERS -FIRE DEPARTMENT 1000 07/07/1995 000023 PAGERS -POLICE DEPARTMENT 1900 07/07/1995 000024 CURATOR SERVICES 2000 07/07/1995 000025 MOBILE OFFICE RENTAL 2100 07/07/19'95 000026 IDENTI-KIT LEASE 2200 07/07/1995 ADMINISTRATION FEE 000027 BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 00 010-2500-425.33-10 00 010-3200-431.34-05 00 010-3100-431.35-16 F'ROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK: CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 00 010-6100-425.34-05 JULY/AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 95 00 010-3100-431.34-05 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-3100-431.34-05 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 099-9700-470.30-90 2300 07/07/1995 000028 00 097-9700-470.30-90 ADMINISTRATION FEE 2400 07/07/1995 000029 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT 2500 07/07/1995 000030 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT 2600 07/07/1995 000031 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT 2700 07/10/1995 000032 6 MONTHS F'ART'ICIPATION 2000 07/10/1995 000033 CAL - ID CELLULAR PHONE 2900 07/10/1995 000034 CAL -ID CELLULAR PHONE 3000 07/10/1995 000035 REIMBURSEMENT -PURCHASE OF 00 010-3100-431.34-05 00 010 2500-425.34-OS 00 010-2500'425.34'05 00 061-3100-431.34-05 IN ARCNET-POLICE DEPT. 00 010-3100-431.35-17 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-3100-431.35-17 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 010-2500-425.21-10 BUDGET BINDERS 0000963 PACIFIC ALARM SVC. 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000795 F'AGENET 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000795 PAGENET 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 AMOUNT STMT N A530101 N A530183 N 0000910 SAN JACINTO MUSEUM ASSOC. REQ 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000922 SCO'T'SMAN MANUFACTURING CO SMC000805640695 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001490 SMITH L, WESSON 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000372 UNION BANK 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000372 UNION BANK 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000307 XEROX CORF'ORATII]N 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000307 XEROX CORPORATION 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000307 XEROX CORPORATION 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 99045871 N 8111 N 8111 N 568785319 N 568716622 N 47156333 N 0001813 ALLIED RIVERSIDE CITIES N STMT 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000674 LA CELLULAR TELEPHONE 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000674 LA CELLULAR TELEPHONE 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000824 JOLENE SHAW 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N STMT N STMT N REQ N 292.00 141.00 1.:33.50 1.475.00 74.96 439.62 1.84i..42 4,683.02 10'7.67 529.24 34.17 5.31.0.71 39.84 33.93 36.5:L ROGRAM: GM31:?%- „y• .,.v...,,. GROUP NUMBEk : 00002 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 01/1996 GROUP USER ANNE TRANS..: TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER CDESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 3100 07/11/1995 000047 00 010-4150-410.35-16 PAGERS -PUBLIC WORKS 3200 07/11/1995 00004E 00 050-9000-450.35-16 PAGERS -WATER DEPARTMENT COUNT: AMOUNT: GROUP TOTALS 32 130.126.01 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Uga+ATE L.IST PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000795 PAGENET 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 A530182 N REPORT NUMEg 0000795 PAGENET A530182 10.50 07/15/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N c AG7NDA 5-' L Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Coucnil FROM: Laurie Mora, Deputy City Clerk Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 RE: Claim - Patrick Perez (File #JS 95-20) RECOMMENDATION: Reject the claim as recommended by the Claims Adjustor, pursuant to Government Code Section 913. COACHELLA VALLEY JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY July 12, 1995 Laurie Mora Deputy City Clerk City of San Jacinto 312 East Main Street San Jacinto, CA 92583 RE: Perez, Patrick L. v. City of San Jacinto Loss Date : 01/04/94 Our File No. JS 95-20 Dear Ms. Mora: We are in receipt of the above -captioned claim for damages filed with the City of San Jacinto by attorney Robert L. Reveley on behalf of claimant Patrick L. Perez. We request that you take the action indicated below: CLAIM REJECTION: Written rejection of claim by authorized board/officer in accordance with Government Code Section 913. [ ] LATE CLAIM: Do NOT reject claim but RETURN it for failure to file within time limit prescribed in Government Code Section 911.2. Transmittal NOT to contain "WARNING" required by Section 913, but should advise that the recourse to file "Application for Leave to File Late Claim" as provided in Government Code Section 911.4. This must be returned within 45 days of the date claim mailed or delivered. [ ] INSUFFICIENT CLAIM: Send notice of insufficiency for failure to comply with Government Code Section 910 and/or 910.2 and/or 910.4 and cite the following specific insufficiencies: This must be sent within 20 days of your receipt of claim. [ ] AMENDED CLAIM: Reject claim as set forth in first paragraph above, CLAIM REJECTION. [ ] APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE LATE CLAIM: Reject the Application under Government Code Section 911.8. [ ] OPERATION OF LAW: Defer any written response pending our further advice. Please provide us with a copy of any response requested above. If you have any questions, please contact the CVJPIA office. yours, Dennis M. M y Claims Manager DMM/lc 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 200, Palm Desert, CA 92260 (619) 341-0492 FAX (619) 340-5949 PrP-mim A, 5 V N Staff Report JAC I NTO TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Les Evans, Director of Public Works via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 RE: AWARD OF BIDS - WATER LINE REPLACEMENT Recommendation: Award the bid for the Water Line Replacement Project to David T. Wasden, Inc. of Corona, for $88,829.75 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract on behalf of the City subject to approval by the Riverside County Economic Development Agency. Fiscal Impact: The City has $95,007.05 of CDBG funds programmed for the Vernon Avenue Water Line Project. Background: The City Clerk received bids on June 20, 1995 for the installation of new water lines on Soboba Avenue, Andrews Avenue and Fifth Street, east of Vernon Street. Ten bids were received as follows: Company Name David T. Wasden, Inc. Norstar Plumbing & Engineering C.P. Construction Co., Inc. Kingdom & Sons, Inc. C.N.B. Excavating E. W. Harmon, Inc. EL -CO Contractors, Inc. Nottson Construction Genesis Construction Sully -Miller Contracting Co. Bid Amount $ 88,829.75 92,301.50 104,490.00 120,293.40 126,669.17 128,354.00 146,241.30 149,263.35 163,532.40 186,506.24 THOMAS M. COX JAMES A. COX JULIE M. CLARK July 12, 1995 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 805 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE HEMET, CALIFORNIA 92543 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jim Cox RE: Amicus Participation - --\ Tp TELEPHONE AREA CODE 909 652-1400 FAX .909) 652-3990 RECOMMENDATION: Approve participation of the City of San Jacinto in the matter of Loder v. City of Glendale. DISCUSSION: Enclosed is correspondence from the City attorney of Glendale, requesting all cities to participate in the brief of this matter which will be reviewed by the California Supreme Court. The case is fully explained in the materials, but affects a city's ability to perform pre -employment drug testing in all classifications of employment. The League of California Cities' Amicus Committee has urged all cities to participate. There is no cost to the City. 1 CITY OF Office of the CITY ATTORNEY lendale CALIFORNIA 613 E. Broadway, Suite 220, Glendale, CA 91206-4394 June 23, 1995 James A. Cox, City Attorney City of San Jicinto City Hall 312 E. Main St. San Jacinto, CA 92583 • Tel: (818) 548-2080 Fax: (818) 547-3402 Re: Lorraine Loder v. City of Glendale et al., California Supreme Court Case No. SO43548 Dear Mr. Cox: On February 16, 1995, the California Supreme Court, in a five to one vote, agreed to accept this case for review. Since the Court only reviews about 6 to 8% of those civil cases on which a Petition for Review is filed, the importance of this case and the implications that it has for public employers, is obvious. The League of California Cities has arranged for an amicus brief writer in support of the City of Glendale's pre- employment drug testing program. It has urged its members to join in this amicus brief. This letter is being written to encourage your City to join in the amicus brief being coordinated by the League and to provide you with e brief explanation of the case. This case involves a challenge by Ms. Loder, who is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union. She is contesting the pre -employment and promotional drug screening program conducted by the City of Glendale on candidates whc are offered a position of employment. Her standing is based on her taxpayer status in the City. Briefly, the City's Drug and Alcohol Testing Program is as follows: Individuals who apply for a job or a promotion with the City are given advance notice that they will be tested if they are successful in passing the early stages of the application process and are offered employment. The test is done in conjunction with a regular physical examination, which includes the taking -of a urine specimen, and which is performed in a medical doctor's office. In addition to conducting the usual chemical analysis on the specimen for the purpose of detecting medical problems, a drug and alcohol screen is also conducted.. PgINFFOON RECYCLED WE Amicus Curiae June 23, 1995 Page Two The City has a long history of conducting physical examinations on pre -employment and promotional applicants. In 1986, the City, because of suspected drug use in the work force, initiated a pilot project whereby it tested job applicants to whom an offer of employment was made. To its surprise, the City discovered that 20.8% of those applicants who were offered employment tested positive for illegal drug use. Consequently, the City began its program of testing every applicant who was offered employment. The lawsuit was initiated by Ms. Loder through the ACLU. It contained numerous constitutional challenges to the program. The core of these challenges was that the program violated the right to privacy and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures under the United States and California Constitutions. It also asserted that the program violated the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (Civil Code §§ 56, et seq.) The Appellate Court applied the strict scrutiny test and required the City to demonstrate a compelling interest for every position by showing a nexus between the job and the harm caused were that job to be filled by an individual who was illegally using drugs. This is in marked contrast to other court decisions which have only mandated the balancing test, i.e., the test passes constitutional muster where the interest of the employer, on balance, prevails over the right of the applicant. For example, the only other California case to decide this issue involved pre-employemnt testing by a private employer wherein the Court upheld the constitutionality for testing all entry level applicants because the interest of the employer, on balance, was greater than that of the applicants. See Wilkinson v. Times Mirror Corporation (1989) 215 C.A.3d 1034 Not only is there a total lack of justification for imposing a more onerous test on public employers than private employers, but the decision runs counter to other cases which have sustained the balancing test even when random or compulsory drug testing is performed on permanent employees who have a vested right to their jobs. See National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. G:\FILES\DOCFILES\PLD\LODERO1\LTRAMICI.RBP Amicus Curiae June 23, 1995 Page Three 656 (1989); National Treasury Employees Union v. Hallet, 756 F. Supp. 947 (D.C. La. 1991) affd. 891 F.2d 99, National Treasury Employees Union v. Hallet; 776 F. Supp. 680 (D.C. N.Y. 1991) Likewise, the case is contra to federal authority which has applied the balancing test for pre -employment and promotional candidates. See Willner v. Thronburq, 928 F.2d 1185 (D.C. Cir. 1991) cert. denied 502 U.S. 1020 There are other compelling reasons for reversing of the Court of Appeals decision. First, requiring the showing of a nexus between every job and the harm caused places a tremendous administrative and financial burden on public employers. It is a very different standard than that established by other cases which have simply held that the employer has meet its burden because its interest in a drug free work place overcomes the right to privacy of those who voluntarily choose to apply for a job knowing that they will be tested. Second, if drug testing on urine samples which is a part of a normal physical examination is unconstitutional, then so too are employment physical examinations which include the taking and analyzing of urine specimens. Third, any disgruntled applicant can sue and recover attorney's fees if the employer is unable to prove a compelling interest in the testing of that position. If successful, the applicant can recover attorney's fees. In this case, the City is confronted with the possibility of having to pay about $167,453.00 in attorney's fees. Fourth, the Appellate Court, in a case of first impression, misapplied the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Fair Employment and Housing Act. The Court construed these acts to prohibit asking candidates to whom offers of employment have been made any questions, as part of their medical examination, related to their medical condition or drugs being taking until they have tested positive for illegal drug use. One cannot take a valid medical examination without this information. Fifth, it is very important that public employers retain the ability to make employment decisions based upon their individual needs. Sixth, public employers should not be the last bastion of illegal drug users. G:\FILES\DOCFILES\PLD\LODERO1\LTRNIICI.RBP Amicus Curiae June 23, 1995 Page Four If you wish to add your name to the amicus brief which is supported by the League, send the attached consent form to Mr. Lawrence Newberry at the Pasadena City Attorney's Office located at 100 North Garfield, Suite 228, Pasadena, California 91109-7215. The consents must be provided to Mr. Newberry by July 21, 1995, because he intends to have his brief filed by July 31, 1995. You are strongly urged to lend your support to the amicus brief in this case of tremendous significance and statewide and nationwide importance. Your support and cooperation in this landmark case is greatly appreciated. Thank you. Very truly yours, SCOTT H. HOWARD, CITY ATTORNEY By on R. Braden Chief Assistant City Attorney RRB:cc cc: JoAnne Speers John Wilson Larry Newberry G:\FILES\DOCFILES\PLD\LODER01\LTRAMICI.RBP 5 • STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Nathaniel Holmes III, Chief of Police via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 SUBJECT: Surplus Property Procurement Programs RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. permitting the City of San Jacinto to participate in Federal and State surplus property procurement program, and Resolution No. permitting the City of San Jacinto to participate in the Federal Surplus Property Program. FISCAL IMPACT None BACKGROUND Each year the State and Federal Government declare property as surplus which may in some cases be purchased for a nominal fee, or received by specified agencies for no charge. There are two programs in which we would like to participate. Both of which require that the City Council pass a resolution to participate. The first is the Federal Surplus Property Program. Under this program items obtained may be used for whatever the public agency needs to carry out their mission to serve their jurisdiction. The second is the Department of Defense Procurement Program defined as "Procurement by State and local governments of law enforcement equipment suitable for counter -drug activities through the Department of Defense" which is administered via the California Counter -Drug Procurement Program. Under this program military surplus property may be obtained for the specified purpose of counter -drug activities. By passing the attached resolutions the Council will permit the City to take part in these programs. RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AUTHORIZING THE PARTICIPATION OF THE SAN JACINTO POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE CALIFORNIA COUNTER DRUG PROCUREMENT PROGRAM OF FEDERAL PROPERTY. WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto Police Department participates in and has personnel assigned to narcotics intervention; WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto Police Department has personnel assigned to target gang members that sell and use narcotics; WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto Police Department Traffic Officers profile vehicles that are commonly used by drug dealers; WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto Police Department Detective Bureau targets drug addicts who support their habit by committing burglaries within the City; WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto Police Department by the above definition is eligible to participate in the California Counter -Drug Procurement Program; WHEREAS, the City of San Jacinto Police Department ensures that any property received under the provisions of Sections 1122 of the Defense Appropriations Act will be properly operated, secured, and maintained; WHEREAS, the San Jacinto City Council authorizes the San Jacinto Police Department to procure excess equipment and supplies in accordance with the appropriate instructions and directives furnished by the Governor's Office; II NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of San Jacinto declares the San Jacinto Police Department eligible to participate in the California Counter -Drug Procurement Program, MOVED, PASSED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of , 1995, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAINS: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mayor Deputy City Clerk State of California Department of General Services State Agency for Surplus Property 701 Bu-ning Tree Road iferton, CA 92633 (714) 449-5900 RESOLUTION NO. 95 — ELIGIBILITY RENEWAL APPLICATION FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY PROGRAM Name of organization City of San Jacinto Address 312 East Main Street Organization is a: PUBLIC AGENCY X A Conservation B Economic Development C Education D Parks and Recreation E Public Health F Public Safety G 2 or more listed H Other (includes library/museums) I Homeless Program SASP Form 201-A 3/92 Telephone (909) 654-7337 City San Jacinto County Rivers idezip 92583 NONPROFIT AGENCY J Private Education K Private Health L Older Americans Act for Sr. Citizens M. Homeless Program NOTE: Categories J—K—L—M Number of sites Enrollment or number of clients served RESOLUTION "BE IT RESOLVED by the Governing Board, OR by the Chief Adminisrative Officer of those organizations which do not have a governing board, and hereby ordered that the official(s) and/or employee(s) whose name(s), title(s), and signature(s) are listed below shall be and is (are) hereby authorized as our representative(s) to acquire federal surplus property from the California State Agency for Surplus Property under the Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse side of this form... NAME —(Print or type) TITLE Pamela S. Easter City Manager athaniel Holmes III Chief of Police SIGNATURE PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July 19 95 by the Governing Board of by the following vote: Ayes: ; Noes: ; Absent: I, Clerk of the Governing Board of City of San Jacinto do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board at a reg_Alar meeting thereof held at its regular place of meeting at the date and by the vote above stated, which resolution is on file in the office of the Board. City of San Jacinto (Signed) OR AUTHORIZED this day of 19 — by: Name of Chief Administrative Officer (Signed) FOR STATE AGENCY USE Application approved: Application disapproved. Comments or additional information: Date: Signed. (Title) c 1 STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Nathaniel Holmes III, Chief of Police via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: July 18, 1995 SUBJECT: Ice Cream Vendor Regulations RECOMMENDATION: Waive reading in full and by title only and introduce (First Reading) Ordinance No. (First Reading) FISCAL IMPACT: Variable BACKGROUND: Motor vehicles which operate for the purpose of vending from the vehicle and in particular those which sell ice cream to children on the streets have a potential to pose special dangers to the health, safety and welfare of children and residents of the City of San Jacinto. This ordinance will regulate this type of vendor and require that persons engaged in the sale of ice cream and confections to children and other members of the public be held to a standard of safety. This ordinance requires that persons desiring to engage in vending be free from convictions for such things as narcotics sales, and crimes of moral turpitude. It will additionally require that the vehicle used for street vending comply to standards of appearance and safety established by this ordinance. Once a vendor has properly obtained a city business license they are required to make application to the police department for a vendors permit, and to have the vehicle inspected for both basic safety equipment and that required by this ordinance. The City Attorney has reviewed this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE OPERATION AND RETAIL SALE OF ICE CREAM, CONFECTIONS, AND OTHER FROZEN DESSERT PRODUCTS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES. Section 1. The City Council expressly find that vehicles in which ice cream, confections, and other frozen dessert products are carried for the purpose of retail sale on the public streets has the potential to pose special dangers to the public health, safety, and welfare of children and residents of the City of San Jacinto. These dangers include, but are not necessarily limited to, the conflict between traffic and the public's attraction to vehicles selling such products. It is the purpose and intent of the City Council, in adopting this Ordinance, to provide responsible companies and individuals who engage in the operation of such vehicles with clear and concise regulations to prevent safety, traffic, and health hazards, as well as to preserve the peace, safety, and welfare of the community. Section 2. Definitions. As used in this article: a. Ice cream truck means any vehicle, as that term is defined in the California Vehicle Code, which is equipped or primarily used for retail sales on any public street, alley, or highway within the City of San Jacinto of ice cream, ice milk, popsicles, sherbets, frozen yogurt, frozen dessert products, and confections of any kind. The inventory of these vehicles is not necessarily limited to ice cream, confections, or frozen dessert products. b. Frozen dessert product includes ice cream, ice milk, popsicles, frozen yogurt, confections, and chilled desserts of any kind. c. Person means any natural person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, stockholder, and includes, but is not limited to, owners, operators, drivers, lessors, and lessees of ice cream trucks. d. Vend or vending means offering frozen dessert products of any kind for sale from a motor vehicle on a street, alley, highway, or public place within the City of San Jacinto and includes the movement or standing of an ice cream truck for the purpose of searching for, obtaining, or soliciting retail sales of frozen dessert products. e. Ice cream vendor shall mean any person, as defined in this article, who: 1 1. Conducts, permits, or causes the operation of ice cream trucks, 2. Owns, operates, controls, manages, or leases ice cream trucks; or 3. Contracts with persons to drive and vend from ice cream trucks. f. Operator shall mean any person who drives, operates, or vends from an ice cream truck and shall include the driver and assistant on each ice cream truck. g. Vendor's permit shall mean a permit issued to any person by the City of San Jacinto authorizing the holder thereof to operate an ice cream truck and engage in the business of ice cream vending. h. Safety inspection sticker shall mean a sticker affixed to an ice cream truck evidencing that it has been inspected by the San Jacinto Police Department and found to be in safe operating condition. i. Darkness is any time from one-half hour after sunset to one-half hour before sunrise and any other time when visibility is not sufficient to render clearly discernible any person or vehicles on the highway at a distance of 1000 feet. Section 3. Permit required. a. No person shall operate or cause the operation of an ice cream truck in the City of San Jacinto without a vendor's permit issued pursuant to the provisions of this article and any other license or permit required under any other Code or Ordinance for each and every ice cream truck. Section 4. Permit term and transfer. a. The term of a vendor's permit shall be for a period of one year unless otherwise suspended or revoked prior to the term's completion. b. No permit issued pursuant to this Ordinance shall be transferable to any person. Section 5. Application for ice cream vendor permit; contents; required fee. a. Any person desiring to obtain a permit to operate or cause the operation of one or more ice cream trucks shall make application to the Chief of Police or his designated representative. A non-refundable fee for such application shall be established from time to time by Resolution of the City of San Jacinto. b. Neither the filing of an application for a permit nor the payment of an application fee shall authorize the vending from or operation or management of an ice cream truck until such permit has been granted or renewed. 2 c. Each applicant for a permit to conduct business as an ice cream vendor shall furnish the following information: 1. The present or proposed address from which the business is to be conducted; 2. The full true name under which the business will be conducted; 3. The full true name and any other names used by the applicant; 4. The present residence and business addresses and telephone numbers of the applicant; 5. A description of the merchandise which the ice cream trucks will vend; 6. The number of vehicles to be owned, operated, or controlled by the applicant and the makes, body styles, years, serial and engine numbers, state license plate numbers, and name and addresses of the registered and/or legal owners of each vehicle; 7. California driver's license number of the applicant; 8. Certified copy of the applicant's birth certificate; 9. Two (2) photographs of the applicant, at least two (2) inches by two (2) inches in size taken within the six-month period immediately preceding the date of the application. 10. The business, occupation, or employment history of the applicant for the three year period immediately preceding the date of the application; 11. The permit history of the applicant for the three year period immediately preceding the date of the filing of the application, including whether such applicant, in previously operating in this or any other city, county, state, or territory, has ever had any similar license or permit, or franchise revoked or suspended, and if so, the circumstances of such suspension or revocation; 12. All criminal convictions suffered by the applicant, including ordinance violations and traffic offenses; 13. The full true names and residence addresses of all persons employed or intended to be employed or with whom the applicant has contracted or intends to contract as drivers, operators, or attendants; 14. Certification, as approved by the San Jacinto Police Department, evidencing that each and every ice cream truck to be operated or controlled within the corporate limits of the City of San Jacinto by the applicant has, within two (2) months prior to the date the application is received by the Chief of Police, passed a safety inspection and is eligible for the issuance of a safety inspection sticker to be placed on the rear bumper of each vehicle; 15. Acceptable written proof that the applicant is insured under a policy of insurance in the manner and form required by this article from a responsible, solvent insurance carrier authorized to issue public liability and property damage insurance in the State of California; 3 16. The applicant shall submit to a fingerprinting in order to facilitate a complete background investigation; 17. Such other identification and/or information as the Chief of Police or his designated representative may require in order to discover the truth of the matters required to be set forth in the application. 18. Applicant must possess a business license for the City of San Jacinto. d. The applicant shall personally appear at the Police Department of the City of San Jacinto and pay the required application fee and shall present the application containing the information and supporting documentation required by subsection (c) of this section. e. In the event of a change in status or information required herein above, the applicant shall report such change to the Chief of Police not later than two weeks from the occurrence of such change. Section 6. Investigation of applications. The Chief of Police or his representative shall have a reasonable period of time in which to investigate the application and background of the applicant for a vendor's permit. The Chief of Police or his representative shall, within thirty (30) days after the date of filing of the application, render a written approval or denial of the application for the permit or renewal thereof (an exception to this clause is authorized in cases where the Department of Justice fails to return criminal history record prior to the thirty (30) day period). Section 7. Denial of permit. The Chief of Police shall not grant a vendor's permit if he finds that any of the following requirements are applicable: a. No vendor's permit shall be issued to a person employed or contracted as a driver of an ice cream truck who, within five years prior to the application, has been convicted or has pled nolo contendre or guilty, within five (5) years prior to his application for a permit, to a misdemeanor or felony crime of moral turpitude or drug related misdemeanor or felony crime, including but not limited to the sale of a controlled substance specified in California Health and Safety Code Sections 11054 through 11058; the sale, distribution, or display of harmful or obscene matter; indecent exposure; selling or disposing of lottery tickets; permitting gambling, pool selling or bookmaking; or alcohol or drug related traffic offenses. The investigating city employee is specifically authorized to obtain state summary criminal history record information as provided for in Section 11105 of the California Penal Code. Any complaint for the above -listed charges 4 pending before a court of law shall cause the application to be considered pending until adjudication of the complaint. Section 8. Revocation of permit. a. Any vendor's permit may be immediately suspended or revoked by the Chief of Police or his designated representative for any of the following reasons: 1. Falsehood of any information supplied by the permittee upon which issuance of the permit was based; 2. Failure of the permittee to notify the Chief of Police or his representative within two (2) weeks of any change occurring subsequent to the issuance of the permit in the information supplied by the permittee upon which issuance of the permit was based; 3. Failure of the permittee or of any employees or subcontractors of the permittee to comply with the regulations set forth in this code. b. No such suspension or revocation shall become effective until the permit holder has been notified in writing of the right of such permit holder to appeal the suspension or revocation. Notification of the permit holder may be mailed first class mail, postage prepaid, to the address supplied by the permit holder. Such notice shall be effective upon the third day following the mailing of such notice. In lieu thereof, the notice of such suspension or revocation may be personally served upon the permit holder and such notice shall be effective upon said service. Section 9. Ice cream truck regulations. a. Each ice cream truck shall have a current, valid County of Riverside health inspection sticker affixed to the lower right side of the windshield and a current, valid, San Jacinto Police Department inspection sticker affixed to the left side of the rear of the ice cream truck. b. Each individual who drives, operates, or vends from an ice cream truck shall have on his person a current, valid, California driver's license and original current proof of insurance which shall be made available for inspection by law enforcement officials upon request. c. Each vendor's permit holder shall be issued an identification card which will also serve as the vendor's permit. The permit holder shall wear or carry such card in a visible position upon his or her person at all times while vending from an ice cream truck and shall produce the same for inspection upon request. Each permit holder shall immediately surrender to the Chief of Police any vendor's 5 permit issued by the City of San Jacinto upon the suspension, revocation, or expiration of such permit or upon leaving employment as an ice cream truck operator. Section 10. Prohibited conduct. a. No person shall vend from an ice cream truck which is stopped, parked, or standing on any public street, alley, or highway; 1. Within five hundred (500) feet of any school property, park, playground, or recreational facility. 2. When the posted speed limit on the public street, alley, or highway is thirty-five (35) miles per hour or greater. 3. When the ice cream truck is parked in violation of any other provision of law. 4. When any part of the ice cream truck is open to prospective customers other than on the side of the vehicle next to the right side of the street, alley, or highway. 5. When the ice cream truck is not stopped, parked, or standing on the right side of the street, alley, or highway. 6. When the prospective customer is standing or sitting in another vehicle. 7. When the prospective customer is located in that portion of the street, alley, or highway which is open to vehicular traffic, or 8. During the hours of darkness. b. No person shall back an ice cream truck to make or attempt a sale. c. No minor shall ride in or on an ice cream truck. d. No more than two (2) individuals shall be in or on a vending ice cream truck. Section 11. Insurance provisions. a. It shall be unlawful for any person to own, lease, drive, operate, cause or permit to be driven or operated any ice cream truck in the City of San Jacinto unless such person has submitted with his application for permit a motor vehicle liability insurance policy covering each ice cream truck, issued by a solvent corporation holding a certificate of authority to do insurance business in the State of California, which policy shall conform in all respects to the requirements of this chapter. b. The required motor vehicle liability policy shall insure the owner, driver, and any other person using or responsible for the use of any ice cream truck with the 6 consent, expressed or implied, of such owner, driver, or person, against loss from the liability imposed upon such owner, driver, or person by law for injury to, or death of, any person, or damage to property growing out of the maintenance, operation, or ownership of any ice cream truck in an amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limit, no aggregate. c. Every insurance policy and every certificate of motor vehicle liability insurance filed within the City pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter shall contain the following endorsements: 1. It is hereby understood and agreed that, notwithstanding expressions consistent with or contrary thereto in this policy contained, the policy is expressly issued to cover a motor vehicle regulated by the provisions of this ordinance. This policy shall inure to, and be for the benefit and protection of, anyone who shall sustain any damages or injury, or to the heirs, personal representative, administrators, executors or assigns of any such person who may be so damaged or injured or suffer death, by reason of the operation of the motor vehicle or from the defective condition thereof. Liability under this policy shall in no manner be abrogated or abated by the death or dissolution of the lessor or the insured. 2. There is continuing liability up to the full amount of the policy, notwithstanding any action or recovery thereon. 3. No cancellation or reduction in coverage of this policy for any reason whatsoever shall become effective until the expiration of thirty (30) days after written notice of such cancellation or reduction in coverage shall have been given to the clerk of the council of the City of San Jacinto. Said period of thirty (30) days to commence running from the date said notice is actually received in the office of the clerk of the council. Section 12. Inspection of ice cream trucks. a. Each ice cream truck for which a permit or renewal is sought shall be inspected at the direction of the San Jacinto Police Department to ensure that the vehicle can be safety operated. b. In addition to other equipment required by law, each ice cream truck shall be equipped with the following: 1. A convex mirror mounted so that the occupant of the driver's seat can see the area in front of the truck which is obscured by the vehicle's hood. 7 2. A back-up alarm audible for a distance of at least one hundred (100) feet. 3. Signal lamps mounted at the same level and as high and widely spaced as practicable. These lamps shall be five to seven inches in diameter and shall display two alternately flashing yellow lights visible at 500 feet to the front and rear in normal sunlight upon a straight level street when stopped. 4. A signal arm that can be extended horizontally from the left side of the vehicle shall be permanently mounted to the vehicle and conform to the specifications shown on Exhibit "A" hereto attached. 5. The signal arm and lights required in (1) through (4) above shall be activated only when the vehicle is stopped on the street for the purpose of vending. These devices shall not be in operation when the vehicle is in motion or stopped for any other purpose. Section 13. Required signs, lettering, and color. a. All vehicles utilized as an "ice cream truck", as defined herein, shall be painted white in color contrasting colored signs as required below. b. There shall be displayed in a conspicuous place on both the front and back of the ice cream truck appropriate warning signs or lettering, e.g., "CAUTION CHILDREN". The lettering shall not be less than six (6) inches in height and the lettering shall be in contrast to the color of the background upon which they are placed. c. There shall be displayed on both front and back of the ice cream truck , a 3" yellow reflective strip. The strip shall be attached as shown on Exhibit "B". d. There shall be displayed in a conspicuous place on both the right and left side of the ice cream truck lettering permanently affixed showing the name of the company or operator of the ice cream truck and the business address and telephone number of the owner or operator. The letter shall not be Tess than four (4) inches in height and shall be in contrast to the color of the background upon which they are placed. e. No other lettering, numbering, price lists, signs or insignia shall be displayed on the right and left side of the ice cream truck so as to interfere with the visibility of the lettering required in subsection (b) and (c). Section 14. Noise level. Ice cream vendors shall not operate any sound device under the following circumstances: 8 a. Whenever any such sound can be heard for a distance greater than three hundred (300) feet; b. Within five hundred (500) feet of the property line of any property on which a school building is located during the hours school is in session. c. When passing a hospital at any time or a church during the hours services are being held therein. d. During the hours of darkness. Section 15. Applicability of regulations to existing business. a. The provisions of this article shall be applicable to all persons and businesses described herein whether the herein described activities were established before or after the effective date of the ordinance enacting this article into law. All such persons and businesses shall have thirty (30) days from said effective date to file a completed application for vendor's permit with the Chief of Police or his designated representative. b. Requirements set forth in Sections 13(b) and 14 shall be applicable to vehicles legally in use upon the date of adoption of this ordinance, one hundred twenty (120) days from the effective date of this ordinance. Section 16. Conducting as a nuisance. Any ice cream truck operated contrary to the provisions of this article shall be, and the same is hereby declared to be unlawful, a public nuisance, and a misdemeanor violation. The City Attorney may, in addition to or in lieu of prosecuting a criminal action hereunder, commence an action or actions, proceeding or proceedings, for the abatement, removal, or enjoinment thereof, in the manner provided by law, and may take such other steps and may apply to such court or courts as may have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate or remove such establishment and restrain and enjoin any person from operating an ice cream truck contrary to the provisions of this article. Section 17. Penalties. The violation of any provision of this ordinance is declared to be a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisonment not to exceed six months, or both such fine and imprisonment. At the discretion of the City Attorney, a violator may be charged and prosecuted as an infraction pursuant to the provisions and penalties stated in Government Code Section 36900(b). 9 INTRODUCED at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Jacinto held on the day of , 1995. MOVED, PASSED, AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of said City Council, duly held on the day of , 1995, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: City Clerk ATTEST: 10 Mayor f CE CAE , I I cU CK STOP S (GN AL ^,� �- /9'T INNER END RED REFLECTOR EXHIBIT A CAUTION CHILDREN 18' OU TER END RED REFLECTOR BLACK 2- I NCIr-i LETTERS 18' 1 YELLOW CAUTION INNER CND OU TER END DI A. C�ILDREN L XFIIBIT "B" v--YELLOW 3" REFLECTIVE STRIP YELLOW 3v REFLECTIVE STRIP Exhibit "C" Ice Cream Inspection/Permit Fee Schedule Fee Description Fee Application Fee $ 45.00 Fingerprint Fee Non -Resident 24.00 Resident 12.00 FBI/Department of Justice Fingerprint Clearance 66.00 (Fees established by Department of Justice) Permit and Identification 15.00 Permit Renewal and Identification 15.00 Vehicle Inspection and Certification 30.00 Reinspection and Certification 20.00 c A DA'1- d S A N 'JACINTO TO: Staff Report Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager via: Les Evans, Director of Public Works DATE: July 18, 1995 RE: FLASHING LIGHTS IN ADVANCE OF THE INTERSECTION OF RAMONA EXPRESSWAY AND CHASE STREET Recommendation: Direct staff whether or not to proceed with design and installation of flashing lights atop the Intersection Ahead advance warning signs at Ramona Expressway and Chase Street. Fiscal Impact: The cost of the design and installation of two flashing beacons in advance of the Ramona Expressway and Chase Street intersection is estimated at approximately $20,000. The cost of the installation could be funded by gasoline taxes or traffic signal funds. Background: At the July 5, 1995 City Council meeting, a improvements at the intersection of Ramona Council directed staff to investigate the cost conjunction with the existing Intersection Ahead as follows: Design Purchase & Installation of Two Beacons brief discussion took place regarding Expressway and Chase Street. The of installing flashing beacon lights in warning signs. The estimated costs are $ 2,500 17,500 $ 20,000 The time needed for design, bidding and construction of the beacons is estimated at approximately six months. Description of Option Intersection widening and installation of traffic signal $230,000 Est. Cost Intersection widening and $80,000 restriping for left -turn lanes Installation of advance warning flashing beacons Installation of botis dots in advance of intersection $20,000 RAMONA EXPRESSWAY @ LAS BRISAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS Pros This option offers a solution to the rear -end collision potential on Ramona Expressway and the safe entry problem from Chase St. This option will minimize the possibility of rear -end collisions on Ramona Expressway This option will help call attention to the Intersection Ahead sign, especially at night. $5,000 Installation of the dots will alert the motorists to changed conditions ahead Restripe for left -turn lanes $5,000 without intersection widening Do nothing $0 This option will improve safety for left -turning vehicles Time for Cons Comp. The traffic signal does not meet Caltrans warrants and may create a 18 mos minor liability The project will not make it any easier for access on Ramona Expressway from Chase St. This option does not really offer significant increases in safety for left - turning vehicles or for entry onto Ramona Expressway from Chase. 4 mos. 6 mos. The motorist may not associate the 2 mos. dots with Intersection Ahead The existing road shoulder will not support truck traffic and will fail 2 mos. n/a The question Staff needs guidance on is whether Agency is interested in this deal and how it wants to participate, if we are interested. If we sell the property, we would attempt to obtain the highest possible price, but would probably receive somewhere between $3.00 and $4.00 per sq. ft. The actual total price varies based on which site is acceptable. If we choose to sell the property, we have been working with Bob Wolf of Germania Construction of Moreno Valley, who feels he can obtain financing for this project, in a fairly swift manner. Mark looks most favorably upon a land lease. The risk to the City is the requirement to subordinate to the construction loan and permanent financing. However, our protection would be a three -party agreement among the developer, lender and Agency, allowing the Agency to make payments and to buy the loan. He says typically, at the end of the lease (20-30 years), the Agency becomes the owner of the building. The benefit of acting as a lender could be that it would help make the economic deal between the developer and Family Fitness, as well as we might be able to achieve a greater interest rate than our current investments. Perhaps the greatest chance of financial benefits present themselves if the City were to build the building. According to Mark, the Agency is precluded from building a building for private use. However, Jim Cox feels the City is empowered to build a building. As a matter of fact, the City has previously built two buildings to be leased. A decision to become a landlord can be based in part on the proforma. Russ has put together a proforma based on information provided by Family Fitness. It shows a gross profit of $280,000 and a recapture of some of our past expenses. ($100,000 for consultants and land expense $300,000). It is inaccurate in that it is very general and also does not reflect the requirement to pay prevailing wage. This will drive the gross profit down. This proforma assumes obtaining a loan from a financial institution and a sale after completion. As an alternative, the City could self -finance the construction in an amount of approximately $1,150,000 instead of putting up equity of $375,000 and obtaining market financing for $1,125,000 as proposed by Russ. A comparative analysis of this scenario shows the Agency earns approximately $700,000 more after 12 years than using Russ' assumptions and then reinvesting the proceeds. The question is whether the Agency has the cash to build a building. In consulting with Larry, it appears we have approximately $600,000 - $700,000 available now and, depending on the budgeted expenditures, another $500,000 - $700,000 in 95-96. Therefore, a proper conclusion is that the Agency may have to borrow up to $200,000 in order to construct the building. Ak I n ,g-s- TO: FROM: DATE: CITY OF SAN JACINTO STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Brian McNab , Director of Community Development via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager July 18, 1995 SUBJECT: VECTOR CONTROL SERVICES - NORTHWEST MOSQUITO AND VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD City -Wide RECOMMENDATION Direct Staff as appropriate. BACKGROUND Currently, the City of San Jacinto is under contract with Riverside County Environmental Health Department for a number of services, including some limited Vector Control Services. The attached letter from the Environmental Health Department was notice that they were stopping all Vector Control activities in both incorporated and unincorporated areas. A vector is an organism such as an insect or rodent which has the potential to carry disease. They include, but are not limited to, mosquitos, flies, rodents and ticks. The Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control District has apparently been asked to provide service to the unincorporated areas of Western Riverside County. They would also provide service to the cities if they agree to annex into the District. A resolution authorizing annexation and description of services is provided for your information. Pamela Easter June 26, 1995 Page 2 It is our understanding that they will be contacting your city in the near future to see if your city would be interested in becoming part of their district. We will make every attempt to provide for a smooth transition, within our budget constraints. Our Department would like to thank your city for having given us the opportunity to provide vector control services to your constituents. While we will no longer be able to provide these services after September 1, 1995, our Department looks forward to continuing to provide sewage and household trash and garbage complaint services; and subsurface sewage disposal design services your city has previously contracted for. Should you have any questions concerning this correspondence, please call me at (909) 358-5172. Sincerely, go.QY0,4 Steve Van Stockum, Division Director District Environmental Services Division SVS:bo cc: Supervisor Kay Ceniceros, District III Kenneth B. Cohen, Director, HSA John M. Fanning, Director, Dept. of Env. Health NORTHWEST nosourro AND VECTOR ONTROLDISTRICT i:, Protecting the �u61k a Health ti*4 President George Plantenga County of Riverisde Vice -President George Read County of Riverside Secretary John Fritz City of Riverside Trustee Richard Deininger City of Corona Trustee Barbara Carmichael City of Norco Major S. Dhillon Ph.D. District Manager NORTHWEST MOSQUITO AND VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT July 3rd, 1995 Mr. Brian McNabb Acting City Manager City of San Jacinto 312 East Main Street San Jacinto, CA 9483 Dear Mr. McNabb, I sincerely appreciate your time and consideration for discussing the vector control issue with me on June 27th, 1995. On June 28th, 1995, a meeting was held among the Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District, Coachella Valley Mosquito & Vector Control District, County Environmental Health Department and State Health Department. After the discussion the County Environmental Health Department authorized the two existing Districts to expand their program to provide vector control services to the entire county. However, this authorization does not apply to the incorporated areas of the cities presently not within the Districts. In the event, the city of San Jacinto wishes to join the District, the city council must approve and adopt a resolution. A copy of the resolution draft is enclosed. Also, attached herewith is a proposal by the District outlining the benefits of vector control and disease surveillance programs. A copy of the resolution is also being sent to the county Board of Supervisors, and the cities of Canyon Lake, Temecula, Murrieta, Perris, Hemet and Moreno Valley. The city of Lake Elsinore has already joined the District in addition to the cities of Corona, Norco and Riverside. The benefits of an area -wide vector control program have already been described in the proposal. It is therefore, requested that the city of San Jacinto consider joining the District to protect the health & welfare of the residents of the city from vectors and vector -borne diseases. 1966 Compton Ave. • Corona, CA 91719 (909) 340-9792 • FAX (909) 340-2515 July 3rd, 1995 page -2- Brian McNabb, Acting City Manager Since timing is a key element to complete the annexation process please let me know at your earliest if you need any further information. I hope your council will adopt the resolution. Sincerely, Litts-(GLL y //I11�� Major S. Dhillon Ph.D. District Manager MSD/rr Enc.: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO REQUESTING THAT THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TAKE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE NORTHWEST MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT TO EXPAND SERVICES TO PROVIDE THE ENTIRE CITY OF SAN JACINTO WITH VECTOR CONTROL SERVICES WHEREAS, the Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District ("District)" desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 for the annexation of the entire City of San Jacinto presently not within the District boundaries; and WHEREAS, to serve the public health, both the City of San Jacinto and the District wish to have the entire corporate limits of the City of San Jacinto, including any future annexations thereto, within the boundaries of the District; and WHEREAS, the territory now proposed to be annexed is inhabited, and a description of the boundaries of the territory is set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the reason for the proposed annexation is to provide area -wide vector control which is a more effective and efficient means of abating vectors and diseases. Vectors, in general, include mosquitoes, domestic flies, black flies, biting midges, ticks, and rodents; and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation should be subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. Vector control services will be provided in accordance with the current plan of services furnished to the City by the District; 2. Funding will be provided by service charges or benefit assessment consistent with the District's statutory authority under the California Health and Safety Code; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Jacinto that the Local Agency Formation Commission of Riverside County is hereby requested to take proceedings for the annexation of territory as described in Exhibit A, and any areas annexed to the City in the future, according to the terms and conditions stated above and in the manner provided by the Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985. ADOPTED this day of 1995. Mayor of the City of San Jacinto, California Al 11sST: City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto, California I, SAMPLE CERTIFICATION , City Clerk of the City of , California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was regularly introduced and adopted by 2the City Council of the City of , California, at an adjoumed regular meeting thereof held on the day of 1995, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of , California, this day of 1995. City Clerk of the City of , Califomia (Seal) PROPOSAL: VECTOR CONTROL & DISEASE SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO BY NORTHWEST MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT 1966 COMPTON AVENUE CORONA, CA 91719 JULY, 1995 VECTOR CONTROL & DISEASE SURVEILLANCE SERVICES BY THE NORTHWEST MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT Vector -borne disease ran rampant in California in the early part of the century. In the 50s & 60s several hundred cases of mosquito -borne encephalitis were detected and the disease is still prevalent in Southern California. Encephalitis a debilitating disease, can be fatal to the elderly and the children has been consistently detected in the county of Riverside since the 80s. In Southern California, all cities in the counties of Orange, San Bernardino, San Diego and almost all the cities in Los Angeles county, benefit from the services of Mosquito or Vector Control Districts. All these cities have joined the Mosquito & Vector Control Districts (MVCDs) to ensure area wide vector control because of their effectiveness in disease surveillance and control which ultimately Leads to reduction in potential risk of exposure to vector -borne diseases. Presently, there are two Mosquito & Vector Control District in the county of Riverside. The Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District serves the cities of Corona, Norco, portions of the city of Riverside and unincorporated areas of the northwestern portion of the county (Jurupa, Mira Loma, Glen Avon, Woodcrest, Home Garden, Highgrove etc.). Coachella Valley Mosquito & Vector Control District covers the cities of Palm Springs, Indio, Thermal, Cathedral City, Desert Hot Springs, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, Coachella, La Quinta and unincorporated areas of the mideastem portions of the county. The county has notified the Districts that it is in the process of scaling back its vector control program. In light of reduction or elimination of certain portions of the vector control program by the county, a major portion of the Riverside county and several cities will be devoid of vector control services. Due to the need for such services, the two Districts have met and discussed this issue with County Environmental Health Department and the California State Health Department (Vector -Borne Disease Section) to provide vector control services to the entire county. The general consensus of all entities is to organize a comprehensive disease surveillance and vector control program to be carried out by the two Districts to protect residents of the entire county. The Board of Trustees of both Districts have addressed the need for expansion of comprehensive services to provide disease surveillance and vector control (nuisance & disease mosquitoes, wild & domestic rodents, tick borne diseases, biting midges, black flies, domestic flies and other pestiferous species) for the entire county. The Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District was formed in 1959 to control mosquitoes in the northwest portion of the county. Since its inception, the District has significantly grown in area due to the quality of its services. The District is governed by 5 Board members, two from unincorporated areas of the county (appointed by Board of Supervisors) and one each from the cities of Corona, Norco and Riverside. Each city within the jurisdiction of the District appoints a Board member. Presently, the District provides disease surveillance and vector control services which includes mosquitoes, flies, rodents and disseminates informational pamphlets and educational material to the public. The District recently added an Africanized Honey Bee control program and receives a good number of service calls regarding this aspect of the program. Due to the potential threat of diseases, the pestiferous nature of vectors and the following reasons, it is of utmost importance that the city consider joining the District for receiving the benefit of comprehensive services: NEED FOR SPECIALIZED I� AND EFFECTIVE VECTOR CONTROL SERVICES: The Mosquito Abatement Districts have been in existence in California since 1915. The records consistently show that their quality and specialization of services to be far superior to any attempt at community wide vector control by any entity or individual city. Because of this aspect and cost effectiveness, most of the cities or county areas have joined the Districts. There are presently 50 Mosquito Abatement or Vector Control Districts in the State and their numbers continue to increase as demographics and the need for vector -borne disease control deem necessary. 2. VECTORS/DISEASES DO NOT RECOGNIZE POLITICAL BOUNDARIES: Vectors migrate significant distances from their point of breeding. For example, mosquitoes are known to travel more then -2- 20 miles from their breeding sources; plague epizootic may occur over wide areas, and so on. Therefore, area wide surveillance and control measures will result in effective and efficient reduction of these vector -borne diseases. 3. NEW REGULATIONS: A. Endangered Species Act (ESA) B. Wetlands/Environment C. Pesticides A. In California, there are currently about 85 animal species and 120 plant species listed as endangered or threatened. Manipulation of habitat of some species is in direct conflict with some vector control practices. In Riverside county, some of the endangered species habitats overlap mosquito or vector breeding areas and, therefore, extreme caution and special strategies is exercised to control vectors in such habitats. B. The District employees are trained and kept current on the wetland and environmental issues and laws to ensure that provisions of these rules and regulations are not violated during the implementation of proper mosquito & vector control activities. The District consistently communicates with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and is well respected by the Services for the District's role in the enhancement of habitat protection of such species. The District utilizes specialized equipment and pesticides to accomplish this goal in wetlands and endangered species' habitats. C. Due to proposition 65, new Federal & State regulations, only certain pesticides can be used by mosquito and vector control agencies. -3- The District closely monitors the revised lists of such pesticides. Furthermore, it is a known fact that insects of public health importance are prone to rapid development of insecticide resistance. Therefore, the use of pesticides by the District is focused on the reduction of resistance through rotation and constant search for new materials. 4. CO-OPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT: The District is signatory to the co-operative agreement with the Vector-Bome Disease Section (VBDS) of the State Health Department. Under this agreement, VBDS monitors the pesticide usages and continuing education program for the District. The VBDS also acts as a lead agency pertaining to physical and environmental manipulations and also to obtain special local needs permit for restricted pesticides which saves the District a cumbersome process and resources. DETECTION OF NEW SPECIES OF VECTORS AND VECTOR -BORNE DISEASES: Undoubtedly, monitoring of new vector and vector -borne diseases on an area -wide basis is much more effective than to do so on a limited basis. The District implements an extensive & regular surveillance program to detect importation of new vectors and share this information with other agencies. Specialized staff conduct this comprehensive vector and disease surveillance program throughout the year. 6. SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT: Because of the variation in vector producing habitats, the District owns and utilizes several specialized and state of the art equipment such as amphibious craft, all terrain vehicle, Hovercraft, Fogging units etc. in the control of vectors in these habitats. In addition, the District uses specialized mosquito traps, a fully equipped laboratory and also contracts with aerial -4- applicators to provide efficient and timely services, whenever the need arises. 7. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION: The Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District is a member of State, National; and International Scientific and Mosquito & Vector Control Associations.These organizations provide current and state-of-the-art information on laws, regulations, pesticides, wetlands, ESA, equipment and technologies. Some of the staff members serve on several committees of these associations at the State, National and International levels. STABLE FUNDING: Since the District is a Special District and performs only one specific service, there is no money shuffling between departments. This gives a continuous and stable funding to effectively carry out the duties at a desired level. LIABILITY BURDEN: The in-depth knowledge of methodologies of Mosquito & Vector Control Districts, continuous training of employees, information exchange and specialized equipment place the MVCDs in a very small risk category. This aspect is well accepted by insurance companies and public entities served by the MVCDs. BENEFIT OF VECTOR SURVEILLANCE & CONTROL SERVICES TO THE CITY: Implementation of comprehensive vector surveillance & control program protects the health and welfare of the city residents and provides further benefits as follows: 1. Vector Surveillance and Control Services of a Professional Standard: Residents receive full vector control services of the highest calibre. This includes: a. Abatement of vectors. b. Response to resident complaints on the -5- same day or the next working day. c. Full surveillance program. The District will implement a full scale surveillance program to detect: 1. Vectors. 2. Disease. 3. New diseases or new vectors. d. Monitoring of vector population. The District will implement a monitoring program in order to foresee any potential problems. In the event that a disease outbreak becomes imminent, early warning system is of the utmost importance and proper methodologies must be employed immediately to secure rapid suppression of such outbreaks. 2. Public Education: The District provides educational program for children, homeowner associations, city councils and other civic groups on a regular basis. Phone assistance: Residents can obtain information on any vector or vector -borne diseases via phone. 4. Enhancement of recreational activities. Documentation exists that absence or presence of mosquitoes and rodents directly affect the outdoor activities such as sports, picnics, camping etc. This in turn impacts the revenues of the local governments. -6- 5. Appreciation in Real estate value: As evidenced in other locales where the prevalence or lack of vectors directly affect the value of Real estate. 6. Fish planting. The District routinely stocks mosquito fish to control mosquitoes thus reducing the usage of pesticides. 7. Enforcement. Under the Mosquito Abatement District Act of 1915, the District employees are empowered to enter private and public properties and enforce the laws and regulations pertaining vector control. This authority yields a timely control of various vectors. 8. No monetary burden on the city treasury. The District operates on ad valorem tax and/or a per parcel assessment basis. Each year the Board of Trustees determine the charges and therefore, cause no direct impact on the city treasury. 9. Full representation on the Board. The city appoints a member to the Board of Trustees and thus has a voice in decision making. The Board members are reimbursed for their expenses and are paid a monthly allowance for attending meetings. 10. Liability. Upon joining the District, the city is relieved of any liability regarding vector borne diseases. The District is fully responsible and liable for any such occurrences. In light of these benefits, it is highly recommended that the -7- city consider annexation to the District for full vector control services. This gives the city an opportunity to obtain services of the highest standard and be a part of the decision making process. LEGAL AUTHORITY OF THE DISTRICT The Northwest MVCD was formed under the State Health & Safety Code, pursuant to Division 3, Chapter 5, Article 1, Section 2200 et seq. in 1959 in the county of Riverside. This empowers the District Board to: "Take all necessary or proper steps for the control of mosquitoes,flies or other vectors, either in the District or in territory not in the District but so situated with respect to the District that mosquitoes, flies or other vectors may dispense from the territory into the District". GENERAL FUNDING The statutory authority also allows the District to levy, by resolution or ordinance, a service charge or benefit assessment against any or all parcels of land within the District to pay for the cost of inspection and protection from mosquitoes, flies or other vectors. The schedule of charges shall be made, reviewed, and adopted annually after notice and hearing in connection with the schedule. Following the hearing, the Board may classify parcels of property according to their use in relation to the cost of vector control. The Board may bill for the charges annually or more frequently. The charges shall be collected and paid by the county in the same manner as property taxes by the county. The service charge shall be reasonably related to the District's cost for providing the inspection or protection and shall not be deemed a tax of any kind. Any sum collected shall be used solely for the purposes of vector control. This subdivision only applies to a District formed prior to January 1, 1985, or any District authorized to impose taxes under Section 2212 or 2215.5. The assessment is anticipated to be about $6.00 per parcel per year and will be levied according to the benefit received by each parcel. The reason for such a small assessment is that the District already exists an abatement organization and carries out vector control activities in a very proficient manner. -8- STATEMENT OF PROGRAM FOR THE CITY: Under the statutory authority of the State Legislature and Board of Trustees the Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District will implement a full vector control program in the entire city, therefore, relieving the city of its vector control obligations. The Vector Control Program will be carried out in accordance with the Board policy. The "Vector" refers to any insect or animal capable of causing human discomfort, injury, harboring or transmitting the causative agents of human or animal disease. The services provided by the District will include abatement of: - mosquitoes - domestic flies -blackflies - biting midges - ticks -rodents -Africani7ed Honey Bees These vectors carry diseases such as encephalitis, malaria, yellow fever, sleeping sickness, cholera, tularemia, plague, typhus, Lyme Disease etc. A regular monitoring and surveillance program will be carried out to detect any new vectors and, therefore, new vector borne diseases. Additionally, the District will provide Public education program and code enforcement enhancement program if needed. PROCESS OF INCORPORATION OF SERVICES To provide vector control services to the City, the District has to follow the procedure set forth by LAFCO. The procedure and time required to complete this process is as follows: A. Resolution of City Council. The City Council will adopt a resolution that vector control services be provided by the Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District. B. Resolution by Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District: The Northwest Mosquito & Vector Control District will adopt a resolution -9- to provide services to the City. C. Application to LAFCO: 1. The District will submit an application to LAFCO with appropriate fees. 2. The District will pursue and obtain proper CEQA documents. 3. LAFCO will hold a public hearing within a time frame of receiving an application form from the District. 4. After approval, LAFCO will assign the District as a conducting authority. D. District Hearings: 1. As a conducting Authority, the District will hold "Protest Hearing". 2. Simultaneously, the District will also hold "Benefit Assessment Hearing". E. Adoption of Resolution by the District: 1. Depending upon the outcome of public hearings, the District will adopt a resolution ordering annexation. 2. The District will notify proper county authorities for benefit assessment. 3. The District will notify LAFCO. F. LAFCO Recording: LAFCO makes proper recording and send the final documents to the State Board of Equalization, thus completing the process. THIS PROCESS IS ANTICIPATED TO TAKE 6 MONTHS AITER A RESOLUTION IS PASSED BY THE CITY, THEREFORE, A TIMELY RESPONSE FROM THE CITY IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. -10- r - 3'9/'. �vt s N Memorandum JAC I NTO TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Pamela S. Easter DATE: July 13, 1995 RE: POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING UPDATE At your July 18th meeting, Police Chief Holmes will provide you an update on his staffing plans, in view of his one sergeant and three officers being off on industrial injuries.. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF SAN JACINTO STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager July 18, 1995 PUBLIC SAFETY FINANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP NEIGHBORHOOD City -Wide RECOMMENDATION Give staff direction on preferred committee size and membership, application and selection process and committee purpose/timeline. BACKGROUND At your June 20th, meeting, the City Council discussed the formation of a public safety citizens' committee to study and present recommendations to the Council on service levels and funding alternatives for public safety. The Council asked staff to present suggested committee membership categories at your July 18th meeting. In response, this memo provides suggestions for potential committee membership as well as discusses several other related items in which staff needs direction in order to proceed. The following are a sample of various constituent groups that could be potential committee members. These were considered by the staff in coming up with the recommended committee membership. CATEGORY 1. CFD #1 (Soboba Village 4) 2. CFD #2 (Rancho San Jacinto) 3. CFD #3 (Various Areas) 4. Homeowner post-1985 5. Homeowner pre-1978 6. Apartment owner 7. Mobilehome Park owner 8. Mobilehome lot owner 9. Heritage Ranch 10. Commercial Business owner/occupant 11. Commercial Business tenant 12. Commercial Business landlord 13. Industrial Business owner/occupant 14. Industrial tenant 15. Industrial landlord 16. Farmer 17. Homeowner of lot greater than 1/2 acre 18. Vacant infill lot owner 19. Chamber member -2- REPRESENTING New residents, Existing Public Safety Tax Payers New residents, Existing Public Safety Tax Payers New residents, Existing Public Safety Tax Payers New residents Long term residents All apartment owners All Mobilehome Park and R.V. owners Residents living in Mobilehomes on private lots R.V. lot owner and R.V. Park owners Commercial businesses and Building owners Commercial Business Commercial Building owners Industrial Business owners & Building owners Industry Business owners Industrial Building owners All Agricultural Activities Lots greater than 1/2 acre, Vacant Lots Residents & lots greater than 1/2 acre Vacant lots Chamber members - businesses After reviewing potential membership categories, staff narrowed the recommended list to the following categories. This would provide for a 15 member committee. Although it may seem to be a large size committee, our experience indicated that 50-75% of committee members usually attend. With that assumption, we would have a working group of 8-11 3 Post 1989 Single Family Homeowner (of which 2 will reside in CFD 1,2,3) 1 Pre-1978 Single Family Homeowner 1 Mobilehome Lot Owner 1 Apartment Owner 1 Mobilehome Park Owner 1 Heritage Ranch Owner 1 Farmer 1 Owner of Vacant Lot Within "City Core" 2 Chamber Members 1 Commercial Landlord (Non -Chamber Member) 1 Industrial Landlord (Non -Chamber Member) 1 Industrial Business Owner/Occupant (Non -Chamber Member) 15 TOTAL STATUS AS A CITY COMMITTEE As this committee is being established as an advisory body to the City, it is subject to the Brown Act requirements and limitations. Also, pursuant to City regulations, all members must file a Form 730 Financial Disclosure Statement. ADVERTISING FOR MEMBERS Staff recommends the following methods to advertise for committee membership. Place press releases and display ads in the Hemet News, Press Enterprise and Mobile Home Courier. Also send press releases to local radio stations. Direct mail to Ken Brass (CFD #1) and Mike Caldwell (CFD #2) Direct mail to apartment and mobilehome park owners Direct mail to President of Heritage Ranch Homeowners Association Direct mail to the President of the Chamber Board of Directors Based on the response from this methodology, Staff will provide follow up outreach to fill the slots. -3- DUTIES OF COMMITTEE The initial duties of the committee would be to review the existing levels of service and their funding sources; recommend the appropriate level of service for Police and Fire; recommend the maximum percentage of General Fund Revenue allocated to Public Safety; recommend the funding methodology for the level of Public Safety selected by the Committee; and, publicly advocate the committee's recommendation. TIMELINE OF THE COMMITTEE If any ballot measure is recommended by the committee, the City Council must adopt a resolution by Mid -December, at the latest, to place the measure in the March election. The committee can be appointed by the Council by September 5th and meet as necessary to develop a recommendation by November 15th. After the Council action (if necessary), the committee members would be called upon to publicly advocate for their recommendation. Staff anticipates the need for weekly meetings during the two months between September and November. (See attached estimated time line.) PREFERRED QUALIFICATIONS TO SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE The ideal committee member would have experience with, or knowledge of public safety service levels and local government finance. The probable qualifications we will find are public safety or retired public safety personnel and people familiar with business financial practices. In selecting members, the Council should try to ascertain the ability to comprehend both service level and local government finance issues. Therefore, it seems appropriate to develop some form of application to help determine the applicants' qualifications. SELECTION OF COMMITTEE A number of the categories will undoubtedly have multiple applicants. Therefore, the Council needs to determine how they would fill the committee positions. Several alternatives include 1) making a decision based on application review; 2) having the whole Council or subcommittee interview the applicants. -4- July 18 July 24 August 7 ESTIMATED TIME LINE Select committee constituent groups Advertising mailed / completed Close of application period. (Staff is presuming at this point there will be some unrepresented constituent groups) August 8-17 Solicitation to unfilled constituent groups August 8-28 Selection process September 5 Appointment by City Council September 11 - Committee meetings November 15 November 21 Presentation of committee report December 4 Last regular Council meeting prior to deadline for filing ballot measure for March election. -5- H:C C R PT-951P u bSa R C o m S A N JACI NTO TO: Memorandum Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Pamela S. Easter DATE: July 13, 1995 RE: POTENTIAL CANCELLATION OF AUGUST 22 STUDY SESSION In view of pending vacations and the number of budget meetings the Council will be holding in August, the Council may wish to consider canceling the August Study Session. There are no agenda items scheduled for that session at this time.