Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout082697 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE AUGUST 26, 1997- 7:00 PM 6:00· PM - Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code Sections: 1. §54956~8, Conference with Real Property Negotiator; Acquisition of property identified as APN 922-062-0107 for Affordable Housing; Negotiating Parties: Robert McKenzie and Robert Thatcher; Under 'negotiation: price and terms of payment for acquisition. 2. §54956.9(a), Conference with City's Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation, Outdoor Media Group v. City.of Temecula. At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 PM and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM. Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 97-15 Resolution: No. 97-95 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall presiding Prelude Music: Jordan Bellino Invocation: Father Edward Renner, St. Thomas Episcopal Church Flag Salute: Councilmember Lindemans ROLL CALL: Ford, Linderoans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS: Boy Scout Awards - Medal of Merit Recognition of Problem Oriented Policing Certificate of Appreciation - Ennior Racinell, Inland Empire Entrepreneur of the Year Award R:\Agenda\082697 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 12, 1997. R:\Agenda\082697 2 4 Resolution Approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheets as of June 30, 1997, the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Year ended June 30, 1997. 4.2 Appropriate $21,280 to the 1996-97 City Attorney Department budget in the General Fund. Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Public Improvement Bonds in Tract No. 23583 (Located Northeasterly of the intersection of Calle Madero at North General Kearny Road) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Accept the substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement, Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Securities for Street, Drainage, Water and Sewer Improvements, Traffic Signal Mitigation Agreement and Bond, and Subdivision Monumentation Bond in Tract No. 23583; 5.2 Authorize the release of the original faithful performance, labor and materials, traffic signal mitigation, and monument bonds on file; 5.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developers and Sureties. R:\Agenda\082697 3 6 7 8 Acceptance of Drainage Easements and Quitclaim to Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Located at Meadows/Paloma Del Sol Area) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN OFFER OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT MADE TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CERTAIN OFFERS OF STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS MADE TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND AUTHORIZING QUITCLAIM OF ALL SAID EASEMENTS TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (MEADOWS/PALOMA DEL SOL AREA) Award of Construction Contract for the Annual Slurry Seal Project FY97-98, Project No. PW97-13 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Award a contract for Project No. PW97-13, Annual Slurry Seal FY97-98 Project, to California Pavement Maintenance Co. for ~ 163,579.46 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 7.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of 916,357.95 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Completion and Acceptance of the FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Project PW95- 2_~8 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Accept the FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Project PW95-28, as complete; 8.2 Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 8.3 Direct the City Clerk to release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. R:\Agenda\082697 4 9 10 Law Enforcement Services Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the second amendment to the agreement with the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department and the City of Temecula and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 97-13 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO, 97-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PERS) AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA 11 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 97-14 RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 97-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.06 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND CREDITS R:\Agenda\082697 5 JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CALL TO ORDER - TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT: President Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Linderoans, Roberts, Stone JOINT CITY COUNCIL/BOARD OF DIRECTORS PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council/Community Services District before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. Amend Joint Use Agreement - Temecula Elementary School RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Adopt the Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration for Margarita Community Park. 1.2 Approve the First Amendment to Agreement between the City of Temecula and Temecula Valley Unified School District for the Joint Use of a Portion of Temecula Elementary School. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING R:\Agenda\082697 6 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 97-01 Resolution: No. CSD 97-06 RECONVENE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING: PUBLIC COMMENT: A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Board of Directors gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 12, 1997. 2 Financial Statements for Year End RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997. 2.2 Approve the transfer of $21,530 to the 1996-97 parks and recreation utilities account. R:~Agenda\082697 7 3 2.3 Appropriate $8,710 to the 1996-97 "Service Level B" residential street lighting account. Award of Contract - Muni Financial, Inc. RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve contract of $21,000 with MuniFinancial, Inc. to provide ongoing services related to administration of the City's Park/Street Lighting Tax and the TCSD Rates and Charges. DISTRICT BUSINESS 4 Proposed Residential Street Lighting and Slope/Landscape Maintenance Fee - Tract 28309 (Regency Homes) RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT NO. 28309 (REGENCY HOMES) BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 1998-99 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Bradley BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next meeting: September 9, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\082697 8 TEMECULA :REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 97-01 Resolution: No. RDA 97-07 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Steven J. Ford presiding ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Ford PUBLIC COMMENT: A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Agency on an item not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Agency gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 12, 1997. 2 Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997. 2.2 Approve the transfer of $114,420 in the CIP/Economic Development Fund. R:\Agenda~082697 9 3 Amendment No. 6 to Norm Reeves Lease RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve as to form Amendment No. 6 to the Lease Agreement with Donna L. Reeves Trust and authorize the Executive Director and Agency Attorney to execute the amendment. Acquisition of Property for the Affordable Housing Program RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG THE WESTSIDE OF PUJOL STREET, NORTH OF FIRST STREET (APN 922-062-017) IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA 4.2 Authorize the expenditures of up to $50,000 from RDA Housing set-aside funds for acquisition, escrow and closing costs. AGENCY BUSINESS 5 Employment and Workforce Study Reports and Approval of Contract for Labor Force Study RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Receive and file the 1997 Demographic Report from ECAP; 5.2 Receive and file the 1997 Workforce Study; 5.3 Receive and file the report from Mount San Jacinto College on Workforce Development; 5.4 Approve a contract with the Resource Group to perform a labor survey and authorize the Executive Director and Agency Chairperson to execute the agreement. R:\Agenda\082697 10 DEPARTMENTAL REPORT REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: September 9, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\082657 11 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 12 Administrative Fee for Processing Applications for Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Reductions RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA IMPLEMENTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR PROCESSING APPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REDUCTIONS COUNCIL BUSINESS 13 14 Community Service Funding Program Ad Hoc Committee RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Review and approve the Community Service Funding (CS Funding) Program application changes for FY 1997-98; 13.2 Appoint two Councilmembers to serve on the CS Funding Program Ad Hoc Committee which will review and approve applicants to that program. Arts Council of Temecula Valley Community Service Funding Request RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Review and consider the Arts Council of Temecula Valley funding request for their community service programs. R:\Agenda\082697 12 15 16 17 Temecula Valley Playhouse Community Service Funding Request RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Consider a $15,000 funding request from the Temecula Valley Playhouse for their community service programs. Request for Approval of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Planning Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Planning Agreement. Designation of Voting Delegate for California League of Cities Annual Conference RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Designate a voting representative and an alternate. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: September 9, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agendat082697 13 PROCLAMATIONS,/ PRESENTATIONS ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD AUGUST 12, 1997 EXECUTIVE SESSION A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:30 PM. It was duly moved and seconded to adjourn to Executive Session at 5:30 PM, pursuant to Government Code Sections: 1. §54956.9(c), Conference with City's Legal Counsel; Whether to initiate litigation, four matters. 2. §54956.9(a), Conference with City's Legal Counsel; Existing Litigation, Strachota Insurance v. City of Temecula, et. al. 3. §54956.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiator; Acquisition of property identified as APN 922-062-0107 for Affordable Housing. Negotiating Parties: Robert McKenzie and Robert Thatcher. Under negotiation: price and terms of payment for acquisition. The motion was unanimously carried. The Executive Session was adjourned at 7:00 PM. A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:05 PM at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Mayor Birdsall presiding. PRESENT 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Birdsall ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City Clerk June S. Greek. PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude and intermission music was provided by Vivian Tang. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Linden Curtis, New Covenant Fellowship. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the flag salute by Councilmember Ford. Minutes\08\12\97 -1 - 08/20/97 City Council Minutes ,August 12, 1997 PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATIONS Mayor Birdsall proclaimed Saturday, August 23, 1997 as "California Progressive Square's Day." Mayor Birdsall presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Commissioner Ron Guerriero for his service on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission. Mayor Birdsall presented a Certificate of Appreciatation to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, for a mass clean-up program at both sites of the City of Temecula entrance signs. Tracy Skousen and Alan Dredge thanked the City Council for the opportunity to provide this service. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT City Attorney Thorson stated in accordance with the provisions of the Brown Act, he had nothing to report from Closed Session. PUBLIC COMMENTS Thomas J. Flesher, Attorney, representing Neil Cregar, 41176 Via Celito, addressed the City Council regarding a code enforcement action that deals with a horse trailer on the Cregar's property. He stated the trailer has been parked in this driveway for the last 21 years and has never before been a problem. He asked the City Council to place this matter on an upcoming agenda for discussion. Councilmember Lindemans requested this be placed on a future agenda. Mayor Birdsall asked that Municipal Code Section 17.24 be examined as well. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Lindemans requested that funding for the Arts Council's Annual Concert on the Green and the matter of hiring a professional consultant to address a five-year collaborative plan for funding the arts be placed on the next agenda. Mayor Birdsall instructed staff to obtain information regarding the Arts Commission in Monterey. She also recognized City staff for their recent articles in League of Cities Magazine and the California Golf Magazine. Mayor Pro Tern Roberts stated AB927 was signed by the Governor which allows the City to withdraw from the County Library System and be guaranteed 100% of property taxes generated for libraries in the City. Minutes\08\12\97 -2- 08/20/97 City Council Minutes .August 12, 1997 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Ford requested that Item No. 12 be removed from the agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts requested Item No. 22 be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Linderoans stated he would abstain on Item No. 5. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-11 and 13-23, with Councilmember Lindemans abstaining on Item No. 5. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Birdsall None Stone ., Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. Minutes 2.1 Approve the minutes of July 22, 1997. Resolution Approving List of Demands 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 1997 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 1997. Minutes\08\12\97 -3- 08/20/97 City Council Minutes ,August 12, 1997 o Resolution to Support Local Control Over Public Safety Issues 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CITY OF MONROVIA'S APPEAL TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO MAINTAIN LOCAL CONTROL OVER PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Linderoans Ford, Roberts, Birdsall Purchase of Radio System Equipment for Fire Station 84 6.1 Approve the purchase of City Radio Equipment from Comtronix of Hemet for a total cost of $15,971.25. Parcel Map No. 28384 (Located at the Northeast corner of the intersection of Margarita Road and Highway 79 South) 7.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 28384, subject to the Conditions of Approval. Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 22148 (Located Northwesterly Southeasterly of La Serena Way at Calle Medusa) 8.1 Accept public improvements in Tract No. 22148; 8.2 8.3 and Authorize the initiation of the one-year warranty period, reduction of the Faithful Performance Street and Drainage and Water and Sewer security amounts and release the Subdivision Monumentation and Traffic Signalization Mitigation securities; Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. Minutes\08\12\97 -4- 08~20/97 City Council Minutes ,August 12, 1997 10. 11. 13 Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street (Within Tract No. 22148) (Located Northwesterly and Southeasterly of the intersection of La Serena Way at Calle Medusa) 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 22148) Release Warranty and Monument Bonds in Tract No. 23128 (Located at the Southeast corner of North General Kearny Road at Nicolas Road) 10.1 Authorize the release of Faithful Performance Warranty and Subdivision Monument Bonds in Tract No. 23128; 10.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and Surety. Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System (Within Tract No. 23128) (Located at the Southeasterly corner of North General Kearny Road at Nicolas Road) 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 23128) Accept Subdivision Improvements in Tract No. 24131-1 (Located at the Northwesterly corner of Meadows Parkway at Leena Way) 13.1 Accept the public improvements in Tract No. 24131-1; 13.2 Authorize initiation of the one-year warranty period, reduction of the Faithful Performance Street and Drainage, and Water and Sewer security amounts, and release of Subdivision Monumentation Security; 13.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. Minutes\08\12\97 -5- 08/20/97 City Council Minutes ,Auaust 12, 1997 14 15. 16. 17. Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System (Within Tract No. 24131-1 ) (Located at the Northwesterly corner of Meadows Parkway at Leena Way) 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 24131-1) Accept Subdivision Improvements in Tract No. 24135-2 (Located at the Southwesterly corner of Pio Pico Road at Amarita Way) 15.1 Accept the public improvements in Tract No. 24135-2; 15.2 Authorize initiation of the one-year warranty period, reduction of the Faithful Performance Street and Drainage, and Water and Sewer security amounts, and release of the Subdivision Monumentation Security; 15.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System (Within Tract No. 24135-2) (Located at the Southwesterly corner of Pio Pico Road at Amarita Way) 16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 24135-2) Completion and Acceptance of the Parkview Site Improvement Project, Phase I, Fire Station $4 - Project No. PW95-O9CSD 17.1 Accept the construction of the Park view Site Improvement Project, Phase I, Fire Station 84 - Project No. PW95-09CSD, as complete; 17.2 Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 17.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. Minutes\08\12\97 -6- 08/20/97 City Council Minutes ,AuGust 12, 1997 18. 19. 20. 21. 23. Purchase of Asphalt Patch Truck 18.1 Approve the purchase of a 1998 IHC 4700 Asphalt Patch Truck for the Public Works Department, Maintenance Division, in the amount of $78,430.68. 18.2 Approve the purchase of an Essick Walk-Behind Roller for the Asphalt Patch Truck in the amount of $11,167.21. Award of Construction Contract for Project No. PW97-11 Citywide A.C. Street Repairs FY97-98 19.1 Award a contract for Project No. PW97-11, Citywide A.C. Street Repairs FY97- 98, to Harding and Harper, Inc. for 812,966.90 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 19.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $1,296.69 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Parcel Map No. 28471-1 (Located Southwesterly of the intersection of Winchester Road and Zero Drive) 20.1 Approve Final Parcel Map No. 28471-1, subject to the Conditions of Approval. Award of Contract for Project No. PW97-12, Citywide P.C.C. Repair Program FY97-98 21.1 Award a contract for Project No. PW97-12 Citywide P.C.C. Repair Program FY97-98 to All Concrete Construction in the amount of $40,862.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 21.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $4,086.20 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 97-12 23.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 97-12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28.010(d! OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT ON 1) SOLANA WAY BETWEEN YNEZ ROAD AND DEL REY ROAD, 2) SANTIAGO ROAD BETWEEN FRONT STREET AND YNEZ ROAD, 3) LA SERENA WAY BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND CALLE MEDUSA, AND 4) RAINBOW CANYON ROAD BETWEEN PALA ROAD AND SOUTH CITY LIMITS Minutes\08\12\97 -7- 08/20/97 City Council Minutes ,AuQust 12, 1997 22. Resolution in Support of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Mayor Pro Tern Roberts expressed his concern over absence of arterial projects in Southwest Riverside County. He stated that support of this resolution is an opportunity to receive better representation on this Commission. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 97-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING PROPOSED LEGISLATION WHICH RESTRUCTURES THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNCIL BUSINESS 24. Resolution of Intention and Ordinance Amending PERS Contract Human Resources Manager/Assistant to the City Manager Grant Yates presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation as follows: 24.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-93 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PERS) AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA 24.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 97-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PERS) AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Stone absent. Minutes\08\12\97 -8- 08/20/97 City Council Minutes ,August 12, 1997 25. Development Impact Fees - Clarifications to Ordinance and Resolution Senior Management Analyst Allie Kuhns presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemarts, seconded by Councilmember Stone to approve staff recommendation 25.1 as follows: 25.1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO, 97-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.06 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND CREDITS The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Stone absent. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation 25.2 as follows: 25.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RESTATING THE TERMS OF RESOLUTION NO. 97-45, WHICH ESTABLISHED AND IMPOSED A PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE, AND CLARIFYING CERTAIN MATTERS IN RESOLUTION NO. 97-45 The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Stone absent. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None given. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Peter Thorson reported, during the Closed Session, the City Council directed him to take all necessary steps to intervene in the matter of Stull vs. The Bank of America. Minutes\08\12\97 ~9- 08~20~97 City Council Minutes ,Auaust 12, 1997 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Ford to adjourn at 7:51 PM to a regular meeting on August 26, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk Minutes\08\12\97 -10- 08/20/97 ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RF_SOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $925,696.00. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 26th day of August, 1997. ATfF_3T: Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] Reao,~ 97- 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 97- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of August, 1997 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk 97- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 08/07/97 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 08/14/97 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 08/26t97 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 08/08/97 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 08/26/97 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 165 190 191 192 193 194 210 280 3OO 32O 33O 34O 38O GENERAL FUND RDA DEV-LOW/MOD SET ASIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO J. FUND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-ClP INSURANCE FUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FAClUTIES RDA - DEBT SERVICE PAYROU~ 001 GENERAL 165 RDA-LOW/MOD 190 TCSD 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 280 RDA-ClP 300 INSURANCE 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES TOTAL BY FUND: I RONALD E. BRADLEY, ClTY~ 'A~GER ,(x~ $ 229,739.82 130,271.87 407,271.94 158,412.37 $ 925,696.~ 185,492.89 47,725.44 89,824.50 8,677.06 23,849.37 45,629.70 526.07 5,604.58 329,789.20 3,977.11 9,949.36 3,016.61 13,221.74 0.00 767,283.63 100,221.33 4,841.69 38,459.24 69.41 138.81 2,917.04 579.18 4,745.02 289.43 3,361.94 0.00 2,789.28 158,412.37 925,696.00 , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 16:05 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 14 FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES AMOUNT 130,293.10 26,055.64 33,113.20 42.05 83.92 2,068.91 482.88 5,450.71 10,824.17 2,679.55 4,675.12 2,935.88 11,034.69 TOTAL 229,7'39.82 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK HUMBER 44684 44685 44686 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 726688 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 779642 970731 16:05 CHECK DATE 07/31/97 07/31/97 08/01/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 07/31/97 VENDOR NUMBER 002099 000413 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000444 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000283 000166 VENDOR NAME HOME DEPOT BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES CALIFORNIA DEPT OF FISH INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) INSTATAX (IRS) FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION PREFABRICATED CABINETS - CRC JUL RESTROOM RENTAL OLD TOWN PERMIT:MOWING MURRIETA CREEK 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 1ST HOMEBUYER PRGRM-MCDONELL ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-182-999-5212 280-199-999-5212 001-164-601-5403 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 193-2070 280-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 340-2070 165-199-999-5449 ITEM AMOUNT 202.57 826.00 109.00 43.10 8.48 113.30 4.88 2.78 2.51 4,071.66 228.72 924.43 1.64 3.28 64.52 18.24 207.25 11.95 176.63 35.67 15,549.43 784.90 4,841.58 8.94 17.88 336.19 87.45 685.71 31.94 728.48 258.87 3,769.33 179.04 1,368.83 2.38 4.77 100.20 22.54 172.53 10.04 137.56 95.44 21,180.00 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 202.57 826.00 109.00 5,919.04 29,194.03 21,180.00 44689 08/07/97 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI SPORTS PROGRAM AWARDS 190-183-999-5380 773.65 44689 08/07/97 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI SPORTS PROGRAM AWARDS 190-183-999-5380 646.50 1,420.15 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44690 44690 44690 44690 44690 44690 44690 44691 44692 44693 44693 44694 44694 44694 44694 44695 44696 44697 44697 44697 44698 44699 44699 44699 44700 44701 44702 44703 44704 44705 44706 44707 44708 16:05 CHECK DATE 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 002410 A NOHANfS TOUCH BUILDIN 001700 A+ TEACHING MATERIALS 000104 ABSOLUTE ASPHALT, INC. 000104 ABSOLUTE ASPHALT, INC. 002801 ALL SPORTS AWARDS & PRO 002801 ALL SPORTS AWARDS & PRO 002801 ALL SPORTS AWARDS & PRO 002801 ALL SPORTS AWARDS & PRO ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMP 000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. ARRELLANO, ALICIA 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER, INC. 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER, INC. 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER, INC. ASPIRING ANGELS 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER BARRACK, ELIZABETH 002541 BECKER, WALTER KARL BONILLA, SILVIA C. DBA BONNAND, LAURIE 002432 C C P 0 A CONFERENCE 19 001054 CALIFORNIA BUILDING OFF 001090 CALIFORNIA DEPT OF GENE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP JUL JANITORIAL SRVCS-CITY PRKS DAY CAMP/TINY TOTS SUPPLIES (112)BAGS TEMP A.C.-MA[NT CREW TAX (2500) BLUE GOLF PENCILS-MRKTG FREIGHT TAX CREDIT:GOLF PENCILS SHIPPING REFUND:FEES-COPY OF POLICE RPT RED CROSS AQUATICS SUPPLIES TEMP HELP W/E 7/5 BUSCH,FLORES TEMP HELP W/E 7/5 CERASANI TEMP HELP W/E 7/5 DE RIEUX REFUND:FINGERPRINTING FEES DRINKING WATER FOR CITY HALL BOTTLED WATER SERVICE-MAINT YD BOTTLES WATER SERVICE-CRC REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT ELECTRICAL SERVICES-CITY HALL REFUND:SWIMMING CLASSES REMOVE/REPLACE SIDEWALK - RAMP REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND:PUPPET THEATRE CF:CRIME PREV.-FANENE 9/16-19 SEM:BERG,SMITH,ZUNA,RODRI 8/22 PUB:PLANNERS 97 BOOK OF LISTS ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-2310 165-2310 190-2310 193-2310 280-2310 300-2310 340-2310 190-180-999-5212 190-183-999-5340 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 280-199-999-5270 280-199-999-5270 280-199-999-5270 280-199-999-5270 001-170-4060 190-183-999-5310 190-180-999-5118 001-120-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 001-170-4060 340-199-701-5240 340-199-702-5240 190-182-999-5240 190-2900 340-199-701-5212 190-183-4975 001-164-601-5402 190-2900 190-183-4982 001~170-999-5261 001-162-999-5261 001-161-999-5228 ITEM AMOUNT 498.08 12.90 54.56 .52 14.64 4.30 17.20 1,722.00 81.89 800.80 62.06 350.00 80.00 27.13 40.00- 5.00 38.50 487.62 288.96 200.92 10.00 187.59 7.54 22.05 100.00 79.00 35.00 4,550.00 100.00 30.00 140.00 320.00 9.00 PAGE 2 CHECK AMOUNT 602.20 1,722.00 81.89 862.86 417.13 5.00 38.50 977.50 10.00 217.18 100.00 79.00 35.00 4,550.00 100.00 30.00 140.00 320.00 9.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 08/07/97 16:05 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44709 08/07/97 000638 CALIFORNIA DEPT/CONSERV QTR 2 STRONG MOTION INST. PMT 001-2280 44709 08/07/97 000638 CALIFORNIA DEPT/CONSERV QTR 2 STRONG MOTION INST. PMT 001-2290 44709 08/07/97 000638 CALIFORNIA DEPT/CONSERV (5%) CITYS PORTION OF SMI 001-162-4229 4,258.62 2,414.69 333.67- 6,339.64 44710 08/07/97 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER STREET SIGNS & MISC HARDWARE 44710 08/07/97 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER STREET SIGNS & MISC HARDWARE 001-164-601-5244 001-164-601-5244 150.85 80.92 231.77 44711 08/07/97 001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC QTR 1 -FIRE SYSTEM INSPECTION 190-182-999-5250 150.00 150.00 44712 08/07/97 001555 CHRISTOPHERSON FIRE PRO FIRE SYSTEM TESTING - CRC 190-182-999-5250 65.00 65.00 44713 08/07/97 000462 CLUB, THE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-1990 44713 08/07/97 000462 CLUB, THE TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 218.40 312.00 530.40 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 600 A&S 001'2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 600 A&S 190-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 800 A&S 001-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 800 A&S 190-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 800 A&S 193-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 001-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 165-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 190-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 193-2330 44714 08/07/97 000140 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDEN 000140 CANCER 280-2330 39.75 39.75 66.50 65.56 .94 148.21 19.41 30.29 1.59 6.47 418.47 44715 08/07/97 002037 COM-AID, INC. TELEPHONE MAINT & REPAIRS 320-199-999-5211 44715 08/07/97 002037 COM-AID, INC. TELEPHONE MAINT & REPAIRS 320-199-999-5250 337.00 86.75 423.75 44716 08/07/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 44716 08/07/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET (4) BATTERIES-HAND HELD RADIOS 190-180-999-5242 TAX 190-180-999-5242 300.00 23.25 323.25 44717 08/07/97 001873 CROBARGER, RICHARD TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 124.80 124.80 44718 08/07/97 002661 CUMMINS CAL PACIFIC, IN PMA INSPECTION ON GENERATOR 190-182-999-5212 301.00 301.00 44719 08/07/97 002106 DA FAMILY SUPPORT 002106 SUPPORT 190-2140 82.50 82.50 44720 08/07/97 002413 DALEY & HEFT JAN-APR LEGAL SERVICES 300-1990 2,497.85 2,497.85 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET 44721 08/07/97 001393 DATA TICKET INC. JUN CITATION PROCESSING 001-140-999-5250 INC. JUN CITATION PROCESSING 001-170-999-5250 INC. DEC CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-140-999-5250 INC. DEC CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-170-999-5250 INC. 3/13 CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-140-999-5250 INC. 3/13 CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-170-999-5250 INC. MARCH CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-140-999-5250 INC. MARCH CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-170-999-5250 INC. JUN CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-170-999-5250 INC. JUN CITATION HEARING OFFICER 001-140-999-5250 223.37 223.38 43.75 43.75 35.00 35.00 17.50 17.50 17.50 17.50 674.25 44722 08/07/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DEN-AMIN 001-2340 15.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 08/07/97 16:05 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44722 08/07/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENT-ADV 001-1180 44722 08/07/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENTICAR 001-2340 44722 08/07/97 000156 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENT-REV 001-1180 44722 08/07/97 000156 DENT1CARE OF CALIFORNIA 000156 DENTICAR 001-2340 8.81 8.81 8.81 - 8.81 32.62 44723 08/07/97 002466 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY JUL ELEVATOR SERVICE/MAINT 44723 08/07/97 002466 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY AUG ELEVATOR MAINT/SERVICE 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 195.00 195.00 390.00 44724 08/07/97 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATIO RECYCLED PAINT-GRAFFITI REMOVL 001-164-601-5218 44724 08/07/97 001669 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATIO RECYCLED PAINT GRAFFITI REMOVL 001-164-601-5218 43.64 73.70 117.34 44725 08/07/97 DURISH, JULIE REFUND: BABY GAMES 190-183-4982 29.00 29.00 44726 08/07/97 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 6/20 ADAMS 001-110-999-5118 44726 08/07/97 001380 E S ! EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 6/20 ADAMS 001-150-999-5118 44726 08/07/97 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP (2)W/E 6/20 ADAMS 280-1990 355.88 355.87 711.75 1,423.50 44727 08/07/97 002390 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER SEWER ENG./INSPECT FEES ST #84 210-190-626-5804 980.39 980.39 44728 08/07/97 000754 ELLIOTT GROUP, THE JUL LDSC PLANS REVIEW 001-161-999-5250 2,425.00 2,425.00 44729 08/07/97 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE RANCHO HIGHLANDS-REPLANT TREES 193-180-999-5212 120.00 120.00 44730 08/07/97 002797 EXPERTEES (11) WORK SHIRTS-ADMIN TECH. 330-199-999-5243 285.81 285.81 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 44731 08/07/97 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-164-604-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-110-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-162-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 280-199-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-165-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 320-199-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-162-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-110-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-161-999-5230 INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-150~999-5230 38.76 9.69 19.13 28.31 50.44 9.69 16.84 15.56 37.74 9.69 235.85 44732 08/07/97 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO LOT RPT RES.IMPROV PRGRAM:BASS 165-199-999-5250 44732 08/07/97 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO LOT RPT RES. IMPROVEMNT:SAUCEDO 165-199-999-5250 150.00 150.00 300.00 44733 08/07/97 FLORES, HELEN 44733 08/07/97 FLORES, HELEN REFUND:SEC DEPOSIT/ROOM RENTAL 190-2900 REFUND:SEC DEPOSIT/ROOM RENTAL 190-183-4990 100.00 115.00 215.00 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 001-2360 447-34 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 165-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 190-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 191-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 192-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 193-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 194-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 280-2360 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 300-2360 605.63 15.90 125.81 .43 .85 11.90 3.39 22.35 2.12 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97' 16:05 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97' 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97' 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 44734 08/07/97 002002 FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO FORTIS BENEFITS INS. CO 002002 LIFE INS 320-2360 002002 LIFE INS 340-2360 002002 LTD 001-2380 002002 LTD 165-2380 002002 LTD 190-2380 002002 LTD 191-2380 002002 LTD 192-2380 002002 LTD 193-2380 002002 LTD 194-2380 002002 LTD 280-2380 002002 LTD 300-2380 002002 LTD 320-2380 002002 LTD 340-2380 002002 STD 001-2500 002002 STD 165-2500 002002 STD 190-2500 002002 STD 191-2500 002002 STD 192-2500 002002 STD 193-2500 002002 STD 194-2500 002002 STD 280-2500 002002 STD 300-2500 002002 STD 320-2500 002002 STD 340-2500 FLAMMER ST DISB AUG 97 001-1170 17.00 19.12 1,095.76 41.61 225.76 .82 1.63 22.27 7.94 51.05 2.87 40.49 27.01 1,171.54 44.01 238.86 .87 1.73 23.55 8.39 54.03 3.04 42.84 28.57 13.58 3,972.72 44736 08/07/97 002886 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD - V 002886 DMV FEES 001-2140 326.85 326.85 44737 08/07/97 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, DAY PLANNER BINDERS & REFILLS 001-171-999-5228 185.01 185.01 44738 08/07/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-676-3526-JUL-FIRE ALARM 320-199-999-5208 44738 08/07/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-693-0956-JUL-GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 44738 08/07/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA ' PAYM 909-694-4356-JUL-HINTERGARDT 320-199'999-5208 44738 08/07/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-694-8927-JUL-GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 44738 08/07/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM DEBIT-909-699-2475 FINAL BILL 001-164-601-5208 76.65 28.29 28.52 25.05 7.83 166.34 44739 08/07/97 002545 GAMBLE, MARK S. TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 480.00 480.00 44740 08/07/97 002819 GARWlN & CHAN ASSOCIATE (50)VIDEO & (50)AUDIO TAPES 320-199-999-5221 470.33 470.33 44741 08/07/97 002141 GELS, PAUL 44741 08/07/97 002141 GELS, PAUL MOTORCYCLE REPAIR POLICE DEPT 001-170-999-5214 MOTORCYCLE REPAIR POLICE DEPT 001-170-999-5214 100.00 475.00 575. O0 44742 08/07/97' 000177' GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-1990 44742 08/07'/97 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT JUN OFFICE SUPPLIES -POLICE 001-1990 629.58 352.28 981.86 44743 08/07/97 001609 GREATER ALARM COMPANY, QTR 1 ALARM SRVCS-CABOOSE 001-110-999-5223 75.00 75.00 44744 08/07/97 HANEY, JOSEPHINE L. REFUND:SEC DEPOSIT/ROOM RENTAL 190-2900 100.00 44744 08/07/97 HANEY, JOSEPHINE L. REFUND:SEC DEPOSIT/ROOM RENTAL 190-183-4990 215.00 315.00 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44745 44746 44746 44746 44746 44746 44747 44748 44749 44750 44751 44752 44752 44753 44754 44755 44756 44756 44757 44758 44759 44759 44760 44761 44762 44763 44764 44765 44766 16:05 CHECK DATE 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 VENDOR NUMBER 000194 000194 000194 000194 000194 000199 002892 002023 000206 000206 000548 000209 002890 000945 000945 002893 000482 001967 001256 002011 002693 000220 VENDOR NAME HORTON, VIRGINIA I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS INTERNAL REVENUE SERVIC JACKSON, TRAVIS L. JENKINS, DONALD KIMBALL, GINA KING, WENDE KINKO'S, INC. KINKO'S, INC. KIPLINGER CALIFORNIA LE L & M FERTILIZER, INC. L A CELLULAR L P S COMPUTER SERVICE L P S COMPUTER SERVICE LARA, NOE LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, LEITGEB, RICHARD LEITGEB, RICHARD LEMIEUX, ELLEN MAILBOX, THE MANPOt4ER TEMPORARY SERV MARRIOTT HOTEL MARTIN, KATHARINA E. MATROS, ANDREA MAURICE PRINTERS, INC. CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION REFUND:SWIMMING CLASSES 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000199 1RS GARN TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND:SWIMMING CLASSES TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS (10) REAMS OF CARDSTOCK MISC COPYING/SUPPLIES -TCSD SUB:97/98 THE KIPLINGER LETTER MISC LDSC & MAINT SUPPLIES 909/223-1667 RVSD SHERIFF JUL LASER PRINTER MAINT AUG LASER PRINTER MAINT TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS NOV-FEB PROF SRVCS-WINCHESTER REFUND:SEC DEPOSIT/ROOM RENTAL REFUND:SEC DEPOSIT/ROOM RENTAL REFUND:PUPPET THEATRE PUBLICATION FOR YOUTH PRGMS TEMP HELP W/E 7/20 ALDRED/CAST HOTEL:CCPOA CONF:9/17-19:FANEN TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS REAL ESTATE NEWSLETTERS PRINTI ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-183-4975 001-2080 165-2080 190-2080 193-2080 280-2080 001-2140 190-183-999-5330 190-2900 190-183-4975 190-183-999-5330 330-199-999-5220 190-180-999-5222 280-199-999-5228 001-164-601-5218 001-170-999-5208 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 190-183-999-5330 280-199-602-5804 190-2900 190-183-4990 190-183-4982 190-180-999-5228 001-164-604-5118 001-170-999-5261 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 280-199-999-5270 ITEM AMOUNT 25.00 1,987.06 18.75 630.00 14.76 43.57 289.56 160.00 100.00 25.00 168.00 85.63 70.30 73.00 117.59 54.39 310.76 310.76 168.00 3,533.75 100.00 210.00 60.00 49.90 1,104.95 181.22 364.00 386.40 1,037.63 PAGE 6 CHECK AMOUNT 25.00 2,694.14 289.56 160.00 100.00 25.00 168.00 155.93 73.00 117.59 54.39 621.52 168.00 3,533.75 310.00 60.00 49.90 1,104.95 181.22 364.00 386.40 1,037.63 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 08/07/97 16:05 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS QTY 500 FOIL BUSINESS CARDS 320-199-999-5220 102.50 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 320-199-999-5220 7.94 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS:TEM POLICE DEPT 001-170-999-5222 191.25 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-170-999-5222 14.82 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS:HUTER,JENNI 190-180-999-5222 41.21 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS:P.ALBANESE 001-162-999-5222 41.21 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINSS CARDS:VOLLMUTH~MARY 001-140-999-5222 38.25 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS TAX 001-140-999-5222 2.96 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS BUSINESS CARDS:A.ELMO/C.KEIRSE 001-162-999-5222 151.66 44767 08/07/97 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS STATIONARY PAPER 001-162-999-5222 16.42 608.22 44768 08/07/97 002548 MORRIS SR., STEWART M. TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 224.00 224.00 44769 08/07/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT LEGAL ADVERTISEMENTS 001-120-999-5256 161.00 44769 08/07/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT SPECIAL EVENTS ADVERTISING 190-180-999-5254 249.56 44769 08/07/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION UPDATES 001-165-999-5256 169.06 579.62 44770 08/07/97 OCCHIPINTI, LISA REFUND: TUMBLE JUNGLE 190-183-4982 10.00 10.00 44771 08/07/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 190-180-999-5214 105.00 44771 08/07/97 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 001-164-601-5214 47.50 152.50 44772 08/07/97 ORANGE EMPIRE TRAINING 97 TRAINING MATRIX:PS,MB,PZ 001-162-999-5261 210.00 210.00 44773 08/07/97 002516 ORGANIZERS PLUS TV/PROJECTION CART FOR CHAMBER 340-199-701-5219 913.75 913.75 44774 08/07/97 002652 OSCAR'S COUNICL MTG/LUNCHEON 8/4/97 001-100-999-5260 119.30 119.30 44775 08/07/97 002406 PACIFIC BUSINESS INTERI 2 LAZY BOYS FOR PRKVW FIRE STA 210-190-626-5610 1,163.70 1,163.70 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-162-999-5238 103.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-100-999-5238 25.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 320-199-999-5238 38.45 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-163-999-5238 25.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-164-601-5238 25.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-165-999-5238 25.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-164-604-5238 12.50 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-170-999-5238 52.50 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 190-180-999-5238 150.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-120-999-5238 27.00 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-110-999-5238 13.50 44776 08/07/97 001561 PAGENET PAGING SERVICE & PAGERS RENTAL 001-140-999-5238 12.50 509.45 44777 08/07/97 000472 PARADISE CHEVROLET, INC INSTALL REMANUFACTURED ENGINE 190-180-999-5214 3,333.01 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 001-2130 32.88 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 001-2390 15,559.87 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 165-2390 628.78 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 190-2130 3.34 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 190-2390 3,130.72 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 191-2390 11.05 3,333.01 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 16:05 CHECK DATE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PER$ (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44778 08/07/97 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH ]NSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 FHP 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH [HSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PER 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISERSO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACIFICR 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS DED 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS-ADM 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE FLAMMER HEALTH INS-AUG 97 44779 08/07/97 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA SO 192-2390 193-2390 194-2390 280-2130 280-2390 300-2390 320-2390 340-2390 001-2130 001-2390 165-2390 190-2390 191-2390 192-2390 193-2390 194-2390 280-2390 300-2390 320-2390 340-2390 001-2090 165-2090 280-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 300-2090 001-2090 001-2090 165-2090 190-2090 191-2090 192-2090 193-2090 194-2090 280-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 193-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 194-2090 001-2090 280-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-1170 165-2090 22.04 321.56 107.10 1.00 742.09 45.10 617.35 377.45 313.17 71.48 1.75 14.69 .05 .09 1.31 .37 2.43 .23 1.86 2.09 156.86 168.60 56.19 697.00 356.85 972.19 38.27 1,161.38 4,959.53 45.11 1,177.39 14.84 29.60 207.20 44.36 142.85 760.21 2,085.92 321.14 12.39 61.92 2,533.58 305.70 101.90 1~917.98 179.04 817.31 99.20 154.85 136.51 PAGE 8 CHECK AMOUNT 22,009.85 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44779 44780 44781 44781 44781 44781 44781 44781 44781 44781 44781 44781 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44782 44783 44783 44784 44784 44784 44784 16:05 CHECK DATE 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08107/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 VENDOR NUMBER 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 000245 001958 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 000254 002776 002776 001537 001537 001537 001537 VENDOR NAME PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE PERS LONG TERM CARE PRO CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION 000245 AETNA SO 000245 BLSHIELD 000245 FHP 000245 HELTNNET 000245 HELTHNET 000245 HELTHNET 000245 NELTNNET 000245 HELTHNET 000245 KAISERSO 000245 KAISERSO 000245 KAISERSO 000245 KAISERSO 000245 PACIFICR 000245 PERS CNO 000245 PENS CNO 000245 PENS REV 001958 PERS L-T PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PETTY CASH PETTY PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE CONPAN PUBLIC PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT CASH REIMBURSEMENT NEWSPAPER SUBSCRIPTION PUBLIC NOTICES: 10.28.010D NOTICES: ELECTIONS NOTICES: 10.28.01D NOTICES: PW97-11 NOTICE: PW97-12 NOTICE: PH-269 NOTICES: ELECTIONS NOTICE: PA97-0118 NOTICE: PA97-0189 NOTICE: PA97-0129 NOTICE: PA97-0174 NOTICE:PLAN COM MTG CAN SC-5001343-2 GY SC-5001343-2 GY 001537 DENTALPM 001537 DENTALPM 001537 DENTALPM 001537 DENTALPM ACCOUNT NUMBER 280-2090 190-2090 001-2090 001-2090 165-2090 190-2090 280-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 193-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 280-2090 001-2090 001-2122 001-110-999-5223 001-120-999-5220 320-199-999-5220 001-140-999-5260 001-150-999-5260 001-161-999-5260 001-164-601-5260 001-170-999-5220 190-183-999-5320 001-140-999-5230 001-164-604-5228 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 001-150-999-5208 001-150-999-5208 001-2340 165-2340 190-2340 193-2340 ITEM AMOUNT 45.50 37.15 15.48 94.61 1.07 52.21 3.37 9.39 11.85 95.47 6.82 34.09 100.15 52.02 128.96 824.65- 49.85 71.61 33.31 10.56 26.00 49.92 100.18 15.00 32.27 149.60 1.00 124.80 8.00 16.75 10.00 33.00 34.00 48.00 17.00 19.75 16.50 17.75 17.25 6.75 110.36 123.87 2,229.73 126.60 369.51 3.39 PAGE 9 CHECK AMOUNT 19,579.36 49.85 489.45 369.55 234.23 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44784 44784 44784 44784 44784 44785 44786 44786 44786 44787 44787 44788 44788 44788 44788 44789 44789 44790 44791 44792 44793 44794 44795 44796 44797 44798 44798 44799 44799 44799 44800 44801 44801 44801 16:05 CHECK DATE 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 VENDOR NUMBER 001537 001537 001537 001537 001537 002851 000262 000262 000353 000353 000353 000353 002322 002322 000268 002714 001872 002034 002384 002505 000519 000519 000537 000537 000537 002366 001576 001576 001576 VENDOR NAME PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. PRINCIPAL MUTUAL, INC. QUALITY SEAMLESS RAIN G R.E.E. INC R.E.E. INC R.E.E. INC RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR RIVERSIDE CO. AUDITOR RIVERSIDE CO. CITATION RIVERSIDE CO. CITATION RIVERSIDE CO. HABITAT ROWAN, BARBARA SALAZAR, MARIANNE SAN DIEGO, CITY OF SECURE BUSINESS COMMUNI SHEPARD, KIM SIGNS AND LUCITE PRODUC SMITH, ROSE SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET C STEWARD COMPANY, THE STEWARD COMPANY, THE STEWARD COMPANY, THE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION 001537 DENTALPM 001537 DENTALPM 001537 DENTALPM FLAMMER DENTAL AUG 97 COBRA AUG 97 GUTTER & DWNSPT INSTALL @ PRKV REFUND: B97-0255 REDUCE SQ~ FT REFUND: B97-0255 REDUCE SQ~ FT REFUND: B97-0255 REDUCE SQ~ FT 01-99-01979-0 MARGARITA ROAD 02-79-10100-1 DIAZ ROAD JUNE PRKING CITATION ASSESSMEN JUNE PRKING CITATION ASSESSMEN MAY PRKING CITATION ASSESSMENT MAY PRKING CITATION ASSESSMENT RVSD CO. TICKET-REC~D IN ERROR RVSD CO. TICKET-REC~D IN ERROR K-RAT PMT FOR MAY & JUNE 97 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS REIMB:CODE ENFORCEMENT TRAININ MAINT & INSTALL POLICE RADIOS MISC AUDIO/VIDEO SUPPLIES REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT INSTALL NUMBERS @ PRKVW STATIN REFUND: COMPUTER CLASS PEST CTRL SERVS-CITY HALL PEST CTRL SERVS-SR CNTR 2'02'351-4946 6TH STREET 2-00-397-5042 CITY HALL 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS METERS CITY HALL - CARPET CLEANING TEFLON COATED DRILL BITS FREIGHT TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 280-2340 300-2340 340-2340 001-1170 001-1180 210-190-626-5610 001-2290 001-162-4200 001-162-4285 190-183-~9-5370 190-180-999-5240 001-2265 001-2260 001-2265 001-2260 001-170-4055 001-2260 001-2300 190-183-999-5330 001-162-999-5261 001-170-999-5215 320-199-999-5210 190-2900 210-190-626-5804 190-183-4982 340-199-701-5250 190-181-999-5250 190-181-999-5240 340-199-701-5240 193-180-999-5240 340-199-701-5212 330-199-999-5242 330-199-999-5242 330-199-999-5242 ITEM AMOUNT 178.05 16.92 152.32 25.66 93.36 2,325.00 .25 33.75 45.00 10.90 59.66 1~499.50 110.00 1~439.50 220.00 5.00 5.00 5,505.00 96.00 200.00 93.94 70.00 100.00 631.62 70.00 56.00 29.00 1,239.47 5,872.96 697.31 1,400.00 55.90 4.50 4.33 PAGE 10 CHECK AMOUNT 3,195.54 2,325.00 79.00 70.56 3,269.00 10.00 5,505.00 96.00 200.00 93.94 70.00 100.00 631.62 70.00 85.00 7,809.74 1,400.00 64.73 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44802 44803 44803 44803 44803 44803 44803 44803 44803 44803 44803 44804 44804 44805 44805 44806 44806 44806 44806 44807 44808 44808 44808 44808 44808 44808 44808 44808 44809 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 44810 16:05 CHECK DATE 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 VENDOR NUMBER 002891 001547 001547 001547 001547 001547 001547 001547 001547 001547 001547 000700 000700 000168 000168 000307 000307 000307 000307 000919 000642 000642 000642 000642 000642 000642 000642 000642 001483 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 002107 VENDOR NAME STUDENT WORKS PAINTING TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 TEMECULA ARTS COUNCIL TEMECULA ARTS COUNCIL TENECULA FLOWER CORRAL TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL TEMECULA TROPHY CO. TEMECULA TROPHY CO. TEMECULA TROPHY CO. TEMECULA TROPHY CO. TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE CITY OF - FLE TON DOOSON & ASSOCIATES TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE TRANS-GENERAL LIFE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS ITEM DESCRIPTION RESIDENTIAL PRGM:TICE,RANDALL 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES 001547 UN DUES TOO MUCH DUES PAID MAYORrS BALL:R.R,R.B,S.F. 8/16 MAYORrS BALL:R.R,R.B,S.F. 8/16 ARRANGEMENT FOR S. SARAYDARIAN SUNSHINE FUND APPRECIATION PLAQUE ELMER DILL GOLD COLOR KEY TO THE CITY TAX 4TH OF JULY RIBBONS TEEN COUNCIL SURVEY EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX MITIGATION MONITORING:CAMPOS INS. 002107 VL ADVAN INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VL REFER INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE INS. 002107 VOL LIFE ACCOUNT NUMBER 165-199-813-5804 001-2125 165-2125 190-2125 191-2125 192-2125 193-2125 194-2125 280-2125 320-2125 001-2125 001-100-999-5260 001-110-999-5260 001-100-999-5285 001-2170 001-100-999-5265 001-100-999-5265 001-100-999-5265 190-183-999-5370 001-100-999-5222 001-1020 165-1020 190-1020 193-1020 280-1020 300-1020 320-1020 340-1020 001-2610 001-2510 001-2510 165-2510 190-2510 193-2510 280-2510 340-2510 001-2510 001-2510 165-2510 190-2510 193-2510 280-2510 340-2510 ITEM AMOUNT 1,395.00 584.25 2.46 82.00 1.03 2.05 14.35 3.07 7.79 20.50 20.50- 130.00 65.00 74.35 58.72 190.70 135.00 25.24 36.13 46.87 3,703.70 391.25 651.66 12.50 568.75 10.00 416.66 62.50 660.40 244.35 167.50 5.51 55.25 1.10 5.49 9.50 229.40- 158.80 5.50 50.50 .85 5.50 8.25 PAGE 11 CHECK AMOUNT 1,395.00 697.00 195.00 133.07 387.07 46.87 5,817.02 660.40 488.70 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 08/07/97 16:05 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44811 08/07/97 000420 TRANS-PACIFIC CONSULTAN JUNE SERVS:WESTERN BYPASS LIFT 210-165-612-5802 350.00 350.00 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 001-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 165-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 190-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 193-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 194-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 280-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 300-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 320-2080 44812 08/07/97 001065 U S C M /PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 340-2080 3,636.11 181.50 1,134.39 15.63 78.13 348.16 4.92 562.50 128.12 6,089.46 44813 08/07/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 001-2160 44813 08/07/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 165-2160 44813 08/07/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 190-2160 44813 08/07/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 193-2160 44813 08/07/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 280-2160 44813 08/07/97 000389 U S C M /PEBSCO (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 340-2160 645.22 127.28 1,700.04 73.18 41.66 37.62 2,625.00 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-110-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-120-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMR$ POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-162-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 190-180-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-140-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-150-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-161-999-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 001-164-604-5230 44814 08/07/97 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT #11601 280-199-999-5230 59.01 250.23 77.07 213.59 273.85 95.58 414.53 180.55 109.59 1,674.00 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF 44815 08/07/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF N. 5305001995902 JS 001-100-999-5258 N. 5305001995878 PB 001-100-999-5258 N. 5305001995894 RR 001-100-999-5258 N. 5305001995951 SN 001-100-999-5265 N. 5305001995910 RB 001-110-999-5262 N. 5305001995910 RB 001-100-999-5265 N. 5305001995993-J.G.-JUL 001-120-999-5277 N. 5305001995985-G.Y.-JUL 001-150-999-5260 N. 5305001995985-G.Y.'JUL 001-150-999-5258 N. 5305001995985-G.Y.-JUL 001-150-999-5250 N. 5305001995944 TE 001-1170 N. 5305001995977 JK 001-164-601-5250 450.22 421.93 841.95 1,072.23 123.33 290.93 105.00 47.00 52.00 8.00 72.36 48.72 3,533.67 44816 08/07/97 002065 UNISOURCE WHITE COPY PAPER 330-199-999-5220 44816 08/07/97 002065 UNISOURCE COLORED PAPER 330-199-999-5220 44816 08/07/97 002065 UNISOURCE TAX 330-199-999-5220 1,750.40 569.50 179.81 2,499.71 44817 08/07/97 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 001-2120 44817 08/07/97 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 165-2120 44817 08/07/97 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 190-2120 102.00 5.00 17.00 124.00 44818 08/07/97 000854 URBAN LAND INSTITUTE MEMBERSHIP:THORNHILL,G 35248 001-161-999-5226 145.00 145.00 VOUCHRE2 08/07/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44819 44819 44820 44821 16:05 CHECK DATE 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 08/07/97 VENDOR NUMBER 000332 000332 002092 VENDOR NAME VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI VELEZ, KIMBERLY WINTER GRAPHICS SOUTH CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION MAY PLAN CHECK FEES MAY PLAN CHECK SERVICES REFUND: MUSIC FOR TODDLERS ~,K)RLD ECONOMIC ALLIANCE AD/ISL ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-162-999-5248 001-162-999-5248 190-183-4982 280-199-999-5270 ITEM AMOUNT 5,057.12 14,687.63 40.00 369.80 PAGE 13 CHECK AMOUNT 19,744.75 40.00 369.80 TOTAL CHECKS 229,739.82 VOUCltRE2 08/14/9;' 10:40 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND FACILITIES AMOUNT 24,541.40 29,005.00 987.00 38,533.00 313,593.03 116.51 496.00 TOTAL 407,271.94 VOUCHRE2 08/14/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44910 44910 44910 44910 44910 44910 44910 44911 44911 44912 44912 44912 44912 44912 44912 44912 44912 44912 44913 44914 44915 44915 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44916 44917 44917 44917 44917 44918 10:40 CHECK DATE 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 08/26/97 VENDOR NUMBER 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 001056 001056 002468 002468 002468 002468 002468 002468 002468 002468 002468 002695 002499 002685 002685 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002412 002181 002181 002181 002181 000332 VENDOR NAME CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE HA CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED GENERAL CONSOLIDATED J A S PACIFIC CONSULTIN L D KING, INC. LAAN'S TREE SERVICE LAAN'S TREE SERVICE RICHARDS, WATSON & GERS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICHARDS RICNARDS RICHARDS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS WATSON & GERS RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER JULY LDSC MAINT - PARKS JUL LDSC MAINT - SENIOR CENTER JUL LDSC MAINT - C.R.C. JUL LDSC MAINT - T.C.C JUL LDSC MAINT - MEDIANS JUL LDSC MAINT - SLOPES JUL LDSC MAINT -CITY HALL 190-180-999-5415 190-181-999-5415 190-182-999-5415 190-184-999-5415 191-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 340-199-701-5415 JUL LDSC MAINT - PARKS JUL LDSC MAINT FOR SLOPES 190-180-999~5415 193-180-999-5415 PRGSS PMT #10-6TH ST PARKING 280-1990 C.O. #5 & 6 -6TH ST PARKING 280-199-804-5804 CREDIT:LIN ITEM #12 INCOMPLETE 280-199-804-5804 CREDIT MEMO:RETENTION CORRECTI 280-2035 RELEASE STOP NOTICE:6TH ST PRK 280-2038 RETENTION W/H PMT #10 6TH ST 280-2035 STOP NOTICE:6TH ST PARKING 280-2038 STOP NOTICE:6TH ST PARKING 280-2038 STOP NOTICE:6TH ST PARKING 280-2038 JUL B&S TEMP INSPECTOR:LEONARD 001-162-999-5118 JUL PROF SRVCS-WINCHESTER/I-15 280-199-602-5801 TCSD TREE TRIMMING TCSD TREE TRIMMING 193-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5415 JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVlCES JUNE 97 LEGAL SERVICES 001-130-999-5246 190-180-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-1280 001-130-999-5246 300-199-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 280-199-999-5246 280-199-999-5246 JUNE PRGSS:WINCHESTER/I-15 BRI RETENTION FOR JUNE PRGSS PMT LINE ITEM# 81 BILLED IN ERROR RETENTION FOR CM-970603 280-199-602-5804 280-2035 280-199-602-5804 280-2035 JULY 97 PLAN CHECK SERVS 001-162'999-5248 ITEM AMOUNT 17,250.00 246.00 1,593.00 325.00 987.00 11,521.00 496.00 8,961.00 8,813.00 182,818.50 3,765.00 1,500.00- 150.00 20,445.01 18,658.34- 20,445.01- 9,648.25- 6,363.24- 5,347.60 7,209.88 13,000.00 5,199.00 349.67 630.00 523.60 255.00 186.00 3,135.00 1,323.00 170.50 1,296.25 155.69 116.51 496.16 85.68 2,233.35 1,586.92 381.81 92.00 175,472.80 17,547.28- 2,866.50- 286.65 7,396.98 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 32,418.00 17,774.00 150,563.67 5,347.60 7,209.88 18,199.00 13,017.14 155,345.67 7,396.98 TOTAL CHECKS 407,271.94 VOUCHRE2 08/14/97 09:01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES AMOUNT 30~658.39 21,669.80 27,706.30 7,648.01 23,765.45 5,027.79 43.19 153.87 5,372.00 1,181.05 5~274.24 80.73 1,691.05 TOTAL 130,271.87 VOUCHRE2 08/14/97 09:01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44822 08/08/97 001576 STEWARD COMPANY, THE TEFLON COATED DRILL BITS 330-199-999-5242 122000 08/05/97 002856 OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMP 1ST TIME BYR PRGM:FARIA ALFRED 165-199-999-5449 64.73 21,550.00 64.73 21,550.00 44825 08/14/97 002038 ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPL MISC POOL SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5310 65.68 65.68 44826 08/14/97 000936 AMERICAN RED CROSS AQUATIC SUPPLIES FOR TRAINING 190-183-999-5310 65.00 65.00 44827 08/14/97 001947 AMERIGAS 44827 08/14/97 001947 AMERIGAS PROPANE FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-162-999-5263 PROPANE FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5263 269.97 32.12 302.09 44828 08/14/97 000622 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER INSTALL COMPRESSOR - CRC 190-182-999-5212 640.00 640.00 44829 08/14/97 002820 BRADSHAW ENGINEERING CO ADD FIRE SPRINKLERS-CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250 224.70 224.70 44830 08/14/97 BURNS~ WILLIAM J. 44831 08/14/97 BUSHNER, CLAUDIA REFUND:PARTIAL FACILITY RENTAL 190-183-4990 REFUND: SPRING DAY CAMP 190-183-4984 140.00 364.00 140.00 364.00 44832 08/14/97 002878 BUSINESS INFORMATION SY 7/28 COMPUTER TRAINING CLASS 320-199-999-5261 600.00 600.00 44833 08/14/97 000588 C C A P A CONFERENCE APA CF:10/12-15 G.THORNHILL 001-161-999-5258 600.00 600.00 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 44834 08/14/97 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES LIABILITY INSURANCE:EXPLORER JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER~S COMP JULY 97 WORKER~S COMP JULY 97 WORKER~S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER~S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER~S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER'S COMP JULY 97 WORKER~S COMP 300-1990 001-2370 165-2370 190-2370 191-2370 192-2370 193-2370 194'2370 280-2370 300-2370 320'2370 330-2370 340-2370 001-1182 190-183-999-5112 190-181-999-5112 412.00 4,013.61 100.99 1,848.86 .82 1.64 116.77 43.19 138.27 8.35 53.24 16.00 317.64 23.07 .10 1.17 7,095.72 44835 08/14/97 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA REPLACE BACKFLOW BALL VALVES 193-180-999-5415 111.90 111.90 44836 08/14/97 000398 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL CMTA CF:G.ROBERTS 11/6-8 001-140-999-5261 325.00 325.00 44837 08/14/97 000131 CARL WARREN & CO., INC. COOPER & VOCHELLI 9/4/96 300-199-999-5205 24.50 24.50 44838 08/14/97 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER STREET SIGNS & MISC HARDWARE 001-164-601-5244 473.02 473.02 44839 08/14/97 001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC AUG ALARM SRVCS - C.R.C. 190-182-999-5250 50.00 44839 08/14/97 001195 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVIC AUG ALARM SRVCS-SENIOR CENTER 190-181-999-5250 45.00 95.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 08/14/97 09:01 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44840 08/14/97 002782 CHICKfS SPORTING GOODS (20)DOZEN SOFTBALLS 190-183-999-5380 907.06 907.06 44841 08/14/97 001275 COMPUSERVE, INC. COMPUSERVE INFORMATION SERVICE 320-199-999-5228 9.95 9.95 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET FY 97/98 RADIO MAINT AGREEMENT 001-164-604-5215 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET FY 97/98 RADIO MAINT AGREEMENT 001-164-601-5215 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET FY97-98 RADIO MAINT. CONTRACT 001-163-999-5215 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET FY 97/98 RADIO MAINT AGREEMENT 001-162-999-5215 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET FY97/98 RADIO MAINT AGREEMENT 190-180-999-5215 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF NEMET FY 97/98 RADIO MAINT AGREEMENT 001-165-999-5215 44842 08/14/97 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET FY 97/98 RADIO MAINT AGREEMENT 320-199-999-5215 44843 08/14/97 002413 DALEY & HEFT JUNE LEGAL SERVICES - CLAIMS 300-1990 44843 08/14/97 002413 DALEY & HEFT MAY LEGAL SERVICES - CLAIMS 300-1990 585.00 894.00 390.00 1,338.00 1,170.00 363.00 468.00 329.70 406.50 5,208.00 736.20 44844 08/14/97 000518 DEL RIO CARE ANIMAL HOB VETERINARY SERVS FOR K-9 DOG 001-170-999-5327 14.96 44845 08/14/97 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 7/13 BROCK 001-150-999-5118 44845 08/14/97 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 7/13 BROCK 001-150-999-5118 44845 08/14/97 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 7/20 BROCK 001-150-999-5118 44845 08/14/97 001673 DIVERSIFIED TEMPORARY S TEMP HELP W/E 8/3 BROCK 001-150-999-5118 44846 08/14/97 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 6/30 ADAMS 001-110-999-5118 44846 08/14/97 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 6/30 ADAMS 001-150-999-5118 44846 08/14/97 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 6/30 ADAMS 280-199-999-5118 44847 08/14/97 002712 ECONOMIC & POLITICAL AN JUN ECONOMIC CONSULTING SRVCS 280-199-999-5248 44848 08/14/97 002517 ERNIE B'S MGMT MEETING LUNCHES (4)DAYS 001-150-999-5260 44848 08/14/97 002517 ERNIE BfS SALES TAX 001-150-999-5260 239.55 270.00 412.80 377.33 268.13 268.13 536.24 1,000.00 186.00 14.42 1,299.68 1,072.50 1,000.00 200.42 44849 08/14/97 002809 EXPERIAN CREDIT APS FOR ROA 280-199-999-5250 50.00 50.00 44850 08/14/97 000643 FORTNER HARDWARE, INC. MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES - PARKS 44850 08/14/97 000643 FORTNER HARDWARE, INC. MISC. MAINT SUPPLIES - P.W. 190-180-999-5212 001-164-601-5218 60.93 121.01 181.94 44851 08/14/97 000795 FRED PRYOR SEMINARS MANAGE CONFLICT:WIMBERLY 10/16 001-161-999-5261 99.00 99.00 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-308-1079-JUL-GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-506-9269-JUL-FIREWORKS 190-180-999-5208 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-695-1409-JUL-GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-695-3539-JUL-GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-699-0590-JUL-TEM TOWN ASN 320-199-999-5208 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-699-1370-JUL-CABOOSE 001-110-999-5223 44852 08/14/97 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909-699-2309-JUL-GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 53.42 27.01 86.72 38.85 53.27 142.13 36.78 438.18 44853 08/14/97 002819 GARWIN & CHAN ASSOCIATE (100) VHS TAPES 320-199-999-5210 44853 08/14/97 002819 GARWIN & CHAN ASSOCIATE (100) SLEEVES - WHITE 320-199-999-5210 44853 08/14/97 002819 GARWIN & CHAN ASSOCIATE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5210 44853 08/14/97 002819 GARWIN & CHAN ASSOCIATE (10) SONY VIDEOS TAPES 320-199-999-5210 44853 08/14/97 002819 GARWIN & CHAN ASSOCIATE (100) LEADERLESS AUDIO TAPES 320-199-999-5210 175.00 12.00 14.49 145.80 122.00 V(MJCHRE2 08/14/97 09:01 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER 44853 08/14/97 002819 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44854 08/14/97 000177 44855 08/14/97 000378 44856 08/14/97 001517 44857 08/14/97 000308 44857 08/14/97 000388 44857 08/14/97 000308 44857 08/14/97 000388 44858 08/14/97 002481 44858 08/14/97 002481 44859 08/14/97 001407 44860 08/14/97 000203 44860 08/14/97 000203 44861 08/14/97 44862 08/14/97 000206 44(~62 08/14/97 000206 44862 08/14/97 000206 44863 08/14/97 001405 44864 08/14/97 44865 08/14/97 000945 44866 08/14/97 00197-5 44867 08/14/97 000380 44868 08/14/97 000482 44869 08/14/97 001653 VENDOR NAME GARWIN & CHAN ASSOCIATE GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT HAFELI, THOHAS HEALTH & HUMAN RESOURCE I C B O, INC. I C B O, INC. I C B O, INC. ! C B O, INC. INLAND FOUNDATION ENGIN INLAND FOUNDATION ENGIN INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL JOBS AVAILABLE, INC. JOBS AVAILABLE, INC. KELLIHER, KIM KINKO'S, INC. KINKO'S, INC. KINKO'S, INC. KIWANIS CLUB OF TEMECUL KMIECIK, LIDIA L P S COMPUTER SERVICE LA SALLE LIGHTING SERVI LAIDLAW TRANSIT, INC. LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, MAILER'S SOFT~ARE CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION SALES TAX MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES -FINANCE MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES CREDIT FOR RETURNED ITEMS CREDIT:OFFICE SUPPLIES RETURND CREDIT:OFFICE SUPPLIES RETURND REIMB:MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PRGM SUB:TITLE 24 PART 1ADMIN CODE SUB:TITLE 24 PART 2 CA BLDG SUB:TITLE 24 PART 3 ELECT CODE SUB:TITLE 24 PART 9 CA FIRE COMPACTION TESTING-6TH ST PRKI COMPRESSIVE TEST-6TH ST PRKG POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS RECRUITMENT AD FOR SENIOR ACCT AD:REC C(X)RDINATOR/ENG. P.C. REFUND: SWIMMING LESSONS PAPER & PRINTING FOR FINANCE CREDIT:ITEMS PAID BY MURRIETA CREDIT:INVOICE PAID TWICE 96/97 COMM SERVICE FUNDING PRG REFUND: TEEN PROGRAMS SEPT LASER PRINTER AGREEMENT CITY HALL/LIGHTING REPAIR 7/31 DAYCAMP TRIP - SEA WORLD MAR-JUL PROF SERVS-WINCH/I-15 ACCUMAIL AUTO UPDATE SVC ACCOUNT NUMBER 320-199-999-5210 001-150-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-182-999-5220 190-183-999-5370 190-181-999-5220 001-170-999-5220 001-170-999-5220 001-110-999-5278 001-150-999-5220 320-199-999-5221 001-150-999-5250 001-171-999-5228 001-171-999-5228 001-171-999-5228 001-171-999-5228 280-199-804-5804 280-199-804-5804 190-182-999-5212 001-150-999-5254 001-150-999-5254 190-183-4975 001-140-999-5222 280-199-999-5220 190-180-999-5222 001-100-999-5267 190-183-4980 320-199-999-5215 340-199-701-5212 190-183-999-5340 280-199-602-5804 320-199-999-5211 ITEM AMOUNT 20.75 25.05 510.01 901.48 771.85 172.48 2.25 33.18 159.86 104.75 306.37- 527.98- 51.50- 128.20 372.75 37.71 118.53 32.33 64.65 401.04 227.62 289.64 72.00 136.80 15.00 141.59 40.20- 17.24- 1,000.00 18.00 310.76 118.58 415.01 2,825.95 199.00 PAGE 3 CHECK AMOUNT 490.04 1,795.06 128.20 372.75 253.22 628.66 289.64 208.80 15.00 84.15 1,000.00 18.00 310.76 118.58 415.01 2,825.95 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 08/14/97 09:01 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44869 08/14/97 001653 MA1LER'S SOFTWARE FREIGHT 320-199-999-5211 44869 08/14/97 001653 MAILER~S SOFTWARE SALES TAX 320-199-999-5211 8.00 14.43 221.43 44870 08/14/97 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 7/27 ALDRED/CAST 001-164-604-5118 44870 08/14/97 001967 MANPOWER TEMPORARY SERV TEMP HELP W/E 7/27 ALDRED/CAST 001-164-604-5118 744.76 403.24 1,148.00 44871 08/14/97 MCCARROLL, KARLYN REFUND: FACILITY ROOM RENTAL 190-183-4990 105.00 105.00 44872 08/14/97 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI TIC TAC TOE CYLINDER (YELLOW) 190-180-999-5212 44872 08/14/97 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI FREIGHT 190-180-999-5212 44872 08/14/97 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI SALES TAX 190-180-999-5212 204.00 21.00 15.81 240.81 44873 08/14/97 001277 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITI PUB "CONNECT CITIZENS & GOV'T" 001-110-999-5228 9.00 9.00 44874 08/14/97 002294 NATIONAL TICKET COMPANY ULTRA BANDS-STOCK BRANDS 190-183-999-5310 44874 08/14/97 002294 NATIONAL TICKET COMPANY FREIGHT 190-183-999-5310 44874 08/14/97 002294 NATIONAL TICKET COMPANY ULTRA BANDS-STOCK BRANDS 190-183-999-5310 44874 08/14/97 002294 NATIONAL TICKET COMPANY FREIGHT 190-183-999-5310 96.00 24.99 192.00 5.67 318.66 44875 08/14/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT DISPLY AD - OLD TOWN POSITION 001-120-999-5228 44875 08/14/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT DISPLAY ADS:CONSTRUCTION UPDAT 001-165-999-5256 44875 08/14/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT 4TH JULY ADVERTISING 190-180-999-5254 44875 08/14/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT RECRUITMENT AD:ADMIN TEC 001-150-999-5254 80.50 169.06 80.50 45.00 375.06 44876 08/14/97 002668 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES AUG 97 DUCK POND MAINT 190-180-999-5212 800.00 800.00 44877 08/14/97 002398 PALOMAR COMMUNICATIONS, DISPATCH RADIO MOBILE SERVICE 320-199-999-5209 600.00 600.00 44878 08/14/97 000247 PESTMASTER TREAT WEEDS @ CHANNEL BOTTOMS 001-164-601-5401 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-140-999-5230 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 320-199-999-5230 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-165-999-5230 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-164-604-5230 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-120-999-5230 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 001-161-999-5230 44879 08/14/97 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL & POSTAL SERVS 280-199-999-5230 2,595.00 10.75 10.75 28.00 10.75 64.50 49.20 15.00 2,595.00 188.95 44880 08/14/97 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN JULY RECRUITMENT ADVERTISING 001-150-999-5254 44880 08/14/97 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN ONE YEAR SUBSCRIPTION 001-120'999-5228 44880 08/14/97 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC NOTICE: PW97-13 001-120-999-5256 44880 08/14/97 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC NOTICE:PA97-0127 001-161-999-5256 44880 08/14/97 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN PUBLIC NOTICE PA97-138 001-161-999-5256 499.80 124.80 61.57 17.75 16.75 720.67 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001317-6 JS 001-100-999-5208 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001339-0 KL 001-100-999-5208 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5002361-3 PB 001-100-999-5208 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001383-8 RR 001-100-999-5208 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001322-6 RB 001-110-999-5208 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001375-4 JG 001-120-999-5208 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001391-1 GR 001-140-999-5208 65.67 29.80 30.15 44.76 46.06 29.58 44.23 VOUCHRE2 08/14/97 09:01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 44881 08/14/97 002776 PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. PRIME MATRIX, INC. SC-5001343-2 GY SC-5001215-2 GT SC-5001373-9 TE SC-5001379-6 JH SC-5001278-0 SM SC-5001207-9 BB SC-5003835-5 PW BLAZER SC-5001237-6 PW MAINT SC-5001220-2 PW MAINT SC-5001251-7 BH SC-5002330-8 CITY VAN SC-5001206-1 HP SC-5001377-0 SR VAN SC-5001218-6 MJM 5C-5003948-6 INFO SYSTEM SC-5001202-0 TH SC-5002401-7 TH 001-150-999-5208 001-161-999-5208 001-162-999-5208 001-163-999-5208 001-163-999-5208 001-164-601-5208 001-164-601-5208 001-164-604-5208 001-164-601-5208 190-180-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 280-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 109.16 45.64 50.02 202.77 135.80 56.75 58.38 43.62 45.40 40.15 29.27 38.46 45.19 161.41 27.72 42.15 40.26 1,462.40 44882 08/14/97 002612 RADIO SHACK, INC. MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221 183.19 183.19 44883 08/14/97 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF RUBBER STAMPS (POOL) 001-162-999-5222 44883 08/14/97 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF RECEIVED STAMP 001-162-999-5222 44883 08/14/97 000260 RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MF SALES TAX 001-162-999-5222 66.00 31.50 7.56 105.06 44884 08/14/97 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C BLUEPRINTS FOR ADA IMPROVE PJT 210-190-148-5804 44884 08/14/97 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C BLUEPRINTS AND MISC SUPPLIES 001-164-604-5268 153.87 36.50 190.37 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 01-06-30205-0 SIXTH PRKING 001-164-603-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 01-06-30206-0 SIXTH STREET PRK 001-164-603-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-181-999-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-182-999-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-184-999-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 191-180-999-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 193-180-999-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 340-199-701-5240 44885 08/14/97 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER VARIOUS WATER METERS 340-199~702-5240 102.23 29.49 11,414.64 194.53 1,057.47 362.89 252.20 4,799.12 524.77 12.37 18,749.71 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR WASHES FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-162-999-5214 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 340-199-701-5214 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 001-165-999-5214 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 001-163-999-5214 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 001-161-999-5214 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 001-161-999-5263 44886 08/14/97 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH VEHICLE DETAILING & MAINT. 190-180-999-5214 50.00 5.00 5.00 10.00 5.00 26.62 30.00 131.62 44887 08/14/97 001046 REXON, FREEDMAN, KLEPET JULY PROF LEGAL SERVS 001-130-999-5247 44888 08/14/97 000418 RIVERSIDE CO. CLERK & R LIEN RELEASE:PAID WEED ABATEMT 001-120-999-5250 1,758.75 10.00 1,758.75 10.00 44889 08/14/97 000403 SHAWN SCOTT POOL & SPA JULY POOL MAINT-TEM ELEM 190-180-999-5212 434.80 434.80 VOUCHRE2 08/14/97 VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 44890 44891 44892 44892 44892 44892 09:01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 08/14/97 000645 SMART & FINAL, INC. DAYCAMP SUPPLIES 08/14/97 000824 SOUTHERN CALIF ASSOC OF MEMBERSHIP FY 97-98/GENERAL AS 08/14/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 08/14/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 08/14/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 08/14/97 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 44893 08/14/97 2-02-351-5281 RANCHO VISTA 2-01-202-7330 VARIOUS METERS 2-01-202-7603 VARIOUS METER 2-02-502-8077 VARIOUS METERS 000282 SOUTHERN CALIF MUNICIPA ADULT SOFTBALL REGISTRATION 44894 08/14/97 001696 STAPLES OFFICE SUPPLY 44894 08/14/97 001696 STAPLES OFFICE SUPPLY 44895 08/14/97 000305 TARGET STORE 44895 08/14/97 000305 TARGET STORE 44895 08/14/97 000305 TARGET STORE 44896 08/14/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. 44896 08/14/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. 44896 08/14/97 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. SHREDDER FOR RECORDS MGMT SHREDDER FOR RECORDS MGMT CAMERA & MISC SUPPLIES CAMERA & MISC SUPPLIES SUPPLIES FOR RECREATION CERTIFICATE FOLDERS LOGO DIE FOR CITY SEAL SALES TAX 44897 08/14/97 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & MISC HARDWARE & MAINT SUPPLIES 44898 08/14/97 44899 08/14/97 TEMECULA VALLEY POP WAR REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS, INC. COMPUTER SUPPLIES 44900 08/14/97 001483 44900 08/14/97 001483 44900 08/14/97 001483 TOM DODSON & ASSOCIATES TOM DODSON & ASSOCIATES TOM DODSON & ASSOCIATES 44901 08/14/97 TORRES, MARIA MITIGATION MONITOR:REGIONAL CT MITIGATION MONITOR:REGIONAL CT MITIGATION MONITOR:CAMPOS VERD REFUND: SWIMMING LESSONS 44902 08/14/97 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 44902 08/14/97 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 44903 08/14/97 002396 U S LONG DISTANCE, INC. LONG DISTANCE TELECOM PROVIDER 44904 08/14/97 002621 44904 08/14/97 002621 44904 08/14/97 002621 UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. UNION BANK OF CALIF, N. UNION BANK OF CALIFw N. 44905 08/14/97 VOLLMUTH, MARY 44906 44907 5415305001995928 MJM 5415305001995928 MJM 5415305001995928 MJM REFUND: TEEN PROGRAM 08/14/97 000339 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY CITY HALL LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 08/14/97 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES - AT 52 WEEKS SUBSCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-183-999-5340 001-100-999-5226 190-182-999-5240 192-180-999-5319 191-180-999-5319 340-199-702-5240 190-183-999-5380 001-120-999-5610 001-1990 001-163-999-5242 001-164-604-5220 190-184-999-5301 001-120-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 001-120-999-5220 190-180-999-5212 190-2900 320-199-999-5242 001-2620 001-2620 001-2610 190-183-4975 001-164-604-5220 001-164-604-5220 320-199-999-5208 280-199-999-5220 165-199-999-5220 280-199-999-5260 190-183-4980 001-120-999-5228 001-164-604-5228 ITEM AMOUNT 79.12 2,298.00 5,036.66 23,763.81 7,394.99 487.99 546.00 1,800.00 353.92 159.33 58.12 127.98 310.00 110.00 32.55 58.06 100.00 364.13 786.66 646.25 428.75 25.00 160.28 179.65 1,455.38 18.81 18.81 37.86 36.00 74.35 61.88 PAGE 6 CHECK AMOUNT 79.12 2,298.00 36,683.45 546.00 2,153.92 345.43 452.55 58.06 100.00 364.13 1,861.66 25.00 339.93 1,455.38 75.48 36.00 74.35 61.88 TOTAL CHECKS 130,271.87 ITEM 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance August 26, 1997 Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 PREPARED BY: Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director Jesse Diaz, Project Accountant RECOMMENDATIONS: That the City Council: Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheets as of June 30, 1997, the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Year Ended June 30, 1997. Appropriate $21,280 to the 1996-97 City Attorney Department budget in the General Fund. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the City for the year ended June 30, 1997. Please see the attached financial statements for the analytical review of financial activity. The additional appropriation requested in the City Attorney budget is due primarily to the high amount of development and land acquisition related legal costs incurred over the past year FISCAL IMPACT: As is reflected in the attached financial statements, adequate General Fund reserves are available for the requested appropriation. ATTACHMENTS: Combining Balance Sheets as of June 30, 1997 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Combining Balance Sheets (Internal Service Funds) as of June 30, 1997 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 CITY OF TEMECULA Combining Balance Sheets as of June 30, 1997, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Year Ended June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings For The Year Ended June 30, 1997 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department 2 City of Temecula Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 General Fund Assets: Cash and investments $ 15,285,013 Receivables 3,981,014 Due from other funds 1,386,022 Advances to other funds 1,016,645 Total assets $ 21,668,694 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Total liabilities ,472,862 ,472,862 Gas Tax Fund $ 80,292 R.C. Reimb District 168,320 2,256 Duv Impact Fund $ 5,308,374 72,108 719,554 CDBG Fund 8,958 $ 80,292 $ 170,576 $ 6,100,036 $ 8,958 $ 604,926 604,926 $ 65,888 7,864 73,752 8,958 8,958 AB 2766 Fund $ 212,841 13,384 $ 226,225 Fundbalances: Reserved 1,620,146 Designated 12,711,622 Undesignated 3,864,064 Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances 18,195,832 6,540 6,540 170,576 170,576 5,495,110 5,495,110 $ 21,668,694 $ 80,292 $ 170,576 $ 6,100,036 $ 8,958 $ $ 226,225 226,225 226,225 Please note that these balances are unaudited. 3 City of Temecula Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Due from other funds Advances to other funds Total assets Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Total liabilities M~.2t sure "A" Fund $ 2,002,665 114,875 $ 2,117,540 CIP Fund $ 4,960,680 869,367 $ 5,830,047 $ 757,570 1,275,673 2,033,243 Mars Rd Reim Dist Fund 136,192 136,192 Deferred Comp Fund 1,100,275 $ 29,038,168 5,142,254 2,105,576 1,016,645 $ 1,100,275 $ 37,302,643 $ 1,100,275 1,100,275 $ 968,608 6,461,600 7,430,208 Fund balances: Reserved Designated Undesignated $ 2,117,540 769,241 3~27,563 Total fund balances 2,117,540 3,796,804 $ 5,830,047 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 2,117,540 (136,192) (136,192) $ 1,100,275 2,395,927 23,748,636 3,727,872 29,872,435 $ 37,302,643 Please note that these balances are unaudited. 4 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balanc~ - Budget and Actual General Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Sales tax Developmental services: Planning Building & safety Engineering Grants AB3229 (COPS) Fire plan check and inspection Motor vehicle in lieu Motor vehicle license fees Property tax Property transfer tax Franchise fees Transient occupancy tax Contributions Reimbursements Reimbursements from TCSD Reimbursements from RDA Investment interest Business licenses Vehicle code fines Miscellaneous Bids & proposals Parking citations/impound fees Operating ~ansfers in Total Revenues Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity of Budget $ 7,900,000 $ 8,774,595 111% 200,000 343,591 172% 1,291,000 1,416,026 110% 850,000 1,094,608 129% 30,000 115,003 383% 97,393 97,393 100% 75,000 115,578 154% 1,459,315 1,586,154 109% 33,230 1,169,450 1,219,960 104% 150,000 178,449 119% 960,000 998,094 104% 650,000 752,743 116% 10,000 300,000 276,475 92% 162,000 162,000 100% 75,000 75,000 100% 725,000 940,326 130% 140,000 150,220 107% 55,000 57,338 104% 31,000 74,424 240% 13,000 4,363 34% 51,000 79,073 155% 754,211 778,426 103% 17,138,369 $ 19,333,069 113% (1) (1) (2) (1) O) City of Temeeula Statement ofRevennas, Expenditur~ and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual General Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Expenditures: Annual YTD Amended YTD Activity Budget Activity Eneumbr. + Eneumbr City Council $ 461,412 $ 451,349 $ 451,349 City Manager 539,490 525,709 $ 1,485 527,194 City Clerk 527,077 509,935 3,154 513,089 City Attorney 385,000 406,280 406,280 Finance 811,372 761,383 25,068 786,451 Human Resources 310,068 302,934 666 303,600 Planning 1,068,751 964,061 71,405 1,035,466 Building & Safety 1,061,545 1,025,614 1,025,614 Engineering 781,864 747,834 747,834 Public Works 2,133,942 1,737,467 89,073 1,826,540 CIP Admin 650,969 598,723 598,723 Police 5,119,105 4,514,382 25,824 4,540,206 Fire Dept 1,565,354 1,428,007 2,804 1,430,811 Animal Control 55,000 35,699 35,699 Non-departmental 949,834 880,972 880,972 Operating transfers out 3,508,943 3,408,872 3,408,872 Total Expenditures 19,929,726 18,299,221 219,479 18,518,700 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 (2,791,357) 1,033,848 17,161,984 17,161,984 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 14,370,627 $ 18,195,832 Percent of Budget 98% 98% 97% 106% 97% 98% 97% 97% 96% 86% 92% 89% 91% 65% 93% 97% 93% (4) (5) (6) (1) These amounts are reflective of the strong community development activity over the past year. (2) This amount reflects several new tralfio and law enforcement grants received during the year. (3) The General Fund maintained higher than anticipated cash balances during the year. (4) Higher than anticipated attorney costs were recurred, primarily from community development and land acquisition activities. (5) Public Works budget savings were realized primarily in the traffic signal maintenance contract with Riverside County and in personnel costs. (6) The City continues to realize budget savings in the animal control contract with Lake Elsinore Animal Friends (LEAF). 6 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Aotual Gas Tax Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Section 2105-2107 Investment interest Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditure s: Operating transfers out Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity $ 739,211 $ 764,982 15,000 15,379 4,605 754,211 784,966 754,211 778,426 6,540 $ $ 6,540 Encumbr. Total Activity $ 764,982 15,379 4,605 784,966 778,426 Percent of Budget 103% 103% 104% 103% 7 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Rancho California Road Reimbursement District For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Investment interest Anmml Amended YTD Budget Activity $ 8,918 Encumbr. Total Activity $ 8,918 Percent of Budget Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 8,918 161,658 161,658 161,658 $ 170,576 City of Temeeula Statement of Rcvcnucs, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balanc~ - Budget and Actual Development Impact Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Old Fees: Public facilities Parks/habitat Public service Fire Signal mitigation Library Quimby New Fees: Street improvements Traffic signals Parks Corporate facilities Fire protection Library Investment interest Operating transfer in Total Revenues Expenditures: Consulting services Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity 4,079,316 $ 120,000 280,000 105,000 70,000 30,000 304,914 4,989,230 1,761,815 134,768 169,098 257,813 215,840 59,400 57,497 11,596 1,729 25,623 3,536 871 3,315 266,051 1,104,914 4,073,866 39,000 33,313 8,462,854 3,405,272 8,501,854 3,438,585 Encumbrance Total Activity 1,761,815 134,768 169,098 257,813 215,840 59,400 57,497 11,596 1,729 25,623 3,536 871 3,315 266,051 1,104,914 4,073,866 33,313 3,405,272 3,438,585 Percent of Budget 43% 112% 92% 206% 85% 192% 82% 85% 40% 40% (1) Revenues Over/COnder) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 (3,512,624) 635,281 4,859,829 4,859,829 1,347,205 $ 5,495,110 (1) The variance in Public Facilities revenue is due primarily to non residential development impact fees not being adopted for 1996-97. (2) The variance in operating transfers out is due to the timing of when the DIF funded CIP projects are started and costs are incurred. City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Community Development Block Grant For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Grant revenue $ Operating transfers in Total Revenues Expenditures: Other outside services Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Revenues Over/CLlnder) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity 447,403 $ 296,338 14,583 14,583 461,986 310,921 31,403 30,346 416,000 265,992 447,403 296,338 14,583 14,583 (14,583) (14,583) $ Encumbr. Total Activity $ 296,338 14,583 310,921 30,346 265,992 296,338 Percent of Budget 66% 100% 67% 97% 64% 66% lO City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual AB 2766 Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: AB 2766 $ Investment interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Begming Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity 48,000 $ 45,221 10,163 48,000 55,384 75,687 13,187 75,687 13,187 (27,687) 42,197 184,028 184,028 156,341 $ 226,225 Encumbr. Total Activity $ 45,221 10,163 55,384 13,187 13,187 Percent of Budget 94% 115% 17% 17% City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual M~sure 'A' For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity Revenues: Measure 'A" $ 682,000 $ Investment interest Total Revenues 682,000 Expenditures: Operating transfers out 950,000 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (268,000) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 1,437,521 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 1,169,521 $ 879,525 100,494 980,019 300,000 680,019 1,437,521 2,117,540 Total Percent Encumbr. Activity of Budget $ 879,525 100,494 980,019 300,000 129% 144% 32% (1) (1) The variance in operating transfers out is due to the timing of when projects are started and costs are incurred. 12 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Capital Improvement Projects Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Rev~ilUes: Operating transfers in Grants Contributions Reimbursements Investment interest SB 300 Article 3 (SB 821) Total Revenues Expenditures: Rancho Ca. Rd interchange Western bypass corridor Ynez Rd. between Rancho Ca. Rd. and Santiago Rd Pala Rd. bridge Diaz Rd. I15/I215 corridor study Walcott bypass Signal interconnect system Traffic signals - South 79/Margarita Traffic signals - Marg/Rustie Glen Traffic signals - Winchester/Roripaugh Traffic signals - Margarita/Solana Pavement management Traffic signals - South 79/Pala Traffic signals - South 79/La Paz Sidewalk project//5 I 15/79S interchange Winchester Rd./Margarita to N. Willows Ave. Traffic signal Rancho Ca./Cosmie I15 corridor traffic study I15F/9S mtemhange (ultimate) Pala Road improvements Pavement management system update Traffic signals Vincent Moraga/Rancho Ca. Road Traffic signals Rancho Ca. Rd./Via Las Colinas Flashing signals at schools Traffic signals Winchester/Enterprise Traffic signals Margarita Rd./Santiago Traffic signals 79S/Bedford Court Traffic signals 79S/Butterfield City sidewalk project (various) Traffic signals -Winchester/Margarita Traffic signals -Winchester/Nicolas Continued) Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity $ 14,916,121 $ 7,945,626 2,877,400 217,525 110,000 853 1,119,000 708,919 222,068 381,130 133,517 14,697 19,537,168 9,109,688 Encumbr. 3,650,000 434,370 1,107,507 342,557 $ 153,641 215,000 2,143,168 39,513 115,195 955,973 171 40,400 37,670 1,154 2,248,418 1,988,264 32,215 464,512 158,319 37,993 291,522 142,648 17,147 58,817 58,305 83,000 72,513 3,500 50,046 118 1,000 948,807 333,601 106,781 132,162 83,063 128,809 91,146 24,229 34,348 1,458,564 354,255 73,890 1,200,000 1,200,000 117,083 91,637 20,500 200,000 150,000 217 45,000 23,564 11,191 30,000 56,120 60,000 56,120 120,000 120,000 1,378 509 125,000 104,339 132,000 705 6,720 7,200 132,245 131,764 Toml Activity $ 7,945,626 217,525 853 708,919 222,068 14,697 9,109,688 434,370 496,198 154,708 171 38,824 2,020,479 196,312 159,795 58,305 76,013 1,118 440,382 83,063 91,146 34,348 428,145 1,200,000 91,637 217 34,755 1,887 104,339 705 7~00 131,764 Percent of Budget 53% 8% 1% 63% 11% 47% 12% 45% 7% 0% 96% 90% 42% 55% 99% 92% 2% 46% 63% 71% 142% 29% 100% 78% 0% 77% 2% 83% 1% 107% 100% City of Temecula Statc~nent of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Aotual Capital Improvement Projects Fund For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 M~rg~rita community pork Sports p~rk improvera~nts P~rkvicw ~it~ project Emergency generator Duck pond park Maintenance yard Rancho California sports park restrooms Various park improvements (ADA) Winchester creek park Margarita sidewalk project Temeeula Community Center Community Recreation Center improvements Fire station Museum First Street bridge realignment City Hall Operating Transfers Out Annual Amended YTD Encumbr. 1,531,255 2,308 8,059 137,384 49,039 228,007 115,286 23,334 195,594 122,064 198,577 33,856 36,408 1,027,629 990,032 39,086 20,937 28,859 159,950 7,329 3,031 694,045 54,471 1,771 110,000 267,000 498,587 150,000 53,226 1,645,816 1,533,229 104,018 395,964 181,729 270,860 1,983,480 1,978,436 800,000 Total Expenditures 25,588,220 12,180,116 769,923 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (6,051,052) (3,070,428) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 6,867,232 6,867,232 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 816,180 $ 3,796,804 Total 10,367 49,039 138,620 122,064 70,264 1,029,118 1,792 10,360 56,242 498,587 53,226 1,637,247 181,729 1,978,436 800,000 12,922,972 P~rcent 1% 36% 61% 62% 35% 100% 9% 6% 8% 187% 35% 99% 46% 100% 51% The variances in CIP Fund revenues and in project expenditures are due to the timing of when the various projects are actually started. 14 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Margarita Road Reimbursement District For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Total Revenues Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity $ 10,730 10,730 (146,922) (146,922) (146,922) $ (136,192) Encumbr. Total Activity Percent of Budget Internal Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 Assets: Cash and investments Receivables Prepaid assets Property, plant and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation) Total assets Liabilities and fund equity: Liabilities: Due to other funds Current liabilities Total liabilities Fund equity: Contributed capital Retained eamings Total fund equity Insurance Fund $ 1,292,547 $ 55,296 90,105 $ 1,437,948 $ $ 199,062 199,062 500,000 $ 738,886 1,238,886 Totalliabilitiesandfund equity $ 1,437,948 $ Vehicles Fund 111,681 1,573 137,108 $ 250,362 $ 214,539 35,823 250,362 250,362 $ Information Support Systems Services Facilities Fund Fund Fund 625,384 625,384 $ 73,716 66,611 $ 140,327 473,065 11,992 485,057 625,384 $ Toml 230,285 $ 103,258 $ 1,737,771 2,155 817 59,841 90,105 259,139 1,021,631 491,579 $ 104,075 $ 2,909,348 333,306 $ 23,766 $ 333,306 23,766 73,716 622,745 696,461 94,177 1,281,781 64,096 80,309 931,106 158,273 80,309 2,212,887 491,579 $ 104,075 $ 2,909,348 Please note that these balances are unaudited. 16 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings Internal Service Funds For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Charges for services Investment interest Gain on disposal of assets Miscellaneous Claims recovery Operating transfers in Insurance Vehicles Fund Fund $ 324,002 $ 38,859 63,550 7,946 69,905 200,000 Information Support Systems Services Facilities Fund Fund Fund $ 375,350 $ 226,999 $ 361,002 $ 340 6,097 2,915 5,722 523 71 2,094 Total 1,326,212 80,848 5,722 2,688 69,905 200,000 TotalRevenues 657,457 46,805 381,935 233,167 366,011 1,685,375 Expenses: Salaries & wages Operating expenses Interest Depreciation Loss on disposal of assets 27,984 133,209 33,982 108,668 357,880 233,081 78,414 244,246 13,505 46,914 258,537 79,253 526 385,864 46,914 625,353 205,154 352,914 271,593 (109) (243,418) 28,013 13,097 467,293 35,932 255,410 36,083 67,212 738,886 $ 35,823 $ 11,992 $ 64,096 $ 80,309 Total Expenses Net Income (Loss) Retained Earnings, July 1, 1996 RetainedEamings, June 30, 1997 303,843 913,621 13,505 384,704 526 1,616,199 69,176 861,930 $ 931,106 1 7/Final ITEM 5 APPROVAl ,-~. /'~ CITY ATTORNEY ~/~'~.. FINANCE DIRECTOR .~__4"'~ CITY MANAGER .,~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Council/City Manager Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 1997 SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: ~ Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Public Improvement Bonds in Tract No. 23583. (Northeasterly of intersection of Calle Madero at North General Kearny Road) Ronald J. Parks, Principal Engineer - Land Development Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council ACCEPT the substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Securities for Street, Drainage, Water and Sewer Improvements, Traffic Signal Mitigation Agreement and Bond, and Subdivision Monumentation Bond in Tract No. 23583, AUTHORIZE the release of the original faithful performance, labor and materials, traffic signal mitigation, and monument bonds on file, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Developers and Sureties. BACKGROUND: On December 18, 1990, the City Council approved Vesting Tract Map No. 23583, and entered into subdivision agreements with: Bedford Development Company, a California Corporation for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation, and traffic signal mitigation fee payment. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were Surety Bonds posted by Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company as follows: Bonds No. 3S 743 626 00, 3S 743 627 00, and 3S 743 628 O0 in the total amount of $1,033,500 ($725,500, $212,000, and $96,000, respectively, for streets and drainage, water, and sewer improvements) to cover faithful performance. Bonds No. 3S 743 626 00, 3S 743 627 00, and 3S 743 628 00 in the total amount of $516,750 ($362,750, $106,000, and $48,000, respectively, for streets and drainage, water, and sewer improvements) to cover labor and materials. R:\agdrpt\97\0812\tr23E93.$ub 3. Bond No. 3S 743 666 00 in the amount of $3,450 for traffic signal mitigation fees. 4. Bond No. 3S 743 667 O0 in the amount of $15,321 for subdivision monumentation. Bedford Development Co. ( now KI/FKLA Rancho Realty LLC for the subject parcel) is in escrow for the sale of the subject property pending City Council acceptance and approval of the substituted agreement and bonds. The prospective developer of the subdivision is: Dick-Con, a California Corporation 4500 Imperial Avenue San Diego, CA 92113 The prospective new developer has submitted replacement agreements and securities for the contractual work. The substituted securities are bonds posted by Insurance Company of the West as follows: Bond No. 150 33 38 in the total amount of $1,033,500 ($725,500, $212,000, and $96,000, respectively, for streets and drainage, water, and sewer improvements) to cover faithful performance. Bond No. 150 33 38 in the total amount of $516,750 ($362,750, $106,000, and $48,000, respectively, for streets and drainage, water, and sewer improvements) to cover labor and materials. 3. Bond No. 149 48 10 in the amount of $3,450 to cover traffic signal mitigation fees. 4. Bond No. 150 33 37 in the amount of $15,312 to cover subdivision monumentation. The contractual eighteen (18) month period for completion of the work under the original agreement (Bedford Development Co.) has expired. It is Staff's recommendation that the new developer (Dick-Con, a California Corporation) be granted an eighteen (18) month construction completion period as set forth in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Section 20-"Time for Completion of Work/Time Extensions). The contractual completion date would be February 12, 1999. The affected streets, although not completed or accepted, are Corte Coelho, Corte Gurule, and portions of North General Kearny Road, Via Norte, and Calle Madero. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachments: Location Map Substitute Public Improvement Bonds (on file) Substitute Agreements (on file) R:'~AGDRPT~97~0826\TR23583 .SUB VICINITY MAP 3~' / .~0 / / / / \ ~6 =j$ ect ~it~ Tract No. ~.3583 LocatiorLMap NOTE: MAP~ NOT TO SCAI,F, ITEM 6 APPROVAl I~/,.~"'~ CITY ATTORNEY '/fi,~ FINANCE DI, ECTO/R~_ AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Council/City Manager  Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 1997 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Drainage Easements and Quitclaim to Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District. (Meadows/Paloma Del Sol Area) PREPARED BY: ~/ Ronald J. Parks, Principal Engineer - Land Development ~' Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 97-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN OFFER OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT MADE TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CERTAIN OFFERS OF STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS MADE TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND AUTHORIZING QUITCLAIM OF ALL SAID EASEMENTS TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT. (MEADOWS/PALOMA DEL SOL AREA) BACKGROUND: The Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved Tract No. 9833-1, but did not accept certain offer for Drainage Easement at the time of the map approval. The City of Temecula approved Tract Maps No. 24131-1, 24135-1 and 24135-2 and accepted the offered Storm Drainage Easements, and also approved Tract Maps No. 24133 and 214133-3 but did not accept similar Storm Drain Easement offers. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (DISTRICT) has requested that, as successors-in-interest to Riverside County upon incorporation, the City of Temecula now accept all such offers for the subject tracts for those easements described in Attachments "A" and "B" of the attached Resolution No. 97- to the DISTRICT. In addition the DISTRICT also requests that the City quitclaim the Drainage Easement in Tract No. 9833-1, and the several Storm Drainage Easements and Storm Drain Easements, all as set forth in Attachments "A" and "B" and any and all rights acquired by the City of Temecula for the subject easements. R:~AGDRl~97~O826~RCFD&WCD.PDS The DISTRICT will then maintain the storm drain systems which were approved and inspected by the DISTRICT in accordance with Developer- DISTRICT-County Transportation Department agreements and Developer-DISTRICT-City of Temecula agreements The subject locations and documents are included with this Staff Report. The legal descriptions are attachments (Exhibits "A" and "B") to City Council Resolution No. 97- FISCAl IMPACT: None Attachments: Location Map Quitclaim Forms (DISTRICT) (on file) R:\AGDRPT~97~0826~RCFD&WCD.PDS VICINITY ~NFIELD CHRISTIAN HS MID I LIARI Paloma Del Sol/Meadows Area Q-itclaim DrainaEe, Storm Drain, Storm DrainaEe Easements ~'~ocation Man NOTE: MAPS NOT TOSCALE RESOLUTION NO. 9% A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN OFFER OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT MADE TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, AND CERTAIN OFFERS OF STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS MADE TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND AUTHORIZING QUITCLAIM OF ALL SAID EASEMENTS TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT. (MEADOWS/PALOMA DEL SOL AREA) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (DISTRICT) requests that the City of Temecula quitclaim the Drainage Easement and several Storm Drainage Easements and Storm Drain Easements offered in Tracts No. 9833-1, 24131-1, 24135-1, 24135-2, 24133-3, and 24133 to the DISTRICT for operation and maintenance of DISTRICT facilities; and, WHEREAS, The County of Riverside did not accept offer of dedication of certain Drainage Easement at Final Map approval of Tract Map No. 9833-1; and, WI-IERF_akS, The City of Temecula did not accept offers of dedication of certain Storm Drain Easements at Final Map approvals of Tract Maps No. 24133-3 and 24133; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temccula hereby accepts the offers of dedication of Drainage Easement in Tract No. 9833-1, and Storm Drain Easements in Tracts No. 24133-3 and 24133, and authorizes the quitclaim of said easements and such Storm Drainage Easements as accepted by the City of Temecula in Tracts 24131-1, 24135-1, and 24135-2 to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District as set forth in Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of August, 1997. Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor, R:~AGDR/rI~97~0826LRCFD&WCD.PDS ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 97- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of August, 1997, by the following vote: AYF~: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: R:La, GDRPl~97k0826~RCFD&WCD.PDS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- Accepting Storm Drain Easements and Drainage Easement offered to but not accepted by the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula as indicated on certain tract maps described hereafter, and other such Storm Drainage Easements accepted by the City of Temecula, and quitclaiming all rights acquired by the City in these Storm Drainage, Storm Drain, and Drainage Easements to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District as described below: Offers zcce~ted at Final Tract Ma0 ~pl/roval A. Storm Drainage Easement (32 foot in width) on Lot 98 of Tract No 24131-1, f'ded May 24, 1991, in Book 232 of Maps, Pages 57-67 Incl. B. Storm Drainage Easement (32 foot in width) on Lot 99 of Tract No. 24131-1, f'ded May 24, 1991, in Book 232 of Maps, Pages 57-67 Incl. C. Storm Drainage Easement (20 foot in width) on Lot 95 of Tract No. 24135-1, f'ded May 24, 1991, in Book 232 of Maps, Pages 21-30 Incl. Further described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the Northeasterly line of said Tract No. 241~-1 and the Northwesterly (33.00 foot) right of way line of Pio Pico Road as shown on said Tract 24135-1; Thence South 30°22'31" West, along the Northwesterly right of way line of Pio Pico Road 95.73 feet, to the point of baginnina; thence North 68°$4'22" West 80.77 feet to the terminus of said described centerline; The side lines at the said Northwesterly fight of way line of 1No Pico Road. D. Storm Drainage Easement (40 foot in width) on Lot 98 of TractNo24135- 1, f'ded May 24, 1991, in Book 232 of Maps, Pages ~/-67 Ind. E. Storm Drainage Easement (40 foot in width) on Lot 100 of Tract No. 24135-1, fded May 24, 1991, in Book 232 of Maps, Pages $7-67 Ind. F. Storm Dvainage Easement (30foot in width) on Lot 77ofTract No. 24135. 2, f'ded May 26, 1994, in Book 248 of Maps, Pages 65-71 Ind. Further described as follows: A strip of land 30 foat in width, lying 20 feet Northwesterly and 10 feet Southeasterly of the following described line: Commencing at the most Werefly corner of said Lot 77; Thence South 04°00'00'~_~st along the Westerly line of said Tract No.24135-2, 37.57 feet, to the ~ of be~nning; Thelice North 88°00'00" E~ 9.86 feet, to the beginning of a curve, concave Northwesterly, having a radius of 120.00 feet; Thence No~heastev!y along the arc of said curve 70.69 feet, through a central angle of 33°,15'00#, Thence North $4°15'00" East 67.08 feet, to the terminus of said described line; The s'K!e lines of said Westerly line of Tract No. 24135-2. R:\AGDILP~97~0826~RCFD&WCD.PDS EXHIBIT 'A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- CONTINUED. Offers acce~ted by th[~ resol.~ion G. Storm Drain Easement (33 foot and 34 foot in width) on Lot 106 of Tract No 24133-3, f'ded April $, 1991, in Book 230 of Maps, Pages 48-.~4 Inc. Further described as follows: A strip of !and 33 feet in width and 34 feet in width, the centerline of which is described as follows: BeginniNg as the intersection of the Northwesterly fight of way line of Corte Benavente and the centerline of the 33-foot wide Storm Drain Easement, as shown on said Tract No. 24133-3, said point being on a curve, concave Southeasterly, having a radius of 48.00 feet, a radial line from said point bears North 34030'56" West; Thence North 55° 14'21" West along said centerline of the 33-foot wide Storm Drain ~nt, 302.32 feet, to the be~nning of the centerline of the M-foot wide Storm Drain Easement, as shown on said Tract No. 24133-3; Thence North 20°21'32" West along the centerline of the 34-font wide Storm Drain Easement, 329.63 feet, to the beginning of a curve, concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 95.00 feet; Thence Northwesterly along the arc of said curve, 69.40 feet, through a central angle of 41°51'22", to a point on the Easterly right of way line of Corte Cabrera, as shown on said Tract No. 24133-3; a rsdlal ~ from said point bears North 27047'06" East, said point also being the terminus of said described centerline; The side lines of said strip shall be lengthened or shortened Southeasterly to terminate at the said Northwesterly right of way line of Corte Benavente and Northwesterly, to terminate at the said Easterly right of way line of Corte Cabrera. H. Storm Drain Easement (20 foot in width) on Lot 82 of Tract No. 24133, filed November 30, 1994, in Book 251 of Maps, Pages 1-7 Inc.. Further described as follows: A strip of land 20 feet in width, the centerline of which is described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the Southwesterly line of said Tract No 24133 and the Northwesterly (33.00 foot) right of way line of Montelegro Way, as shown on said Tract No. 24133 said point being on a curve, concave Northwesterly, having a radius of 1167.00 feet, to which a radial bears South 45025'00" East; Thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve and said angle of ~1°15'00"; Thence North 43°20'00" East along said Northwesterly right of way line of Montelegro Way 20.20 feet, to the beo~innln~ of a Gon- l~mgent curve, concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 90.~0 feet, to which a radial bears North 79°29'17" East, said point also being the point of beginning; Thence Northwes~r!y along I~he arc of said curve 56.79 fee~, through a central angie of 36°09'17': Thence North 46°40'00" West 34.58 feet, to the termbins o~ ~ described centerline; The side lines of said s~rip slmll be iengtbened or shortened Southe~L~terly to terminate at the said Northwesterly right of way llne of Montelegro Way. R:~AGDRFr\97\0~26~RCFD&WCD.PDS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- Offers bei~ acce~ted by th[~ Fe~olu~ion I. Drainage Easement (110 feet in width) on Lot 28 of Tract No. 9833-1, filed January 16, 1979, in Book 101 of Ma~, Paaes 7.~-80 Incl. Further described as follows: A strip of !and 110.00 feet in width, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of a 110.00 foot wide Drainage Easement and the Southwesterly (S5.00 foot) right of way line of Margarita Road, as shown on said Tract No. 9833-1, said point being on a curve, concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 1,145 feet, a radial line from said point bears North 40°15'42" East; Thence South 04001'00" West along said centerline of the 110.00 foot wide Drainage Easement, 250.00 feet, to the terminus of said ~ centerline; The side lines of said strip shall be le,g~ned or shortened Northerly to terminate at the said Southwesterly right of way line of Margarita Road. J. Drainage Easement (110.00 foot in width) on Lot 27 of Tract No. 9833-1, filed January 16, 1979, in Book 101 of Mal~, Pages 75-80 Inc.. Further described as follows: A strip of land 110.00 feet in width, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of a 110.00 foot wide Drainage Easement and the Southwesterly (55.00 foot) fight of way line of Margarita Road, as shown on said Tract No 9833.1, said point being on a curve, concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 1,145.00 feet, a radial llne from said point bears North 40°15'42" East; Thence South 04°01'00" West along said centerline of the 110.00 foot wide Drainage Easement, 250.00 feet, ien~hened or shortened Northerly to terminate at the Northeasterly line of said Lot 27. R:\AGDRPT~97\0826~RCFD&WCD.PDS EX!tIBrr "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEME~ AND QUITCLAIM T!~SE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCElfrED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS PARCEL 7413-500A I~?XITIRIFr "R- PAGE 1 OF 9 BEING A PORTION OF LOT 98, AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 84131-1, RECORDED IN NAP BOOK 838, PAGES 57 THROUGH 67, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF TEHECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 33' I EASEMENT TO BE QUIT~D: IDENTIFIER 0 SC. AI,F.: 1"=100' EXi~IRIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFI~RS OF DRAINAGE EASEMF~NT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, ANI) QIjITCLAIM THESE E~$EMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY ~..OOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS ~.xnmrr -n- PARCEL 7413-500B ~'ACE: OF 9 B£IN0 A PORTION OF LOT 99, AS SHORN ON TRACT NO. ~4isl-i, RECORDED IN NAP BOOK ~3~, PAGES 57 THROUGH 67, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFDRNIA, LOCATED IN THE C~TY OF T~ECULA, R~VER~ C~UNTY, CAL~FORNm. / so, EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTIFIER O SC. AI,F.: 1"=100' EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECUI~, AND QUITCLAIM THESE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECU[~ TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS ~.xumrr"B" PARCEL 7413-501A PAGE 3 OF 9 BEING A PORTION OF THE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT IN LOT 95, AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 241.35-1, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 2.32, PAGES 21 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. I \, ~ /-STDRM DRAIN 92 ~ \ // EASEMENTS ~ _ ~ \ ~\ ~ / ~,;iiil~ ~.o.c~ ~ ~ -',~ I ~ /~'~._~' ~ ~ /' TRACT ff2~135- 1 M.B. 232/21-30 EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTIFIER O ,qCAI,F.: NO SCALE EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, AND QUITCLAIM T!:rESE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS r~xm~rr ,,R- PARCEL 7413-501B ~.A(~E 4 OF 9 BEING A PORTION DF LOT 98, AS SHD~/N DN TRACT NO. 24135-1, RECORDED IN MAP BDDK P3P, PAGE3 21 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS DF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LDCATED IN THE CITY DF TEMECULA, .RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. TRACT M.B. PARCEL 7413- 501 / / 31 / / / 30 C~R4L--__..__J / \ / \ EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTIFIER 0 ,SCAL~.: NO SCALE EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ,,, ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, AND QUITCLAIM T!~SE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS ~xnmrr ,,R- PARCEL 7413-501C rAGE ~ OF 9 BEING A PORTION OF LOT 100, AS SHOWN F1N TRACT NO. 24135-1, R£CDRDED IN MAP BOOK 232, PAGES 21 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS DF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA,. RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. / / 99 '~ 39 -% %. 4O / / / / / 75 / ~ 101 \ / ~ / ~ \ / 76 /~ \ / \ \ / \ \ / \ \ / 77 ~ TRACT ¢/24135- i M.B. 232/21-30 EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTIFIER 0 RCAL~.: NO SCALE EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, AND QUITCLAIM THESE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS ~.xm~rr--" PARCEL 7413-502 PAGE 6 OF 9 BEING A PORTION OF THE STORM ORAIN EASEMENT IN LOT 77, AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 24135-2, RECOROED IN MAP BOOK 248, PACES 65 THROUGH 71, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF TE~ECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. TRACT #24135-2 M.B. 248/65-71 \ / % .~o, 1 /~DRAIN ESMT, / 20' / / 69 / 68 t / I / / ~ 70 / \ / / I ,F, GEND EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTWIER 0 gC. ALF,: NO SCALE EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, AND QUITCLAIM THESE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMEC~ TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS PARCEL 7413-503 lr, XHIRIT -R" PAGE 7 OF 9 BEING A PORTION OF THE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT IN LOT 106, AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO, 24133-3 RECORDED IN MAP BOOK c~O, PAGES 48 THPOUGH $4, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LOCATED IN THE CiTY OF TENECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFDPNIA, 7// 41 '51 '22" I I CURVE DATA R = T = 95.00' 36.33' "~CORTE BENAVENTE L = P.O.B:' ~ 69.4.0' ~oj EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTll?IER 0 ,~C. AI,F,,: NO SCALE EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 9% ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, AND QUITCLAIM THESE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: THE MEADOWS .x mrr ,,.,, PAGE 8 OF 9 PARCEL 7413-504 BEING A PORTION OF THE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT IN LOT 82, AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 241,3.3, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 251, PAGES 1 THROUGH 7, INCLUSIVE, -~ RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. TRACT #24133 \ / \ ~ \ 44 \ / / 45 ~ ' ¥:~.. N / I1t ~ ~/ CURVE DATA "x '~-~"'---f I e---ao' 1. 01'15'00" 1167.00' 12.73' 25.46' ~C. AI ,F.: 1"=100' T EXHIBIT "B" TO RESOLUTION NO. 97- ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT OR STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS BY CITY OF TEMECULA, AND QUITCLAIM THESE EASEMENTS AND THOSE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED BY CITY OF TEMECULA TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT AS INDICATED BELOW: SPARKMAN SCHOOL (V.U.C. PARCEL 7400-500 rxm rr ,,.., PAGE 9 OF 9 BEING A PiaRT[ON OF THE STDRM DRAIN EASEMENT LYING LOT 28 OF TRACT NO. 9833-1, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 101, PAGES 75 THRl]UGH 80, INCLUSIVE, RECORD3 OF PIVERSIDE COUNTY, CAL[FI]RNIA. IN CURVE DATA # /%= R = T= 1. 09'55%2" 1200.00' 104 25' 207.94' I,EGF, ND EASEMENT TO BE QUITCLAIMED: IDENTIFIER ,~CALt: NO SCALE ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTO~h,,~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager / Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 1997 Award of Construction Contract for the Annual Slurry Seal Project FY97- 98, Project No. PW97-13 PREPARED BY: ~ ~ Bradley A. Buron, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a contract for Project No. PW97-13, Annual Slurry Seal FY97-98 Project, to California Pavement Maintenance Co. for $163,579.46 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $16,357.95 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: On July 22, 1997, the City Council approved the plans and specifications, and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. With the Pavement Management System (PMS) in place, a five (5) year Slurry Seal Program has been formulated. Slurry Seal is used primarily as a preventive maintenance measure where an asphalt concrete surface has become dry or brittle. A slurry seal placed over A.C. pavements in this condition replace the fine materials and oil's. This treatment will prolong the life of the existing asphalt from five (5) to seven (7) years. All streets within the City were physically inspected, evaluated and prioritized during the implementation of the Pavement Management System. Based on these priorities, streets were grouped into areas that would provide for the most cost effective projects while providing maintenance where it would be most beneficial. The work to be performed will also include crack sealing, treating of all oil stains and replacement of all striping and street legends. The engineer's estimate for this project was ~175,000.00. r:\agdrpt\97\0826\pw97-13.awd/ajp Two (2) bids were publicly opened on August 7, 1997 and results are as follows: Base Bid 1. California Pavement Maintenance ................... ~163,579.46 2. Pavement Coatings Co ........................... $243,432.01 California Pavement Maintenance Co. has performed work for the City in the past. The construction schedule is forty-five (45) days. Work is expected to begin in October, 1997 and be completed by the end of November, 1997. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. FISCAL IMPACT: The project is being funded from the Public Works Street Maintenance Account No. 001-164- 601-5402. The total project is $179,937.41 which included the contract amount of $163,579.46 plus 10% contingency of $16,357.95. ATTACHMENTS: Contract r:\agdrpt\97\0826\pw97-13. awd/ajp CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW97-13 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT FY97-98 THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 26th day of August, 1997, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and California Pavement Maintenance Co., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WlTNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW97-13 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT FY97-98, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW97-13 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT FY97-98. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building News, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General, Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW97-13 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT FY97-98. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Document describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. CONTRACT CA-1 R:\CIP\PROJ ECTS\PW97\PW97-13\CONTRACT.WPD/ajp The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW97-13 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT FY97-98 All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY NINE DOLLARS and FORTY-SIX CENTS ($163,579.46), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed Forty Five (45) working days, commencing with delivery of Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. 6. PAYMENTS. LUMP SUM BID SCHEDULE: Ao Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Bo Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contracts Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the City, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the CITY on forms provided by the CITY. CONTRACT CA-2 R:\CIP\PROJ ECTS\PW97\PW97-13\CONTRACT.WPD/ajp Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within 30 days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contracts Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: CONTRACT AMOUNT $25,000- $75,000 $75,000- $500,000 Over $500,000 RETENTION PERIOD 180 days 180 days One Year RETENTION PERCENTAGE 3% $2,250 + 2% of amount in excess of $75,000 $10,750 + 1% of amount in excess of $500,000 10. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. CONTRACT CA-3 R;\ClP\PRO J ECTS\PW9 7 \PW9 7 - 13\CONTRACT.~fPD/ajp Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in their employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his/her affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance CONTRACT CA-¢ R:\CIP\PRO J ECTS\PW9 7 \PW9 7- t3\C ON TRACT.WPD/ajp Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in their employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his/her affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance CONTRACT CA-4 R:\CtP\PRO J ECTS\I:~/97 ~PW97* 13\C ONTRACT.WPD/aji~ notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. 19. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. 20. GOVERNING LAW. This Contract and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by the law of the State of California. 21. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works\City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR CALIFORNIA PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE CO. 4891 Ronson Court, Ste. J San Diego, CA 92111 (619) 268-9884 By: Robert A. Blakey, Vice President DATED: CITY OF TEMECULA By: Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor CONTRACT CA-5 R:\Cl P\PRO J ECTS\PW9 7 \PW9 7 - 13\CONTRACT.WPD/ajp APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-6 R:\C[P\PROJ ECTS\PW97\PW97-13\CONTRACT.WPD/ejp ITEM 8 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE D I R ECTO i:~,~.~---~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works\City Engineer August 26, 1997 Completion and Acceptance of the FY95-96 Annual Management Project PW95-28 Pavement PREPARED BY: ~ Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects Scott Harvey, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Project PW95-28, as complete and direct the City Clerk to: File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract, and Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On March 18, 1997, the City Council awarded a contract for the FY95-96 Annual Pavement Management Project PW95-28 to Laird Construction Company, Inc. for ~306,675.00. This project include an asphalt overlay and the removal and reconstruction of the existing asphalt pavement for three streets, which included portions of Rancho Vista Road, Solana Way, and La Serena Way. During the pavement grinding operation on both Rancho Vista Road and Solana Way, we determined that the depth of existing asphalt was less than anticipated. Therefore, the contractor did not have to grind as much to achieve the same design finish surface which reduced the actual asphalt quantity by more than 10%. This reduction, along with other minor quantity changes, provided a cost savings of more than 937,000. The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and within the allotted contract time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released on or about thirty-five (35) days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded. pw04\agdrpt\96\0826\pw95-28.acc FISCAL IMPACT: The contract amount for this project was 8306,675.00. The original bid cost of the project was decreased due to changes in the actual field quantities by $37,031.90. Contract Change Order No. I was approved by the City Manager in the amount of $2,150.00. This will bring the total construction cost to ~271,793.10. This is a Capital Improvement Project and is being funded from Measure A funds appropriated from Account No. 210-165-655-5804. Attachments: Notice of Completion Maintenance Bond Contractor's Affidavit pwO4\agdrpt\96\O826\pw95-28.acc RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CiTY OF TEMECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, California 92589- 9033, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. 3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to Laird Construction Co., Inc. to perform the following work of improvement: FY95/96 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on AUGUST 26, 1997. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: PROJECT NO. PW 95-2.8. 6. The street address of said property is: Various locations. Dated at Temecula, California, this m day of , 1997. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) ss JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this day of , 1997. JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk r:\cip\project~\pw95\pw95-28\completn.not/seh CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PW95-28 FY95/96 P,A VEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM This is to certify that Laird Construction Co., Inc. · (hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW95-28 FY95/96 PAVEMENT .~[a. NAGEMENT SYSTEM situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: FY95/96 Pavement Management Program iNSERT TITLE OF WORK HE~cept retention which is due to All American Asphalt for $16,030.11 The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debt[~or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claidi ,~ stop notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute Pursuant to Public Contracts Code § 7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contact amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. , RELEASE R-1 r:\cip~projects~pw95-28~bidpkg 112096/seh CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MAINTENANCE BOND PROJECT NO. PW95-28 BOND# 08031085 PREMIUM: INCLUDED IN PERFORMANCE BOND -- RECEIVED -- JUL 1 7 1997 FY95/96 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM? AIRD CONST. CO. IN(' KNOW ALLMENBY THESE PRESENTSTHAT: LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. 9460 LUCAS RANCH ROAD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730-5797 NAMEAND ADDf~'SS OFCONTRACTOR a CALIFORNIA CORPORATION , hereinafter called Principal, and (fill'~- whether ~ Cor~oratfon, Par~ner~ip-or FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND 225 S. LAKE AVENUE, SUITE 700, PASADENA, CA 91101 NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of THIRTY ?HOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SIXTY-SEVEN DOLLARS' '" DOLLARS and NO/100 .... CENTS {$ 30,6..6.7..40 .. } in l~wful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten percent (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves. successors and assigns, jointly and severa!ly~ firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contrac~ with the OWNER, dated the 187H day of MAR_C;H ,19 97 , a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO'. PW95-28 FY95t96 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and' materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said Contract has Im."cn completed, and was ap~'oved on 3ULY 1 ,19 97 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from ~he date:of approval of the said Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract; or i~ shall appea~ that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void. MAINTENANCE BOND ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of San Bernardino On ~)j '?.,- 'Z-./-'~ -~ before me, Ben $chonfeld, Notary Public, personally appeared Ralph J. Laird, personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person or entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Ben Schonfeld Signed and sealed this'llTH day of':" JULY o1997._Z._. (Seal) · i':~' .:....,'. ,, " ~ co.~ FIDELITY'.AND DEPOt.iT'.'! '" .: .. SURETY COMPANY OF MARYLAND N . '(Name) - ' ' ' '". ' . "'": ' (Title) , :.. '" . ."- APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney (Name) 'h'me) MAINTENANCE BOND CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE On 7-11-97 be fore me, KAREN CHANDLER - NOTARY PUBLIC personally appeared DAVID L. CULBERTSON personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNES~ my hand and official Sig~ature of Notary Public seal. 0 'j~--,~-~ Comm. #1076369 0~~NOTARY PUBLIC CAUFORNIA~ ~m~ '~,-~m~)l/'f ORANGE COUNTY "~ ~. ~ Comm. Exp. M~¢ch 27, 2000 OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. DESCRIPTION OF ATTACI4ED DOCU14ENT MAINTENANCE BOND TITLE OR TYPE OF DOG'UMENT ~U~E~ OF PAGES 2 7-11-97 [] INDIVIDUAL [] PARTNER (S) [] OTHER: CAPACITY C~D BY SIGNER [] CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE (S) [] ATTORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE{S) SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: FTDF. I,TTY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(S) Power of Attorney FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND HOME OFFICE, B~LTIMORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, a corporation of the State of Maryland, by C. M. PECOT~ JR. ,Vice-President, and C.W. ROBBINS , Assistant Secretary, in pursuance of authomty granted by Article VI, Section 2, of the By-Laws of said Company, which are set forth on the reverse side hereof and are hereby certified to be in full force and effect on the date hereof, does hereby nominate, constitute and appoint David L. Culbertson of Anaheim, California .......................... its true and lawful agent and Attorney-in-Fact, to make, execute, seal and deliver, for, and on its behalf as surety, and as its act and deed: any and all bonds and undertakings .................................................. ~nd ~e execution of such bonds or undertakings in pursuance of these presents, shah be as binding upon said Company, as fully and amply, to all intents and purposes, as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company at its office in Baltimore, Md., in their own proper persons.This power of attorney revokes that issued on behalf of David L. Culbertson, dated, February 13, 1981. The said Assistant Secretary does hereby certify that the extract set forth on the reverse side hereof is a true copy of Article VI, Section 2, of the By-Laws of said Company, and is now in force. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Vice-President and Assistant Secretary have hereunto subscribed their names and affixed the Corporate Seal of the said FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, this 15 th day of August, A.D. 1990 ATTEST:~FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND],,~ .......... ....... ........................ ............. STATE OF MARYLAND Crr~ or B~L~MORE On this ]5th day of August , A.D. 1990 , before the subscriber, a Notary Public of the State of Maryland, in and for the City of Baltimore, duly commissioned and qualified, came the above-named Vice-President and Assistant Secretary of the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, to me personally known to be the indlvlduais and officers described in and who executed the preceding instrument, and they each acknowledged the execution of the same, and being by me duly sworn, severally and each for himsel/deposeth and saith, that they are the said officers of the Company aforesaid, and that the seal affixed to the preceding instrument is the Corporate Seal of said Company, and that the said Corporate Seal and their signatures as such officers were duly affixed and subscribed to the said instrument by the authority and direction of the said Corporation. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Official Seal, at the City of Baltimore, the day and year first above written. ,.~jj_ ,._~_ ~ ~ {~""--~°! Notary Publi~ Commissio/a/E~es August 1, 1992 ~ ~_~':.~;.~' CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, Assistant Secretary of the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, do hereby certify that the original Power of Attorney of which the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy, is in full force and effect on the date of this certificate; and I do further certify that the Vice-President who executed the said Power of Attorney was one of the additional Vice- Presidents specially authorized by the Board of Directors to appoint any Attorney-in-Fact as provided in Article VI, Section 2, of the By-Laws of the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND. This Certificate may be signed by facsimile under and by authority of the foliowing resolution of the Board of Directors of the FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND at a meeting duly called and held on the 16th day of July, 1969. RESOLVED: "That the facsimile or mechanically reproduced signature of any Assistant Secretary of the Company, whether made heretofore or hereafter, wherever appearing upon a certified copy of any power of attorney issued by the Company, shah be valid and binding upon the Company with the same force and effect as though manually affixed." IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the corporate seal of the said Company, this 11TH day of 3ULY , 19 9 ?. ITEM 9 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER J/~ TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: August 26, 1997 SUBJECT: Law Enforcement Services Agreement RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the second amendment to the Agreement with the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department and the City of Temecula and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. BACKGROUND: The Riverside County Sheriff's Department serves the City of Temecula with dedicated staff consisting of 33 sworn police officers, 10 community service officers and one office assistant. Additionally, the Riverside County Sheriff's Department provides detective support (four positions), and management and supervision (seven positions) from personnel assigned to the Southwest Station. Twenty of the sworn positions are allocated to the patrol function, producing approximately 98 supported hours of patrol services per day. Patrol personnel are augmented by six specialty units as follows: 1. Community Policing Teams (POP) Four police officers comprise two multi-disciplinary teams. Each team provides support to patrol officers and other City departments by working with citizens and merchants in specific areas of the City. Each two-officer team works out of a neighborhood office located in their service area. 2. Motorcycle Traffic Officers Four specially trained police officers are assigned to traffic enforcement utilizing City owned motorcycles. These officers comprise the four person Traffic Enforcement Team which, in addition to enforcement and patrol, perform traffic accident investigation and reconstruction. The Traffic Team also participates in school, community group and Temecula Community Partnership sponsored training and demonstrations focused on traffic and bicycle safety throughout the City of Temecula. R: tNOR TONL ~`4 GEND`4 S[ LA WENFC. ,4 GN 08/12/97 3. Canine Officer One police officer serves as the City's canine handler. Although assigned to routine patrol duties, this officer has received special and on-going training to function in this capacity. The canine handler drives a vehicle modified to accommodate the canine, which is trained in suspect apprehension and narcotics detection. The canine handler also participates heavily in school and community group demonstrations and educational programs, and is available to support neighboring agencies lacking an available canine. 4. School Resource Officers (SRO) Three police officers, two focused on the high schools, one at Temecula Valley High School and one at Chaparral High School, and the other one at all primary school sites, serve as school resource officers during the academic year. Costs for these positions are shared by the Temecula Valley Unified School District and the City. 5. Community Oriented Policing (COPS) One police officer partially funded from the Federal COPS-FAST Grant Program maintains offices at the CRC and at Margarita Middle School, and works primarily on issues involving Temecula's middle school students and their families. This officer interfaces regularly with the Police Department's School Resource Officers and Community Oriented Policing Teams. 6. Crime Prevention Officer One Community Service Officer, serves as Temecula's crime prevention officer. Temecula's crime prevention program includes coordination of neighborhood and business watch programs, business security surveys, support for Temecula's code enforcement efforts, review of building and development plans, and presentation of crime reduction information to school business and community groups. This program, which draws heavily on the department's Community Oriented Policing teams and volunteer program is operated out of a satellite office in the Temecula Town Center. In addition, through the County contract for police services, the City pays for all vehicle mileage and facilities cost for the use of the Southwest Station which houses the Temecula Police Department. FISCAL IMPACT: The total contract services for staffing and related costs for fiscal year 1997-98 total $4,826,650 and adequate funds have been budgeted in the 1997-98 Operating Budget. Attachment Second Amendment to the Agreement for Law Enforcement Services R:V~IORTONL [AGENDA SILA WENFC. AGN 08/12/97 ORIGINAL / ~,,.~ SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF TEMECULA IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the Agreement for Law Enforcement Services between the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula, effective July 1, 1995 through June 30, 2000, as amended January 21, 1997, is hereby amended in the following respects only: Attachment A is amended to read as follows: CITY OF TEMECULA LEVEL OF SERVICE Average Patrol and Traffic Services 97.5 supported hours per day. (Approximate equivalent of twenty [20] Deputy Sheriff positions @ 1,780 annual productive hours standard.) Dedicated Positions Four (4) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) positions-Community Policing Teams Four (4) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) positions-Motorcycle Team One (1) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported)position-K-9 Deputy One (1) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) position-Community Oriented Policing Officer Three (3) Deputy Sheriff (unsupported) positions-School Resource Officers (year round) Ten (10) Sheriff's Service Officer positions One (1) Office Assistant III position IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Temecula, by resolution or minute order duly adopted by its City Council, has caused this Agreement to be signed by its Mayor and attested and sealed by its Clerk, and the County of Riverside, by order of its Board // // // of Supervisors has caused this Agreemere to be signed by the Chairman of said Board and attested and sealed by the Clerk of said Board, all on the dates indicated below. CITY OF TEMECULA Date: By: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Date: ATTEST: Gerald A. Maloney Clerk of the Board By: Deputy By: Chairman, Board of Supervisors FORM APPROVED COUNTY COUNSEL 1997 ITEM 10 ORDINANCE NO. 97-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREME~ SYSTEM (PERS) AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula authorizing an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Temecula and Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System. The City Council of the City of Temecula does ordain as follows: Section 1. That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Temecula and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, marked Exhibit, and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. Section 2. The Mayor of the City of Temecula is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to executive said amendment for and on behalf of said Agency. Section 3. This Ordinance shall lake effect 30 days from the passage thereof and prior to said date shall be published at least once in the Californian, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Temecula and thenceforth and thereafter the same be in full force and effect. Ord8\97-13 I PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of August, 1997. ATTEST: Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 97-13 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 12th of August, 1997, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of August 1997, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk Ords\97-13 2 ITEM 11 ORDINANCE NO. 97-14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.06 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND CREDITS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 15.06 of Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Chapter 15.06 Public Facilities Development Impact Fee 15.06.010 Findings and Intent. A. The City Council finds that Temecula is a rapidly growing City. The City's population has the potential to grow from a current population of about 40,000 to over 200,000 at build out. This increase in population is reasonably expected to create a substantial increase in the demand placed upon public facilities. The City's existing public facilities will soon become inadequate to handle the projected population growth at existing levels of service. In order to serve the projected population growth, public facilities must be expanded. B. It is the intent of the City to require every person who develops land to mitigate the impacts of that development on the City's public facilities. The City will therefore require developers to pay a public facilities development impact fee that will assist in meeting the demand for public facilities mused by development. The public facilities will be constructed in accordance with a capital improvement plan adopted by resolution of the City Council. C. The amount of the public facilities development impact fees collected pursuant to this Chapter shall be limited to the cost of public facilities attributable to new development. The amount of the public facilities development impact fees collected shall not include the cost of public facilities that serve existing development. 15.06.020 Residential Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Required. A. Except as provided in Sections 15.06.040 and 15.06.050, a developer shall pay a public facilities development impact fee for each building which is part of a residential development, in an amount established by resolution of the City Council, upon final inspection for that building, or the date the certificate of occupancy is issued for that building, whichever occurs first; provided, however, that if a residential development contains more than one dwelling, the Director of Community Development may determine whether the fees or charges shall be paid on a pro rata basis for each dwelling when it receives its final inspection or certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first; on a pro rata basis when a certain percentage of the dwellings have received their final inspection or certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first; or on a lump-sum basis when the first dwelling in the development receives its final inspection or certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. If the required fee is not fully paid prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any portion of the residential development encumbered thereby, the Director of Community Development may require the property owner, or lessee if the lessee's interest appears of record, as a condition of issuance of the building permit, to execute a contract to pay the fee or charge, or applicable portion thereof, within the time specified above. The contract shall be recorded with the Riverside County Recorder and shall constitute a lien for the payment of the fee. B. For purposes of this Section, "final inspection" or "certificate of occupancy, shall be defined as that term is defined in Government Code Section 66007, as amended. 15.06.030 Non-Residential Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Required. A. Except as provided in Sections 15.06.040 and 15.06.050, a developer shall pay a public facilities development impact fee for each building in a non-residential development or new square footage of a building in a non-residential development, in an amount established by resolution of the City Council, prior to issuance of a building permit for that building. Construction which does not result in new square footage shall not be subject to a public facilities development impact fee. B. Notwithstanding paragraph A of this Section, a building permit may be issued to a developer prior to payment of a public facilities development fee, if the developer qualifies as a any nonprofit organization that is exempted from taxes by Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. If, pursuant to this paragraph, the required fee is not fully paid prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any portion of the non-residential development encumbered thereby, the Director of Community Development may require the property owner, or lessee if the lessee's interest appears of record, as a condition of issuance of the building permit, to execute a contract to pay the fee or charge, or applicable portion thereof, upon transfer of the non-residential development, or the applicable portion thereof, to a purchaser that does not qualify as a nonprofit organization that is exempted from taxes by Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The contract shall be recorded with the Riverside County Recorder and shall constitute a lien for the payment of the fee. 15.06.040 Developer Construction of Public Facilities Pursuant to Ca0ital Improvement Plan. A. A developer shall be entitled to a reduction in the amount of the component of public facilities development impact fee required by Sections 15.06.020 and 15.06.030, if the developer constructs public facilities relating to that component pursuant to the City's Capital Improvement Plan and the public facilities constructed are those for which the Capital Improvement Plan designates development impact fees as the funding source. The specific Ords\97-14 2 component of the public facilities development impact fee which would have funded the improvement when installed shall be reduced by the amount of engineering and construction costs that would be reasonably incurred by the City in building those same public facilities. The amount of the reduction in the public facilities development impact fee component shall be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development prior to construction of the development. B. If a developer constructs public facilities pursuant to the City's Capital Improvement Plan, and if the City's engineering and construction costs to construct those same public facilities would have been more than the public facilities development impact fee assessed to that developer pursuant to Sections 15.06.020 and 15.06.030, then nothing in this Section shall prevent the City from entering into a reimbursement agreement with that developer, subject to the availability of funds. 15.06.050 Fee Reduction. A. Application for Fee Reduction 1. Any developer whose development is subject to the public facilities development impact fee required by this Chapter may apply to the Director of Community Development for a reduction in that fee based upon the demonstrable absence of a reasonable relationship between the impact of that development on the City's public facilities and either the amount of public facilities development impact fee charged, or the type of public facilities improvements to be constructed and/or purchased. The application shall be made in writing and filed with the Director of Community Development no later than ninety days after approval of the development. If no application for discretionary review is required for the development, then the application shall be made in writing and fried within ninety days after the City issues a building permit for the development. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the request for reduction. Failure to file a timely application for reduction deprives the Director of jurisdiction to consider the application. The Director shall make a decision on the application for reduction within thirty calendar days after the application has been filed. Notice of the Director's decision shall be mailed to the applicant, postage paid. 2. Any developer whose development is subject to the public facilities development impact fee required by this Chapter, including a developer who, in connection with the development, has constructed or financed regional or regionally significant public facilities substantially similar to those facilities that are listed or otherwise identified in the City's Capital Improvement Plan, either through participation in a special district (e.g., a community facilities district or a special assessment district) or as a result of conditions of approval for the development, may apply to the Director of Community Development for a reduction in that fee. The application shall be made in writing and filed with the Director of Community Development no later no later than ninety days after the effective date of this Section (the effective date of this Section when originally enacted by Ordinance No. 97-09 was June 26, 1997), or ninety days after the City issues a building permit for the development, whichever is later. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the request for reduction. The City shall consider entering into an agreement, or modifying an existing agreement, with any developer applying for a reduction pursuant to this paragraph. 0~.\97-14 3 B. Appeal from Director's Decision 1. Any decision of the Director of Community Development under Section 15.060.050. A may be appealed to the Planning Commission by filing an application for appeal with the Director of Community Development. The application must be filed within fifteen calendar days after notice of the Director's decision has been mailed to the applicant; provided, however, that if the fifteen days expire on a day when Temecula City Hall is not open for business, then the appeal period shall be extended to the next business day. 2. Failure to file a timely appeal application deprives the Planning Commission of jurisdiction to hear the appeal. 3. The Planning Commission shall consider the appeal at a public hearing to be held within forty-five calendar days after the appeal application is filed. C. Appeal from Commission's Decision 1. The decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 15.06.050.B may be appealed to the City Council by filing an application for appeal with the City Clerk. The application must be filed within fifteen calendar days after the Commission has made a final decision on the appeal; provided, however, that if the fifteen days expire on a day when Temecula City Hall is not open for business, then the appeal period shall be extended to the next business day. 2. Failure to file a timely appeal application deprives the City Council of jurisdiction to hear the appeal. 3. The City Council shall consider the appeal at a public hearing to be held within forty-five calendar days after the appeal application is filed. The decision of the City Council shall be final. D. Allocation of Fee Reductions or Credits Any fee reduction or fee credit granted pursuant to this Chapter shall be applied only to that component of the public facilities development impact fee which would have funded the improvement upon which the reduction or credit is based or for which a fee reduction was granted pursuant to Section 15.06.050 A. 1. E. Processing of Protests The procedure set forth in this Section shall implement Government Code Section 66020, or its successor, and shall serve as the City's method for processing protests filed pursuant to that section. Prior to the effective date of the approval of the development, or, if no discretionary approval is required, prior to the issuance of a building permit, a developer that is subject to this Chapter shall sign a statement acknowledging the imposition of a public facilities development impact fee upon that developer's development. Such acknowledgment shall not be Ords\97-14 4 deemed a waiver of the developer's right to protest the imposition and to request a fee adjustment pursuant to this Section. 15.06.060 Use of Funds. All public facilities development impact fees paid and collected pursuant to this Chapter shall be placed in one or more funds and used solely for the purpose of constructing, expanding, or rehabilitating the public facilities specified in the resolution establishing the fee and described in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. 15.06.070 Calculation of Fees. A developer subject to the public facilities development impact fee required by Sections 15.06.020 and 15.06.030 shall pay the amount of the fee in effect at the time that the fee becomes due. Furthermore, any fee imposed on a development which is protected by vested rights acquired through a vesting tentative subdivision map shall pay the amount of the fee in effect at the time the rights became vested plus any adjustment for inflation made between that date and the date the fee becomes due." Section ~. Developments for which a development entitlement application was deemed complete prior to the introduction of Ordinance No. 97-09 on May 8, 1997 shall be exempt from the requirements of this Ordinance; provided, however, that this exemption shall not override any condition of approval for a project which specifically requires payment of fees for the purposes of mitigating impacts on public facilities. Section 3. Ordinance 659 of the County of Riverside establishing a Development Mitigation Fee for residential development as adopted by reference by the City of Temecula shall not apply to any development subject to the public facilities development impact fee required by Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one of more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause same to be published as required by law. 0rds~,97-14 5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tcmecula this 26th day of August, 1997. ATTEST: Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 97-14 was introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 12th day of August, 1997 and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of August, 1997, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk Ords\97-14 6 JOINT CITY COUNCIL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING ITEM 1 APPROV/k~, ~-~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR? CITY MANAGER ~ /-' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager and Board of Directors/General Manager Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services August 26, 1997 Amend Joint Use Agreement - Temecula Elementary School PREPARED BY: Herman D. Parker, Deputy Director of Community Services RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Adopt the Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration for Margarita Community Park Approve the First Amendment to Agreement between the City of Temecula and Temecula Valley Unified School District for the Joint Use of a Portion of Temecula Elementary School. BACKGROUND: As part of the Master Plan for Margarita Community Park, a 5.5 acre portion of Temecula Elementary School is proposed to be renovated and developed as part of the park site, to enhance public recreational opportunities for the community. The site will be used for public recreation programs and services on days and during hours when school is not in session. The original Negative Declaration for Margarita Community Park was adopted by the City Council through the Public Hearing process on February 25, 1992. The document indicates that active areas of the park site will have lights for evening and night recreational activities. The document also states the impact of the additional lights will be mitigated, and no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. However, because the original Negative Declaration was completed over five (5) years ago in 1992, and did not include the 5.5 acre portion of Temecula Elementary School which will now be used as a portion of the park site, staff has prepared and submitted the attached Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration for adoption. In addition, attached for your review is the First Amendment to the Agreement Between the City of Temecula and the Temecula Valley Unified School District for the Joint Use of a portion of Temecula Elementary School. This document was developed to state the City's intent to install lights on the renovated athletic fields of Temecula Elementary School as part of the Margarita Community Park development project. The City would be responsible for all maintenance and utility costs associated with the lights for the twenty (20) year duration of the agreement. The installation of lights on the athletic fields will greatly assist the Community R:Xziglerg\report~marcompr. lit August 13, 1997 Services Department in providing quality, competitive ball fields for local youth sport organizations to use during evening hours. FISCAl. IMPACT: The construction budget for Margarita Community Park is $2,150,000. These funds are included in the Capital Improvement Program budget for FY1997-98. The estimated annual operation and maintenance costs of $97,500 will be included in the TCSD annual operating budget for FY1998-99. ATTACHMENTS: Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration Negative Declaration First Amendment to the Joint Use Agreement Margarita Community Park Master Plan R:Xziglerg\reporthnarcompr.lit August 13, 1997 CITY OF TEMECULA Environmental Checklist Project Title: Environmental Assessment No. 8 - Revised Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Contact Person and Phone Number: Matthew Fagan, Associate Planner (909) 694-6400 Project Location: South side of Margarita Road, west of Temecula Elementary School Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 General Plan Designation: Public Institutional (PI) Public Institutional (PI) Description of Project: Lighting of athletic fields at the Margarita Community Park. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 8 (Margarita Commumty Park Master Plan) was adopted by the City of Temecula City Council on February 25, 1992. The Mitigated Negative Declaration identified several areas which cotfid be significantly impacted, if mitigation measures were not incorporated as a result of this project. These areas included: earth, water, plant life, animal life, noise, hght and glare, land use, transportation and circulation and public services and cultural resources. Mitigation measures, as well as modifications to the project design, served to reduce the impacts to a level of less than significant. The approved Margarita Commumty Park Master Plan project consists of: a soccer field, a roller hockey rink, a tot lot, a play area, a picmc area/picnic shelters, parking lots, softball fields, tenms courts, volleyball courts, walkways, a restroom, a pedestrian bridge, landscaping and improvements to Long Valley Wash. The proposed change to the plan is for lighting for the softball fields. This lighting was not analyzed m the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. Pursuant to Section 15162(b) a subsequent Negative Declaration shall be prepared for a project if changes to a project or circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration and such changes do not involve new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. R:~PLANNING\gEA.IES 6/19/97 mf i 10. This Initial Environmental Study has conducted and a Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the following reasons: Lighting of the ballfields was not analyzed in the previous environmental review; and The 5.5 acre school portion of the project, where the lighting is proposed was not considered within the scope of the previous Margarita Community Park Master Plan or environmental review for the project. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Apatlments exist to the west, single.family residences exist to the north, an elementary school exists to the east and commercial development exists to the south of the proposed lighted ball fields. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. R:~PLAI, INING~SEA.IES 6/19/97 mf 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by (] [] [] [] [] [] (] [] Land Use and Planning Population and Housing Geologic Problems Water Air Quality Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources affected by this project, involving at least one the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Hazards [ ] Noise [ ] Public Services [ ] Utilities and Service Systems IX] Aesthetics [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Recreation [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION Onthe basis of this imtial evaluation, I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a sigmficant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A SUBSEQUENT MITIGATED NEGATIVE Date Printed Name R:~LANNI~G\gEA.IES 6/19/97 nff 3 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts fxom incompatible land uses)? e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (mcluding low-income or mmority community)? 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal: a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projects? b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c. Displace existrag housing, especially affordable housing? 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving? a. Fault rupture? Seismic ground shaking? c. Seismic ground failure, mcludmg liquefaction? d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e. Landslides or mudflows? f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions form excavation, grading or fill? g. Subsidence of the land? h. Expansive soils? i. Unique geologic or physical features? [1 [] [1 [] [] [] [l [] [] [] [] [1 [] [] [1 [1 [] [] [3 [3 [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [3 [] [] [1 [1 [] [1 [] [] [] [] [] [l [1 [] [3 [3 [] [] [3 [] [] [] [1 IX] IX] [Xl [x] IX] [xi IX3 Ix3 [X3 [Xq (x] PQ [x] 4. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a. Changes m absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and mount of surface runoff? b. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards R:~PLAIqlqlNG~SEA.IES 6/19/97 mf 4 [] [] [] [xq such as flooding? c. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h. Impacts to groundwater quality? i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for pubhc water supplies? $. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c. Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d. Create objectionable odors? 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous totersection or incompatible uses)? c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d, Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: R:~PLANNING\gEA.1T~S 6/19/97 mf 5 [] [] [] [] [] [] [1 [] [] [l [] [1 [] [1 [] [] [] [] [1 [] [] [] [] [] [l [] [] [] [] [l [1 [] [] [] [1 [l [l [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [1 [] [] [1 [] [] [] [] [1 [1 [1 [] [] ix] IX] IX] IX] [x] [x] [Xl IX] IX] [xl [x'] IX] IX] [x] ix] a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including bm not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)? b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? c. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? e. Wildlife dispersal or migration coredors? 8. ENERGY AND MIl~ERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation)? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e. Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brash, grass, or trees? NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a. Increase in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? [] [] [] [] [l [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [l [1 [] [] [1 [1 [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [1 [] [] [] [] [1 [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [x] [] [l [] IX] IX] [Xl IX] ix] {x] [x] [] [xl [xl RSPL~G\SEA.1ES 6/19/97 mf 6 c. Schools? d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e. Other governmental services? UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Commurdcations systems? Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste disposal? g. Local or regional water supplies? 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a. Affect a seeinc vista or scenic highway? b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c. Create light or glare? 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a. Disturb paleontological resources? b. Disturb archaeological resources? c. Affect historical resources? d. Have the potential to cause a physicat change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Affect existing recreational opportunities? 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality R:x, PLANNING\SEA.IFS 6/19/97 mf 7 [1 [] [l [1 [1 [l [] [] [1 [1 [] [1 [] [] [] [1 [] [] [] [] [] [l [] [1 [] [1 [] [1 [1 [] [1 [l IX] [l [1 [] [] [] [l [1 [l [] [1 [1 [1 [l [] [] [1 [] [] [] [1 [1 [1 [] [] [] [] [] IX] ix] ix] ix] ix] [x] IX] ix] [x] IX] [1 IX] IX] ix] ix] IX] of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number ofresthct the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? Does the project have impacts that area individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [] [] [] [] [l [] [] [] [] [] [1 [] IX] [~ ix] R:'~PLANN1NG\gEA.II~S 6/19/97 mf 8 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 8 (Margarita Community Park Master Plan) adopted by the City of Temeeula City Council on February 25, 1992. R:WLANNING\SEA.IES 6/19/97 mf 9 DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The addition of lights at the ball fields has potential impacts on Noise and Light and Glare. Mitigation measures incorporated into the project design will reduce these impacts to a level of less than significant. Noise The construction of lighting facilities will result in an increase in the amount of noise generated at the site due to the fact that the lights will allow for increased use of the playing fields at night. Apartments exist to the west, single-family residences exist to the north, an elementary school exists to the east and commercial development exists to the south of the proposed lighted ball fields. The apartments will not be impacted from noise because they are separated fi'om the project by a minimum distance of five hundred feet and a six foot high solid block wall, which distance and wall will reduce the noise to an insignificant level. The existing single-family residences to the north will not be impacted since they are separated from the project by Margarita Road. It is anticipated the noise from Margarita Road will exceed the noise generated by this project. In addition, it is not anticipated the noise from the project will add to the cumulative noise levels from Margarita Road. As a mitigation measure, the lights for the ball fields will be turned off at 10pro, thus the noise from the project will not be significant after this time. The increased use of the fields will not impact the school because the increased nighttime use will occur when school is not in session. It is not anticipated the project will have a significant impact on the commercial development to the south because of its distance from the site. Therefore, the impacts are not considered to be significant and after mitigation measures are incorporated. Light and Glare The construction of lighting facilities will result in new light and glare. As a mitigation measure, the lights will be on electric timers that will tum off the lights at 10:00 p.m. each evening. Also, the lights will be designed to be shielded and directed onto the playing fields and away from the existing residences. Finally, the lights will conform to the requirements of the Palomar Lighting Ordinance No. 655 which will serve to mitigate impacts to the Mount Palomar Observatory. Therefore, the impacts are not considered to be significant after mitigation measures are incorporated. R:~PLANN1NG\SEA.IE$ 6/19/97 mf 10 CITY OF TEMECULA NEGATIVE DECLARATION X Proposed __ Final PROJECT: Temecula Elementary School Park Site Project, Environmental Assessment No. 8. APPLICANT: Cit~ of Temecula. LOCATION: South side of Margarita Road between Stonewood and Moraga Roads, adjacent to Temecula Elementary School in the City of Temecula. DESCRIPTION: The acquisition of approximately 20.23~acres and the construction of a Community Park by the City of Temecula. Based upon the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has been determined that the above mentioned project will have no significant impact upon the environment. The City of Temecula City Council Planning Commission finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant impact upon the environment, and recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted. The mitigation measures for this project are contained in the Initial Study. (] (Name and Title) (Signat~u~ e) Approved by: ./'~ ~ '/~~ Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning (Si~gnature) '~ (Name and Title) Public Review Period: January 7. 1992 to January 28. 1992. Public Notice was given through: m Local Newspaper. X. Posting the Site. X Notice to Adjacent Property Owners. CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: City of Temecula Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 (714) 694-6400 Date of Environmental Assessment: January 3, 1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) NUMBER 8, Temecula Elementary School Park Site Location of Proposal: Southside of Maraarita Road, between Stonewood Road and Moraga Road in the City of Temecula Description of Project: The project consists of: (1) the ac(~uisition of approximateIv 20 acres of vacant land adjacent to Temecula Elementary School; (2) the development of a community Dark by the City of Temecula: and. (3) some incidental flood control improvements to the Long Canvon channel, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe ,.Nq Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? X Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X do The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? X Yes Maybe N~o Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site7 Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? Air. Will the proposal result in: Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors7 Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? be Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage I~atterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Ce Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X X X X X .X. \$~ORME~AI} 2 Ye~ Maybe N...~o Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidiw? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? Plant Ufe. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants7 Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X X ,,X X X X X X Yes Maybe N...~o 10. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, !and animals including rep- tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Ught and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposat result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: ae Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: aJ A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X .X X X X X \S1/-ORMS~r. A8 4 11. 12. 13. 14. Possible interference with an emerg- ency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? Populaton. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? de Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Y(~s Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X X X X ~S~-ORMS~F. A8 5 Yes Maybe N_go 15. 16. 17. 18. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: Energy. Will the proposal result in: Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? U61ifies. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? Human Health. Will the proposal result in: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X X X X X X X X X X I$~FORMS~.AO 6 Maybe No 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X !11 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS Earth 1.a,c,d,g. No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions, changes to unique geologic or physical features, or the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards. Some minor changes in surface relief will occur as the property is developed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1 ,b, Yes. The development of this site for a public park will result in the disruption, displacement, overcovering and compaction of soils. However the overall amount of onsite grading is expected to be relatively minor because of the lack of significant onsite topography and the localized displacement, overcovering and compaction associated with the development of community parks. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1 .e,f. Yes. Some increase in wind or water erosion and deposition could result from the construction of the proposed park facilities. The majority of the impacts are expected to be short-term and construction related. The City will use the appropriate best management practices to reduce and mitigate onsite erosion and offsite deposition. The development of park facilities on this site will reduce long-term wind and water erosion by reducing the extent and steepness of ohsire slopes and covering of the site with erosion resistant materials such ~$~FORM$~A8 7 Ai~r 2.a,b,c. Water 3.a,c,d,e,i. 3.5. 3.f,g,h. Plant Life 4.a,c. as turf grass and paving, and by providing appropriate improvements to Ohsire drainage facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. No long-term changes in air quality, creation of odors, or alteration to the local or regional climate are expected to occur as a result of this project. Some short-term and construction related air quality emissions or odors may occur during the construction process. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. No alterations in the course or direction of flood flows, changes in the quantity and quality of surface water, or discharges to surface waters are expected to occur as a result of this project. The existing channel will continue to cross the project site when the site is developed. The project will reduce the exposure of people and property to water related hazards by precluding the development of housing on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. Some changes in absorption rates, onsite drainage patterns, and surface runoff may occur as.a result of this project. Onsite absorption rates may be reduced as portions of the site are compacted or paved. The surface runoff pattern may also change as the site is developed. However, because most of the project site will not be paved it is expected to retain much of its soil absorption potential. The project site will continue to drain into the Long Canyon Channel. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result' of this project. Yes. Some changes in the amount of groundwater recharge may occur as a result of this project if channelization in Long Canyon Channel includes a hard- bottomed channel. Channelization may reduce the amount of area available for groundwater recharge. The reduction in the amount of groundwater recharge has the potential to reduce the amount of public water supply that could be available in the future. (Residents of the Temecula Valley rely heavily on groundwater for potable water supplies.) These impacts have the potential to result in a significant impact on the environment. These impacts will be mitigated in the final design of the park facility by ensuring that the Long Canyon Channel maintains a soft-bottomed characteristics to allow the continued recharge of groundwater. As a result of the mitigation included in the project design, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. The project will change the diversity of the native plant and riparian plant species and will introduce new plant species onto the project site. The site currently contains degraded upland grassland, degraded riparian habitat, and ~s~Foe~s~e 8 4.d. Animal Life 5.a,c, 5,5. manmade riparian habitats. No significant areas of Coastal Sage Scrub have been identified. Development of a park facility on the site will replace most of the existing grassland species with mixture of Bermuda Grass and Fescue, and a variety introduced shrubs and trees. The manmade r/parian area created by the inadequate drainage facilities along the eastern property line will be removed as a result of this project. To mitigate any environmental impacts caused by the development of the proposed project on this site, the degraded r/parian habitat located in the main channel area will be enhanced and expanded through the stabilization of the channel area. The channel stabilization will encourage the propagation of adjacent r/parian species onto the project site. Because of these mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No. No unique, rare or endangered species have been identified on the site. The project site was used for agricultural purposes earlier in the ~entury and the natural onsite vegetation was significantly altered at that time. In addition, no endangered or rare vegetative species were identified onsite in the FEIR for the 1989 Southwest Area Community Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. The so/is on'the project site have been identified as locally important land in earlier planning studies done by the County of Riverside. The project site is too small for economically viable agricultural production is currently isolated from other agricultural areas, and completely surrounded by urban uses. The site was also identified as future urban development in the Southwest Area Plan adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in 1989. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Yes. The project will change the diversity of the animal species onsite and may reduce the amount of limited wildlife habitat on the project site. Limited populations of common small rodents, reptiles, insects, and birds are believed to rely on the site for either habitat, food, and/or water. The majority of the site is covered with degraded grassland area. Some limited marginat r/parian area is also found on the site. The project site is an isolated undeveloped parcel in an otherwise developed area of the City of Temecuia. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Maybe. The project site is located within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Area. While a specific site inspection has not been conducted, it's small size, proximity to urban development, and isolation from other wildlife habitat areas make it unlikely that the Stephens Kangaroo Rat (SKR) inhabits the site. During the planning phase of the project, a specific site survey will be conducted to determine if the SKR presently inhabits the site. If the Stephens Kangaroo Rat is identified on the project site, the project could contribute to an incremental reduction of SKR habitat. Any impacts to the SKR would be mitigated by the Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fees that are required by the City of Temecula. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Noise 6.a,b. Yes. Some increase in noise levels may occur as a result of this project. However, the majority of these noise impacts are expected to be of short-term and construction related. Some long-term noise impacts may also occur as a result of this project. The development of this site as a public park will bring additional people to the site for both active and passive recreation. These additional people have the potential to increase ambient noise levels adiacent to this~roposed site. However given the character of the neise, (primarily people talking and children playing) the impact of the noise is not expected to be offensive or to generate severe noise levels. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. U~jht and Glare Yes. The light and glare will result from the lighting of activity areas for evening and night use and for any needed security lighting. The Park Site is located within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District. The lighting standards within this district require that only low pressure sodium street and security lights be installed and all other lighting must be oriented or shielded to reduce the glare in the night sky near the observatory. Additional light and glare may result from the development of the site for a park facility. The impact of the additional light and glare will be mitigated by following the standards of the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District (Ordinance No. 655) and through the appropriate design of the lighting system. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Land Use Yes. The future land use on this site will change if the site is developed for a public park. The existing zoning on the project site is R-2-3000. The R-2-3000 zone would allow one dwelling unit per 3,000 square foot of lot area. The proiect would result in development of the site as a community park with public recreational facilities. At present, public recreation facilities are very limited in the City of Temecula and will have less impact on the surrounding areas than the currently allowable multiple family development. No significant adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Natural Resources 9.a,b. No. The development of a park on this site will result in a minor incremental increase in the use of some renewable and non-renewable resources. The use of the proposed park facility is not expected to result in the use of a significant amount of renewable and non-renewable resources. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Risk of Uoset 10.a,b. No. The development of a park on this site will not result in a risk of explosion, the release of hazardous substance, or any interference with an emergency response plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Pooulation 11. No. The development of a park on this site will not alter the location, distribution, or growth rate of population in this area. The development of a park in this area will result in less population in this vicinity. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Housing 12. No. The development of a park on this site will not affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Transoortation/Circulation 13.a,b. Yes. The development of a park on this site will generate additional vehicular traffic and will generate a demand for new parking. However, the additional traffic that would be generated and the additional parking facilities that will be recluired are significantly less than would occur if the project site was developed as a residential project under the current zoning. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.c,d,e,f. No. The development of a park on this site will not have an impact on the existing traffic system, alter the pattern of vehicular, rail, air, or pedestrian circulation, or increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Public Services 14.a,b,c,f. No. The development of a park on this site will not create a need for, or result in any alterations to additional fire, police, or school services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.d,e. Yes. The development of this site may require the expansion of current City park and recreation services to staff and maintain the proposed project. The project may require that the City government allocate future funding for site maintenance of costs. However, the impact on theses costs on the City's budget is not expected to be significant. (Park and recreation services are a high priority for the City of Temecula given the historic shortage of these facilities in the Temecula Valley.) No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Eperuv 15.a,b. No. The development of this project will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy, or result in a substantial increase in the demand for existing sources of energy. The development of a park may result in a minor increase in the use of existing energy resources. Some incremental increase in energy usage as a result of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Utilities 16.all. No. The development of a park on this site will not result in a need for new utility delivery systems, or require substantial alteration of the gas, electric, communication, water, sewer, storm drain, or solid waste disposal utilities or services. All utilities needed to support the proposed park facility are located on or immediately adiacent to the .site. A minor change to complete the existing storm drain system may occur as a result of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Human Health 17.a,b. No. The development of a park on this site will not result in the creation of a health hazard, or the additional exposure of people to any human health hazards. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Aesthetics 18. No. The development this project site will not result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive view, or the obstruction of any scenic view or vista. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Recreation 19. No. The development of a park on this site will not have an impact on the quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunities in the area. The development of a park of this site will improve and increase future recreational opportunities in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Cultural Resources 20.a,b,c,d. Maybe. No identified cultural resources or historic sites are known to occur on the site. The Southwest Area General Plan did not identify this area as an 'Area of Sensitivity for Archaeological Resources'. The project site has been significantly modified over the last 30 years and it is unlikely that any cultural resources would have avoided detection or destruction. Additional analysis will be undertaken during the planning and development of this project. Any future impacts will be mitigated through the application of standard City paleontotogic and archaeologic development conditions. In addition, if needed, onsite archaeologic and Native American heritage resource experts will monitor activities on the site. Because of these mitigation measures, No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ~s~:o~ws~.~e 12 IV MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Y~ Maybe No X Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) X e Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect on this case because the mitigation measures described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Prepared by: (Signature) David W. HoQan, (Name and Title) Associate Planner ~ (D~ate) - Approved by: (~gnature} Gary Thornhill. Director pf Plannine (Name and Title) (Date) VICINITY MAP ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 8 {Not to Scale) PROJECT SITE Cat~tornia Road FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE JOINT USE OF A PORTION OF TEMECULA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of , 1997 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation (the "City"), and the Temecula Valley Unified School District (the "District"). In consideration of the mutual promises and covenents contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. This First Amendment is entered into with respect to the following facts and for the following purposes, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the parties: a. On December 10, 1996 the City and District entered into that certain agreement entitled "Agreement Between the City of Temecula and Temecula Valley Joint Unified School District for the Joint Use of a Portion of Temecula Elementary School" (the "Agreement"). b. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the City is improving the Property in accordance with the Master Plan for Margarita Community Park, providing parking improvements, and renovating the existing ball fields, swimming pool and bathhouse. c. The City now desires to install lights on the athletic fields and to be authorized to add customary park amenities as part of Phase I development of Margarita Community Park and the District concurs in this expansion of the improvements to the Property. 2. Subparagraphs f. and g. are hereby added to Section 5., Improvement of the Property, of the Agreement to read as follows: "5. Iml~royement of the Property, The following improvements to the Property shall be constructed and installed by the City at its expense: The athletic fields on the Property shall be equiped with lights to provide for night play and the electrical service for the lights shall be metered separately from the school site; al}'necessary R:~ziglefg~,tesomend.use - 1 - Community and CEQA approvals for these lights shall be secured by the City of Temecuta. The City shall be authorized to install customary park and recreational amenities on the Property." 3. Subparagraphs i., j. and k., are hereby added to, and subparagraphs e. and g. are hereby deleted from, Section 7., City Maintenance Responsibilities, of the Agreement to read as follows: "7. City Maintenance Responsibilities. During the term of this agreement, the City shall, at its sole expense, perform the following maintenance on the Property and the improvements which currently exist upon it or which are to be constructed upon the Property pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, in accordance with reasonable maintenance standards and schedules approved by the Director of Community Services of the City and Director of Facilities Services of the District: "e. [Intentionally omitted] "g. [Intentionally omitted] 'T Provide annual renovation of the athletic fields." "j. Maintain and repair the lights for the athletic fields and pay for all electrical costs for operating the lights." Maintain and repair all customary park and recreational amenities installed by the City." 4. Except as specifically provided herein, all other terms of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. //// IIII R: \zlglerg\~.samcnd. u~c - 2 - TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HELD AUGUST 12, 1997 A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was catled to order at 7:36 P.M. at the City Counci~ Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Vice President Steven J. Ford presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Linderoans, Roberts 1 DIRECTORS: Stone Also present were General Manager Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson and City Clerk June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-3. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans, Roberts NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Stone Minutes 1.1 Approve the minutes of July 22, 1997. 2 Award TCSD Landscape Maintenance Contract for FY 1997-98 2.1 Award contract of $335,181 to California Landscape Maintenance, Inc. to provide landscape maintenance services for sports parks, slopes (south), medians and recreation facilities for FY 1997/98. r:\minutes,csd\081297 -1- 3 Design Services for Rancho California Sports Park Sidewalk Project 3.1 Approve a Consultant Services Agreement with KWC Engineering, Inc., in an amount not to exceed ~25,455, for the preparation of schematic design drawings and construction documents for permanent curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping on the west side of Margarita Road between Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT None given. GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT None given. BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS None given. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Linderoans to adjourn at 7:38 PM to a meeting on August 26, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried with President Stone absent. Jeff Stone, President ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary r:\minutes.csd\081297 -2- ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE n~.~ CITY MANAGER .~ TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO: General Manager/Board of Directors FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: August 26, 1997 SUBJECT: Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 PREPARED BY: Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director Jesse Diaz, Project Accountant RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of Directors: Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997. Approve the transfer of $21,530 to the 1996-97 parks and recreation utilities account per the attached Schedule A. 3. Appropriate $8,710 to the 1996-97 'Service Level B" residential street lighting account. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the Community Services District for the year ended June 30, 1997. Please see the attached financial statements for the analytical review of financial activity. Higher than anticipated park facility utility costs were incurred during the 1996-97 fiscal year. As such, a transfer is requested from within the Parks and Recreation Department budget. This transfer is more than offset by budget savings realized in park landscape maintenance and facility repairs and maintenance costs. Due to the number and timing of when new street lights were added to the District's residential street lighting system, an appropriation is requested in the Service Level B budget. FISCAL IMPACT: As is reflected in the attached financial statements, there are adequate funds available in the Parks and Recreation Department budget to cover the requested transfer. There are also adequate reserves available in the Service Level B Fund for the appropriation request. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment UA" - Budget Transfer Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Year Ended June 30, 1997 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department ATTACHMENT "A" BUDGET TRANSFER TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TRANSFER FROM: ACCT. No. 190-180- 999-5415 190-180- 999-5212 Description Landscape Maintenance Facility Repairs and Maintenance TRANSFER TO: Amount ACCT. No. I Description $ 16,760 190-180- Utilities 999-5240 4,770 Amount $ 21,530 Temecula Community Services District Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 Assets and other debits: Cash and investments Receivables Due f~om other funds Total assets Parks & Recreation 1,003,948 540,994 10,907 Service Level A 28,441 Service Level B Service Level C $ 57,381 $ 336,868 8,477 19,725 $ 1,555,849 $ 28,441 $ 65,858 $ 356,593 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities $ 140,921 140,921 Fund balances: Reserved 9,097 Designated 1,405,831 Undesignated 10,907 1,112 12,019 447 15,975 $ 144 $ 58,025 144 58,025 65,714 298,568 Total fund balances 1,414,928 16,422 65,714 298,568 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 1,555,849 $ 28,441 $ 65,858 $ 356,593 Please note that these balances are unaudited. Temecula Cormnunity Services District Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 Assets and other debits: Cash and investments Receivables Due from other funds Total assets Service Level D Service Level R Debt Service 1,042,043 $ 10,624$ 520,315$ 68,456 2,306 8,633 $ 1,110,499 $ 12,930 $ 528,948 $ Total 2,971,179 677,032 10,907 3,659,118 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Fund balances: Reserved Designated Undesignated Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances $ 874,931 874,931 235,568 $ 12,930 235,568 12,930 10,907 1,075,133 1,086,040 $ 502,690 512,234 26,258 2,060,844 528,948 1,110,499 $ 12,930 $ 528,948 $ 2,573,078 3,659,118 Please note that these balances are unaudited. Temecula Community Services District Parks and Recreation Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance = Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Annual Amended YTD Total Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity Assessments TCSD admin fee erecliff'REST" Recreation programs Investment interest Miscellaneous Operating transfer in 2,717,562 $ 2,548,269 $ 2,548,269 299,524 299,524 299,524 365,425 424,485 424,485 20,000 37,264 37,264 24,617 15,938 15,938 12,500 14,871 14,871 Total Revenues 3,439,628 3,340,351 3,340,351 Expenditures: Parks and recreation Seniors Community Recreation Center (CRC) Recreation programs Temecula Community Center (TCC) 2,655,625 2,564,971 $ 3,516 2,568,487 90,118 68,960 68,960 252,741 217,174 18 217,192 408,159 310,677 5,563 316,240 130,524 82,647 82,647 Total Expenditures 3,537,167 3,244,429 9,097 3,253,526 Revenues Over/CUnder) Expenditures (97,539) 95,922 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 1,319,006 1,319,006 Ending Fund Balance, June30, 1997 $ 1,221,467 $ 1,414,928 Percent of Budget 94% 100% 116% 186% 65% 119% 97% 97% 77% 86% 77% 63% 92% (1) (1) (1) (2) NOTES: (1) Budget savings were realized primarily in the area of personnel costs. (2) Overall operating costs for the Temecula Community Center were lower than anticipated. The facility was acquired in September 1996, thus only nine months of operations is reflected. Temeeula Commtmity Se~iees District Service Level A Arterial Street Lights and Median Maintenance Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity Revenues: Assessments $ 204,092 $ 190,738 Investment interest 1,800 114 Miscellaneous 1,803 5,936 Total Revenues 207,695 196,788 Expenditures: Salaries and wages 2,695 2,678 Street lighting 165,000 158,652 Landscape maintenance 28,000 26,814 $ Other operating expenditures 12,000 8,837 Total Expenditures 207,695 196,981 Revenues Over/CLlnder) Expenditures (193) Beginning Fund Balanee, July l, 1996 16,615 16,615 Ending Fund Balanee, June 30, 1997 $ 16,615 $ 16,422 Eneumbr. 447 447 Total Activity 190,738 114 5,936 196,788 2,678 158,652 27,261 8,837 197,428 Percent of Budget 93% 6% 329% 95% 99% 96% 97% 74% 95% 4 Temeeula Community Services District Service Level B Residential Street Lights Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity Revenues: Assessments $ 252,948 $ 253,596 Investment interest 2,500 1,325 Miscellaneous 13,000 18,321 Total Revenues 268,448 273,242 Expenditures: Salaries and wages 6,923 6,839 Street lighting 266,800 275,405 Miscellaneous 4,615 4,720 Total Expenditures 278,338 286,964 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (9,890) (13,722) Beginning Fund Balance, July l, 1996 79,436 79,436 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 69,546 $ 65,714 Eneumbr. Total Activity 253,596 1,325 18,321 273,242 6,839 275,405 4,720 286,964 Percent of Budget 100% 53% 141% 102% 99% 103% 102% 103% Temecula Community Services District Service Level C Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity Encumbr. RevenLles~ Assessments $ 508,482 $ 508,375 $ Investment interest 8,000 14,060 Miscellaneous 5,000 12,838 Total Revenues 521,482 535,273 Expenditures: Salaries and wages 114,979 113,930 Landscape maintenance 272,972 269,840 Utilities 103,575 111,019 Other expenditures 71,243 59,178 Total Expenditures 562,769 553,967 Revenues Over/(lJnder) Expenditures (41,287) (18,694) Beginning Fund Balance, July l, 1996 317,262 317,262 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 275,975 $ 298,568 Total Activity 508,375 14,060 12,838 535,273 113,930 269,840 111,019 59,178 553,967 Percent of Budg~ 100% 176% 257% 103% 99% 99% 107% 83% 98% 6 Temecula Community Services District Service Level D Refuse Collection, Recycling and Street Sweeping Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance o Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Assessments "REST" AB 939 Investment interest Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures: Salaries and wages Refuse hauling Other expenditures Total Expenditures Revenues Over/COnder) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July l, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity $ 1,826,717 $ 1,825,878 17,310 17,310 2,000 9,191 8,000 15,648 178 1,854,027 1,868,205 44,775 43,836 1,826,717 1,747,060 8,095 7,061 1,879,587 1,797,957 (25,560) 70,248 165,320 165,320 $ 139,760 $ 235,568 Eneumbr. Total Activity $ 1,825,878 17,310 9,191 15,648 178 1,868,027 43,836 1,747,060 7,061 1,797,957 Percent of Budget 100% 100% 460% 196% 101% 98% 96% 87% 96% Temecula Community Services District Service Level R Streets and Roads Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity R{~venue~- Assessments $ 19,276 $ 18,998 Investment interest 222 Total Revenues 19,276 19,220 Expenditures: Emergency street maintenance 19,079 9,765 Other expenditures 197 175 Total Expenditures 19,276 9,940 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 9,280 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 3,650 3,650 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 3,650 $ 12,930 Total Activity $ 18,998 222 19,220 9,765 175 9,940 Percent of Budget 99% 100% 51% 89% 52% Temecula Community Services District Capital Project Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Rev~nlle8' Investment interest Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity $ 12,081 Encumbr. Total Activity $ 12,081 of Budget Expenditures: Operating transfer out $ 304,914 304,914 304,914 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 (304,914) (292,833) 292,833 292,833 (12,081) $ Temeeula Community Services District Debt Service Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended Total Budget Activity Revenues: Operating transfers in $ 501,600 $ 468,736 Investment interest 34,000 35,597 Miscellaneous 818 Total Revenues 535,600 505,151 Expenditures: Debt service - principal 170,000 170,000 Debt service - interest 325,600 325,600 Trustee admin fees 6,000 4,452 Total Expenditures 501,600 500,052 Revenues Over/CLlnder) Expenditures 34,000 5,099 Beginning Fund Balance, July l, 1996 523,849 523,849 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 $ 557,849 $ 528,948 Percent of Budget 93% 105% 94% 100% 100% 74% 100% 10 ITEM 3 APPROV/~E), ~ CITY ATTORNEY ~)~ DIRECTOR OF FIN~AiCE_~ CITY MANAGER _~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ronald E. Bradley, General Manager DATE: August 26, 1997 SUBJECT: Award Contract - MuniFinancial, Inc. PREPARED BY: ~~r ~.t~Beryl Yasinosky, Development Services Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Approve contract of 921,000 with MuniFinancial, Inc. to provide ongoing services related to administration of the City's Park/Street Lighting Tax and the TCSD Rates and Charges. BACKGROUND: MuniFinancial, Inc. has provided special district administration services to the TCSD since 1991. These services include the preparation of the levy for the TCSD Rates and Charges and the City's Park/Street Lighting Tax, updating parcel activity, mailing the public hearing notices to property owners, updating software data, conducting field surveys, calculating the equivalent dwelling units (EDU's) per the TCSD's rate formula, and submitting the levy tape to the County of Riverside for inclusion on the annual property tax rolls. In an effort to more efficiently administer the levy process and satisfy tax roll reporting deadlines, staff is recommending that the term of the contract with MuniFinancial be approved for two and one-half years, with a provision to renew the contract for two one-year periods. Pursuant to the terms of the attached contract, the current services will be provided for 921,000 per calendar year, which reflects no increases from last year's contract. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the special district administration services and reimbursables will not exceed 921,000 per calendar year. This amount has already been included in the TCSD budget for Fiscal Year 1997-98. ATTACHMENTS: Agreement with Muni Financial, Inc. r:\yasinobk~mf1997.csd 062596 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of July 1, 1997, between the Temecula Community Services District CTCSD") and MuniFinancial, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 1997 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than January 1, 2000, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, this Agreement may be renewed for two one-year periods. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The TCSD agrees to pay Consultant quarterly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Twenty One Thousand Dollars ($21,000.00) per calendar year for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shah not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the General Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by General Manager and Consultant at the time TCSD's written r :\rusep\eontracth~sf1997 .agr - 1- authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. The General Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10 %) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the Board of Directors. c. Consultant will submit invoices quarterly according to the payment schedule set forth in Exhibit B for services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided throughout the year. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the TCSD disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The TCSD may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least thirty (30) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the TCSD suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the TCSD shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the TCSD pursuant to Section 3. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, TCSD shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the General Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the TCSD shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to r:\rusep\contract~a,~ f1997 .agr -2 - terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by TCSD that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of TCSD or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give TCSD the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit TCSD to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shah allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of f'mal payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer data fries, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the TCSD and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the TCSD without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the TCSD, upon reasonable written request by the TCSD, the necessary computer software for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer fries. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shah not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the TCSD, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the TCSD. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. r:\rusep\contract~msfi 997.agr -3 - a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. (4) Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant' s profession. Do Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Errors and omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self- insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the General Manager. At the option of the General Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as respects the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: r:\rusep\eontract~mfl 997.agr -~'- (1) The TCSD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shah apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer' s liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shah be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the TCSD. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the TCSD. f. Verification of Coverage. Consultam shah furnish the TCSD with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the TCSD. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the TCSD before work commences. As an alternative to the TCSD's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. r:\msep\contracthmf1997.agr -5- 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the TCSD a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither TCSD nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the TCSD. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against TCSD, or bind TCSD in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, TCSD shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for TCSD. TCSD shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The TCSD, and its officers and employees, shah not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without TCSD's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shah not without written authorization from the General Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City of Temecula. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives TCSD notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify TCSD should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City of r: \rusep\contract~asf1997.agr -6- Temecula. TCSD retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with TCSD and to provide TCSD with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, TCSD's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by TCSD to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To TCSD: Temecula Community Services District 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: General Manager To Consultant: MuniFinanciai, Inc. 28765 Single Oak Drive, Second Floor Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: Jim McGuire 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultam shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the TCSD. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, Consultant shall provide TCSD fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Jim McGuire from Consultant' s employ. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shah be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the Board of Directors and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The TCSD and Consultam understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shah govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any r:\ruaep\contracthnaf1997.agr -7- litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT By Jeffrey E. Stone, President Attest: June S. Greek, Secretary/City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney r: \rmep\contractXrnsf1997.agr -8- CONSULTANT By r:\rusep\contmct~ms f1997 .agr -9- EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED Section 2 of the agreement specifies the Scope of Services to provide special district administration services itemized in the following paragraphs: Community Services District Assessment Administration Services Meet with TCSD as needed to gather information, discuss City needs and concerns, project history, services provided by the District, etc. Assist TCSD staff in preparing budgets. Provide comparison studies as requested by staff to aid in the analysis of various methods of assessment, benefit to equity evaluations, EDU calculations and rates, etc. Review Boundary Diagrams and on-site characteristics of the District in order to be completely familiar with the specific Service Levels within the District. Review existing method of spread to address staff concerns and to ensure equity throughout the District. Assist with public meeting workshops prior to any public hearings to discuss the District services, budgets, and any concerns generated by property owners in order to alleviate any negative misconceptions, if so desired by TCSD. Be available as reasonably needed throughout the year to meet with TCSD staff to discuss district administration, budgeting, method of the fee application, levy or other related topic at the discretion of the TCSD. Coordinate with the County of Riverside to obtain all necessary information, i.e. latest secured roll, APN maps, etc. (See Fee Schedule, Special Projects) o Coordinate with TCSD staff to obtain all necessary information, i.e., boundary maps, budget information, District reports, special circumstances and particular parcel levy data, etc. Prepare Preliminary Report for review by staff including but not be limited to: method of spread; District budget background information; description of the District and Service Level; listing of preliminary assessment by Service Level; Tables showing the number of parcels per Service Level along with their anticipated assessment land use code, etc.; description of District services; District Boundary Diagram(s) (provided by City); sample formula and calculations for each land use type. r :\rusep\contracthnsf1997.agr - 1 0- 10. Provide computer print out to staff listing the "Noticed" levy amounts for each assesson parcel number and information requested by TCSD including acreage; land use codes; CSD Service Levels; number of dwelling units; EDU values; situs address; and owner information. 11. After staff has reviewed the Preliminary Report, modify the Report or provide additional comparison scenarios as directed by staff. 12. Cause public notices to be mailed to all affected property owners. TCSD shall provide postage costs, payable to the Postmaster, to consultant seven days prior to the mailing. Consultant may use an outside vendor to prepare and deliver notices for mailing. City will reimburse consultant, under separate purchase order, for previously approved costs associated with this service, including: processing, reproductions, materials, and service charges incurred by the consultant. In addition, the consultant will be reimbursed for coordination and management of the mailing process at an amount not to exceed $0.10 per notice mailed. 13. Prepare Final Report for presentation by staff to the Board of Directors, and upon request, provide the approved f'mal levy database. 14. Prepare and submit to the County a magnetic tape for its use in entering individual parcel levy amounts onto the tax bills, included with the Enabling Resolution. 15. Upon receipt of a parcel exceptions list from the County, revise parcel numbers and report the remaining levy amounts to the County Assessor's Office. 16. Make all necessary adjustments for annexations into the District upon notification by the TCSD. It is understood by the TCSD and the Consultant that all modifications to the District structure, including new service levels, zones or annexations will likely result and require an amendment to the contract amount. A revised Boundary Diagram can be prepared for an additional fee. 17. Attend related council meetings, public workshops, public hearings as reasonably requested by staff. 18. Maintain communication with TCSD staff regarding regulatory changes which may affect the District(s) and current administration procedures. 19. Provide continual administrative consulting to the TCSD, as needed. 20. MuniFinancial Services to research parcel and land use changes. r:\rusep\contracthns f1997.agr - 11- 21. Consultant shall provide all the same services as called out in this agreement for areas which may at some time in the future be annexed into the City. Any significant change to the District structure or to the parcels included within the District, including annexations to the City, will result in additional fees. These additional fees will be addressed in an amendment to this contract or a separate agreement. r:\rusep\¢ontract~ms f1997 .agr - 1 2 - EXHIBIT B PAYMENT SCHEDULE The following fixed fees and schedule are proposed to accomplish the scope of services as set forth in Section 3 and 9 of the Agreement: Month Amount July $ 5,000.00 October $ 5,000.00 January $ 5,000.00 April $ 5,000.00 TOTAL: $20,000.00 The cost of services incidental to the performance of the services described above are included in the stated fbted fee, and no additional charges will be made thereof. The charges for authorized services outside the Scope of Services described above will be based on Muni Financial Service's hourly rate schedule which is in effect at the time the services are rendered. Expenses The reasonable cost of reports, reproduction, and other "out of pocket" expenses provided by consultant are included in the contract amount. The estimated cost of these items, excluding mailing costs, shall not exceed $1,000. Expenses not included in the contract amount are: coordination, production, postage and mailing of brochures, newsletters, notices, County data tapes; and assessor's parcel information which will be billed to the City at cost and handling charges. r:\rusep\contractLrns f1997.agr - 13- ITEM 4 APPROV ,, -" CITY ATTORNEY JfYT,,1,.~%., DIRECTOR OF FINAI~E. .~=~'~- CITY MANAGER .~' ' CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ronald E. Bradley, General Manager DATE: SUBJECT: August 26, 1997 Proposed Residential Street Lighting and Slope/Landscape Maintenance Fee - Tract 28309 (Regency Homes) PREPARED BY: {~ ~_Beryl Yasinosky. Development Services Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT NO. 28309 (REGENCY HOMES) BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 1998-99 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) operates under the authority of Community Services District Law and provides residential street lighting and landscaping and slope maintenance services to numerous residential subdivisions within the City of Temecula through Service Level "B" and Service Level "C", respectively. The boundaries of the TCSD are coterminous with the City, and the City Council also serves as the Board of Directors of the TCSD. Tract No. 28309 is a residential subdivision consisting of 46 residential lots, located on the south side of Nicolas Road, just east of North General Kearny Road. Recorded on June 30, 1997, the tract property is currently vacant, with model home construction anticipated to commence within the next few weeks. An active homeowner's association is not planned for this development and the subdivider is conditioned to transfer street lighting and perimeter slope/parkway landscaping improvements to the TCSD for long-term maintenance purposes. As a result, it is necessary for the TCSD to establish the parcel rates and charges necessary to provide ongoing revenue for these services. r :\yaslnobk~28309csd. r t= 08~697 Beginning Fiscal Year 1998-99, the following TCSD rates and charges are proposed for residential street lighting and slope/parkway landscaping services within Tract No. 28309: Service Level R $25.68 per parcel Service Level C $46.00 per parcel Pursuant to the provisions of Proposition 218, the TCSD is required to hold a property owner election in order to establish new rates and charges. In addition, a report must be prepared and filed with the Secretary/City Clerk which identifies all of the affected parcels. A notice is mailed to the property owner identifying the proposed rates and charges and date of the Public Hearing. The Public Hearing is held at least 45 days after the mailing of the notices. If the proposed rates and charges are not rejected pursuant to a written protest, then the TCSD will conduct a mailed ballot election not less than 45 days after the public hearing. The proposed rates and charges cannot be imposed unless the new charges have been approved by the property owner. Staff recommends that the Board of Directors adopt the resolution to accept the filing of the report on the proposed residential street lighting and slope/landscape maintenance fees for Tract 28309 beginning in Fiscal Year 1998-99 and schedule a public hearing concerning this issue for October 14, 1997. Staff will then proceed with noticing the owner of Tract No. 28309 regarding the proposed rates and charges and the public hearing date. If the Board adopts the fees on October 14, 1997, staff will then proceed with the mailed ballot. FISCAL IMPACT: The owner of Tract 28309, SR Group, LLC has paid a 9200 application fee to cover administrative and mailing costs associated with the public notices and ballot information required per Proposition 218. If voter approved, beginning Fiscal Year 1998-99, the proposed levy of 925.68 per parcel for Service Level B will generate 91,187 annually for residential street lighting services within the subdivision. The proposed levy of 946.00 per parcel (Rate Level 1) for Service Level C will generate 92,116 annually for the repair and maintenance of perimeter slope/parkway landscaping adjacent to Nicolas Road. Sufficient funds will be generated to cover the costs of providing residential street lighting and slope maintenance services. ATTACH MENTS: 1. Resolution of Intention c \yasinobkL~ ~09~l.t'te, 082697 RESOLUTION NO. CSD 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHING SERVICE LEVEL B AND SERVICE LEVEL C RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT NO. 28309 (REGENCY HOMES) FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-99 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES, DECLARES, DETERMINES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Upon incorporation of the City of Temecula, effective December 1, 1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District ("TCSD"), to provide specified services to properties within its jurisdiction. Section 2. The TCSD maintains perimeter slopes and parkway landscaping in numerous residential developments within the City of Temecula. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for residential street lighting (Service Level B) and slope maintenance services ("Service Level C") fumished by it, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes in the manner prescribed by Government Code Sections 61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive. Section 3. The TCSD must initiate proceedings in order to maintain residential street lighting and slope/parkway landscaping within Tract No. 28309 beginning Fiscal Year 1998/99. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61621.2, the TCSD has caused a written report ("Report") to be prepared and fried with the Secretary of the TCSD, which Report contains a description of each parcel of real property and the proposed amount of Service Level B and Service Level C rates and charges required for maintenance of the new residential street lighting and slope/parkway landscaping adjacent to Nicolas Road for each parcel for fiscal year 1998/99. The TCSD proposes to collect the rates and charges at the same time, in the same manner, by the same persons and together with and not separately from, the property taxes collected within the TCSD. These rates and charges shall be delinquent at the same time and thereafter be subject to the same delinquency penalties as such property taxes. All laws applicable to the levy, collection, and enforcement of property taxes, including, but not limited to, those pertaining to the matters of delinquency, correction, cancellation, refund and redemption, shall be applicable to these rates and charges, except for California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 4831. However, if for the first year the charge is levied, the real property to which the charge relates has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created and attaches thereon, prior to the date on which the first installment of such taxes appear on the roll, then the charge, shall not result in a lien against the property, but instead shall be transferred to the unsecured roll for collection. Section 4. The Board of Directors hereby acknowledges the f'rling of the Report, and appoints the 14th day of October, 1997 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as feasible, in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590, as the time and place for the public hearing on the Report and the proposed Service Level B and Service Level C rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of Directors will hear and consider all objections or protests, if any, to the Report. The Board may continue the hearing from time to time. Section 5. The Secretary of the TCSD is hereby directed to give notice of the filing of the Report and of the time and place of hearing on the Report pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 61765.2 and Section 6 of Article XllID of the California Constitution. Section 6. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District this 26th day of August, 1997. Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATrEST: June S. Greek, Secretary [SEAL] r:\yasinobk\28309.re~ 082697 -2- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, Secretary for the Temecula Community Services District, do hereby certify that Resolution No. CSD 97- was duly and regularly adopted by the board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at a regular meeting thereof held on 26th day of August 1997. AYE~: BOARD MEMBERS NOES: BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: BOARD M~/IBERS ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS r:\yasinobk\28309.res 082697 TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAls,, / CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ronald E. Bradley, General Manager DATE: August 26, 1997 SUBJECT: Departmental Report PREPARED BY: ,~ Gall L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary ¢ Margarita Community Park is in the final plan check. Athletic field lighting has been added to the project and is currently being reviewed by the School District. The Master Plan includes parking, lighting, tot lots, picnic facilities, landscaping, irrigation, pedestrian walkways, a roller hockey rink, tennis courts, and ballfield lighting. It is anticipated this project will go out to bid in September, 1997. The 6th Street Parking and Restroom Project is complete and is currently under the 90 day maintenance period. A dedication ceremony is planned for August 22, 1997. This project will be the first built as part of the Old Town Specific Plan. Amenities include a restroom facility, public lockers and eighty (80) parking stalls. Additionally, the Temecula Stage Stop transportation center will be located on this site. The ADA upgrades project is currently out to bid. Abid opening is scheduled for September 4, 1997. This project provides handicap accessibility to the following park sites: John McGee Park, Calle Aragon Park, Bahia Vista Park, Rancho California Sports Park and Veteran's Park. The Winchester Creek Park project has been returned to the architect for second plan check. This park is a 4.5 acre passive use park consisting of a tot lot, picnic facilities, an outdoor basketball court, a sand volleyball court and open turf areas. It is anticipated this project will go out to bid in September, 1997. The City of Temecula has entered into an agreement with the Church of Latter Day Saints - Meadowview Chapter, in conjunction with Outdoor Media Group and City Staff, to renovate the entry monument signs at the Temecula City limits. This project consists of removing the overgrown shrubs and debris around the signs and repainting the signs. The project should be complete by the end of August, 1997. R:~A\AGENDAS\DEPT45 August 13, 1997 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD AUGUST 12, 1997 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:38 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chairperson Steven J. Ford presiding. PRESENT: ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemarts, Roberts, Ford Stone Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson and City Clerk June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. CONSENT CALENDAR. It was moved by Agency Member Linderoans, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. 1. Minutes 1.1 Approve the Minutes of July 22, 1997. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Roberts, Ford NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Stone REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT Redevelopment Director Mary Jane McLarney reminded citizens in the community of Summer Nights in Old Town every Friday and Saturday evening. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Executive Director Bradley reported that the First Time Homebuyer program has been so successful in assisting citizens with the purchase of their first home, that all funds for this year have been expended. He announced that no further funding for this program will be available until next fiscal year. Minutes.rda\081297 -1 - AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS None given. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Agency Member Roberts, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to adjourn at 7:41 PM to a meeting on August 26, 1997, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried, with Agency Member Stone absent. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Chairperson June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk/Agency Secretary Minutes.rda\081297 -2- ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER,.~-. CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members Genie Roberts, Director of Finance August 26, 1997 Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 PREPARED BY: Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director Jesse Diaz, Project Accountant RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Agency Members: Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997. Approve the transfer of $114,420 in the CIP/Economic Development Fund per the attached Schedule "A". DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the Redevelopment Agency for the year ended June 30, 1997. Please see the attached financial statements for the analytical review of financial activity. A budget transfer is required in the CIP/Economic Development Fund for the write-down of the loan owed to the Agency by the Temecula Valley Automobile Dealers Association. The loan proceeds were used for the construction of the auto mall marquee sign. According to the terms of the loan, the Association is to receive credit towards repayment of the loan based on the increase in sales tax generated by the auto dealers. For the 1996 calendar year, the auto dealers generated $1,285,945 in sales tax revenue for the City of Temecula. Based upon the terms of the loan, a credit of $281,476 was thus generated to be applied to the outstanding balance of the loan. Since the total outstanding loan balance (including accrued interest) is only $272,768, sufficient credit was generated by the auto dealers to require the write-down of the entire loan balance in the 1996-97 fiscal year. FISCAL IMPACT: As is reflected in the attached financial statements, there are adequate funds available in the CIP/Economic Development Fund budget to cover the requested transfer due to budget savings realized in several areas such as consulting and legal services. ATTACHMENTS: Schedule "A" - Budget Transfer Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Combining Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1997 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Year Ended June 30, 1997 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department ATTACHMENT "A" BUDGET TRANSFER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TRANSFER FROM: ACCT. No. 280-199- 999-5248 280-199- 999-5246 Description Consulting Services Legal Services TRANSFER TO: Amount ACCT. No. $ 90,760 280-199- 999-5367 23,660 Description Auto Dealers Assn. Loan Amount 114,420 Temecula Redevelopment Agency Combining Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 Assets and other debits: Cash and investments Receivables Land held for resale Total assets Low/Mod CIP Debt Fund Fund Service Total $ 3,139,577 $ 10,108,354 $ 5,196,894 $ 18,444,825 391,876 307,469 41,785 741,130 2,103,053 2,103,053 $ 3,531,453 $ 12,518,876 $ 5,238,679 $ 21,289,008 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Total liabilities Fund balances: Reserved Designated Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances $ 194,275 194,275 $ 1,063,252 $ 1,063,252 859,724 1,053,999 1,922,976 2,117,251 3,337,178 2,955,567 $ 1,448,920 7,741,665 7,640,333 3,789,759 11,430,092 3,337,178 10,595,900 5,238,679 19,171,757 $ 3,531,453 $ 12,518,876 $ 5,238,679 $ 21,289,008 Please note that these balances are unaudited. City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency Low/Moderate Income Homing For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Property tax increment Investment interest Rental income Miscellaneous Total Revenues Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity 1,283,892 $ 1,285,252 150,000 160,915 140,587 129,252 371 1,574,479 1,575,790 Eneumbr. Total Activity $ 1,285,252 160,915 129,252 371 1,446,167 Percent of Budget 100% 107% 92% 92% Expenditures: Salaries and wages Operating and administrative expenditures First time homebuyer program Rehabilitation programs Housing development & acquisition Pujol & Sherwood Apts. operating Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 81,098 65fl77 108,300 54,114 350,000 162,309 201,300 64,545 1,439,000 1,289,586 102,314 92,735 2,282,012 1,729,066 (707,533) (153,276) 3,490,454 3,490,454 2,782,921 $ 3,337,178 65,777 54,114 162,309 64,545 1,289,586 92,735 1,636,331 81% 50% 46% 32% 90% 91% 72% City of Temeeula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Ageney-Cl? For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Revenues: Investment interest Rental income Loan interest Loan fees Advances fi'om other funds Miscellaneous Total Revenues Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity 375,000 $ 539,841 102,000 114,070 15,000 27,919 500 350 75,750 75,750 974 568,250 758,904 Expenditures (2): Winchester Road interchange Sam Hicks monument park First street bridge Sixth street parking Old Town demo block Old Town building facades Old Town gateway Old Town storm drain Old Town sewer lines Old Town water lines Jefferson street lighting Salaries and wages Operating and administrative expenditures Interest City admin charges Fee reimbursement Economic development Consulting senrices Legal services Owner participation agreements City marketing program Old Town plan implementation Auto dealer assn. loan credit Operating transfers out Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 2,852,420 2,275,845 207,226 189,624 3,909,088 810,987 734,083 482,908 2,495,000 30,346 150,034 4,590 83,500 1,043 420,000 5,110 474,200 437,000 7,300 173,657 136,249 85384 60,938 75,750 75,749 75,000 75,000 30,000 237,300 205,206 195,927 82,097 105~00 64314 238,000 192,176 148,848 116,006 62,500 10,382 140,000 254,420 1,729,720 782,000 15,067,037 5,855~90 (14,498,787) (5,096,186) 15,692,086 15,692,086 1,193,299 $ 10,595,900 Eneumbr. :32,362 '71,044 2H,053 1.14,146 4,957 24,273 7,250 23,064 14,107 592,256 To~l Activity 539,841 114,070 27,919 35O 75050 974 758,904 2,358,207 189~24 882,031 703,961 174,492 4,590 6,000 29,383 7,250 136,249 60,938 75049 75,000 205,206 105,161 64,414 192,176 130,113 10,382 254,420 782,000 6,447,346 Percent of Budget 144% 112% 186% 70% 100% 134% 83% 92% 23% 96% 7% 3% 7% 7% 99% 78% 71% 100% 100% 86% 54% 61% 81% 87% 17% 182% 45% 43% (1) (3) (2) (1) The variance in Investment Interest is due to higher than anticipated cash and investment balances. (2) The variances in CIP project expenditures and operating transfers out are due to the timing of when the various projects are started. O) The variance is due to higher than anticipated sales tax generation by the auto dealers, which resulted in a greater than anticipated loan write-down in 1996-97. City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency - Debt Sexyice For the Year Ended June 30, 1997 Annual Amended YTD Budget Activity Revenues: Property tax increment Investment interest Deferred passthrough Miscellaneous 5,135,569 $ 5,151,383 125,000 205,359 882,455 882,455 759 Total Revenues 6,143,024 6,239,956 Expenditures: Passthrough agreements Property tax admin fees Debt service - principal Debt service - interest Trustee admin fees Total Expenditures Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, June 30, 1997 3,716,132 3,714,607 95,000 67,543 590,000 590,000 858,670 858,670 6,000 4,083 5,265,802 5,234,903 877,222 1,005,053 4,233,626 4,233,626 5,110,848 $ 5,238,679 Percent of Budget 100% 164% (1) 100% 102% 100% 71% 100% 100% 68% 99% (1) The variance in Investment Interest is due to higher than anticipated cash and investment balances. ITEM 3 APPROVAL ,~j/~""~'~'-~ CITY ATTORNEY II'"vvv FINANCE DIRECT(::F CITY MANAGER ~ TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Mary Jane McLarney, Redevelopment Director August 26, 1997 Amendment //6 to Norm Reeves Lease RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members approve as to form Amendment //6 to the Lease Agreement with Donna L. Reeves Trust and authorize the Executive Director and Agency Attorney to execute the amendment. DISCUSSION: On July 9, 1996, the Agency Board approved Amendment //5 to a lease for 27500 Jefferson Avenue to Norm Reeves for the purpose of selling used cars for five years for $8,500 per month. On May 27, 1997, in Closed Session, the Agency Board directed the staff to negotiate Amendment//6 allowing the Reeves Group to sell recreational vehicles direct or sublease to an RV Dealer. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Attachment: Amendment//6 R:\SYERSK\STAFFREP\NORM.LS 8/19/97 kg= AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO LEASE AGREEMENT, dated as of June 24, 1997, is made and entered into by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, a public body corporate and politic ("Lessor"), and Donna L. Reeves Trust UTD 7-25-90 ("Lessee"). RECITALS A. On January 25, 1994, Lessor and Lessee duly entered into that certain Lease Agreement ("Lease") for the real property located generally at 27500 Jefferson Street ("Premises"); B. The Lease was amended by an Amendment No. 1 to Lease Agreement, dated as of January 12, 1994, and an Amendment No. 2 to Lease Agreement, dated as of January 20, 1994, (although each was approved by Lessor on January 25, 1994 following approval of the Lease), an Amendment No. 3 to Lease Agreement, dated March 31, 1995, an Amendment No. 4 to Lease Agreement, dated March 26, 1996 and an Amendment No. 5, dated July 9, 1996. The Lease as so amended is hereinafter referred to as "the Lease." C. The Lease generally provides for the Premises to be used for off-site storage of automobiles and other inventory related to lessee's automobile dealership operations located elsewhere in the City of Temecula. D. The parties now desire to further amend the Lease on the terms and conditions stated in this Amendment. E. This Amendment will assist in the elimination of blight in the area of the Premises by maintaining productive use of the Premises for automobile related uses and will complete the assistance provided to the Lessee as set forth in the Lease as well as effectively manage and maintain the real property owned by the Lessor on an interim basis pending the Agency's determination of appropriate long term development of the Premises. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follo~vs: 1. Section 6.1 of the Lease is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "6.1 Permitted Use. Lessee shall use the Premises for the purposes of off-site storage of automobiles and other inventory related to Lessee's automobile dealership operations located in the City of Temecula, and for selling, renting, and/or leasing new and used automobiles, recreational vehicles, or water craft, provided however, that the Lessee complies with the requirements of Section 10.4 hereof. 2. Except as expressly amended hereby, all of the other terms and provisions of the Lease, shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment by their respective dully authorized officer, agents or representatives as of the date first written above. DONNA L. REEVES TRUST UTD 7-25-90 ("Lessee") Donna L Reeves ~' Trustee REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ("LESSOR") By: Steven J. Ford Chairperson ATTEST: June s. Greek Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson General Counsel AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO LEASE AGREEMENT, dated as of June 24, 1997, is made and entered into by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, a public body corporate and politic ("Lessor"), and Donna L. Reeves Trust UTD 7-25-90 ("Lessee"). RECITALS A. On January 25, 1994, Lessor and Lessee duly entered into that certain Lease Agreement ("Lease") for the real property located generally at 27500 Jefferson Street ("Premises"); B. The Lease was amended by an Amendment No. 1 to Lease Agreement, dated as of January 12, 1994, and an Amendment No. 2 to Lease Agreement, dated as of January 20, 1994, (although each was approved by Lessor on January 25, 1994 following approval of the Lease), an Amendment No. 3 to Lease Agreement, dated March 31, 1995, an Amendment No. 4 to Lease Agreement, dated March 26, 1996 and an Amendment No. 5, dated July 9, 1996. The Lease as so amended is hereinafter referred to as "the Lease." C. The Lease generally provides for the Premises to be used for off-site storage of automobiles and other inventory related to lessee's automobile dealership operations located elsewhere in the City of Temecula. D. The parties now desire to further amend the Lease on the terms and conditions stated in this Amendment. E. This Amendment will assist in the elimination of blight in the area of the Premises by maintaining productive use of the Premises for automobile related uses and will complete the assistance provided to the Lessee as set forth in the Lease as well as effectively manage and maintain the real property owned by the Lessor on an interim basis pending the Agency's determination of appropriate long term development of the Premises. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Section 6.1 of the Lease is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "6.1 Permitted Use. Lessee shall use the Premises for the purposes of off-site storage of automobiles and other inventory related to Lessee's automobile dealership operations located in the City of Temecula, and for selling, renting, and/or leasing new and used automobiles, recreational vehicles, or water craft, provided however, that the Lessee complies with the requirements of Section 10.4 hereof. 2. Except as expressly amended hereby, all of the other terms and provisions of the Lease, shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment by their respective dully authorized officer, agents or representatives as of the date first written above. DONNA L. REEVES TRUST UTD 7-25-90 ("Lessee") Trustee REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ("LESSOR") By: Steven J. Ford Chairperson ATTEST: June s. Greek Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson General Counsel ITEM 4 APPRO~,~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ".~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO.' FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Ronald E. Bradley, Executive Director and Redevelopment Agency Board Mary Jane McLarney, Director of Redevelopment August 26, 1997 Acquisition of Property for the Affordable Housing Program Prepared By: John Meyer, Housing and Redevelopment Manager RECOMMENDATION: The Redevelopment Agency: 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG THE WESTSIDE OF PUJOL STREET, NORTH OF FIRST STREET (APN 922-062-017) IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA That the Agency authorize the expenditures of up to $50,000 from RDA Housing set-aside funds for acquisition, escrow and closing costs. BACKGROUND: Per Agency direction, staff has been working with John Johnson regarding the purchase of the above noted property. As a result of these discussions the offer of $42,500 was made and accepted by the property owner. An appraisal of the properties was performed by the City's appraiser. The offer and accepted purchase price is reflective of the appraised value. A Phase I Environmental Analysis has been conducted on the property and has determined no presence of hazardous waste or unacceptable soil conditions. The purchase is an all cash transaction with the Agency paying all closing costs. Additional fund authorization in the amount of $7,500 is requested to cover escrow, closing costs, appraisal and soils testing fees. The $42,500 represents an all inclusive settlement and full payment for just compensation for the acquisition of all property interest pertaining to the subject properties. R:\HOUSING\PUJV.CC 8/18/97 jrm 1 The acquisition of property for affordable housing is programmed in the RDA's five year implementation Plan. RDA Low and Moderate Housing Funds in the amount of $1 Million have been included in the 1997-98 Capital Improvement Program Budget for this purpose. Re-use proposals for the subject property are now in progress and will be returned to the RDA for review and approval at a future date. FISCAL IMPACT: The $50,000 acquisition cost will be funded by the Affordable Housing Units, Land Acquisition/Project Development (Account No. 165-199-812-5804), which currently has a $1 million balance. R:\HOUSINO\PUJV.CC 8/18/97 jrm 2 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG THE WESTSIDE OF PUJOL STREET, NORTH OF FIRST STREET(APN 922-062-017) IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find, determine and a. The Agency is currently implementing the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1--1988, originally approved by the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County on July 12, 1988 prior to the incorporation of the City and subsequently approved and transferred to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula on April 9, 1991 (the "Plan"). b. The Agency has established a Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund pursuant to the provisions of Health and Safety Code Section 33433 for the purposes of increasing, improving and preserving the supply of low and moderate income housing within the Project Area and the City. c. The Agency proposes to purchase the property described in the attached "Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions" for acquisition of certain real property located along the westside of Pujol Street, North of First Street (APN 922-062-017) in the City of Temecula ("Property") for the purposes of increasing, improving and preserving the supply of low and moderate income housing within the Project Area and the City as the property are zoned for multi-family residential housing and are located in an area already developed with multi-family housing. d. The acquisition of the Property for low and moderate income housing purposes is consistent with the Redevelopment Plan and with the Implementation Plan adopted by the Agency. Additionally, acquisition of the Property and the improvement and preservation of low and moderate income housing thereon will assist in the elimination of blight in the Project Area. e. The acquisition of the Property and the units thereon is exempt from the RSHOUSiNG~PUYV.RES 8/18/97 dc provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 Cal. Admin. Code 15326. Moreover, the EIR approving the Plan addressed the impacts of housing development in the area of the Property. Section 2. The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain agreement entitled "Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions" for acquisition of certain real property located along the westside of Pujol Street, North of First Street (APN 922-062-017) in the City of Temecula and authorizes the Chairperson to execute the Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 3. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula on August 26, 1997. Steven Ford, Chairperson ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk/ Agency Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA $S I, June S. Greek, City Clerk/Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the Resolution No. RDA 97- was duly and regularly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on August 26, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS: NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS: R:'xHOUSING~PUJV.RES 8/18/97 dc ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AGENCY MEMBERS: AGENCY MEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk/Agency Secretary R:~IOUS1NG~PUYV.RES 8/18/97 dc PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is dated and entered into as of July 8, 1997 by and between Pujol Joint Venture, composed of Robert A. McKenzie and Robert L. Thatcher, ("Seller"), and THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a municipal corporation ("Buyer"), and constitutes both an agreement to purchase and sell real property between the parties and the parties' escrow instructions directed to First American Title Insurance Company ("Escrow Holder"). RECITALS A. On July 2 , 1997 the Buyer delivered Seller an offer (the "Offer") to purchase the real property interests described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property"). B. Buyer intends to use the Property for public purposes. C. Seller desires to sell and Buyer desires to buy, the Property on the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises operative provisions and the Recitals which are incorporated herein by this reference, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Purchase and Sale. On the Close of Escrow (as herein defined), Seller agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy the Property from Seller, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 2. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property to be paid by Buyer is the sum of FORTY-TWO THOUSAND. FIVE HUNDRED Dollars ($42.500.00) (the "Purchase Price"), which sum shall be paid in full in cash on the Close of Escrow together with Buyer's share of the closing COSTS. 3. Title and Title Insurance. Upon the Opening of Escrow, Escrow Holder shall order from First American Title Company ("Title Company") a title commitment for the Property. Escrow Holder shall also request two copies each of all instruments identified as exceptions on said title commitment. Upon receipt of the foregoing, Escrow Holder shall deliver these instruments and the title commitment to Buyer and Seller. Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be insured at the Close of Escrow by a CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the Purchase Price (the "Policy"). The Policy of title insurance provided for pursuant to this Section shall insure Buyer's fee interest in the Property free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, restrictions, and rights-of- way of record, subject only to the following permitted conditions of title ("Permitted Title Exceptions"): (a) The applicable zoning, building and development regulations of any municipality, county, state or federal jurisdiction affecting the Property; and R:%HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc ~ (b) Those non-monetary exceptions approved by Buyer within fifteen (15) business days after the date Buyer receives the title commitment and legible copies of all instruments noted as exceptions therein. If Buyer unconditionally disapproves any such exceptions, Escrow shall thereupon terminate, all funds deposited therein shall be refunded to Buyer (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), and this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. At the Close of Escrow, Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be free and clear of all monetary encumbrances. 4. Grant Deed. Seller covenants and agrees to deposit with Escrow Holder prior to the Close of Escrow a Grant Deed duly executed and acknowledged by Seller, granting and conveying to Buyer the Property. The Grant Deed shall be in a form satisfactory to Buyer and Buyer's counsel and shall be accepted by Buyer prior to recording. 5. Authorization to Record Documents and Disburse Funds. Escrow Holder is hereby authorized to record the documents and disburse the funds and documents called for hereunder upon the Close of Escrow, provided each of the following conditions has then been fulfilled: (a) Title Company can issue in favor of Buyer the Policy, showing the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. Escrow Holder shall use the proceeds of the Purchase Price to obtain partial reconveyance, if necessary, of any monetary liens encumbering the Property, so that the Property shall be free and clear of monetary liens and encumbrances at the Close of Escrow. (b) Escrow Holder shall have received Buyer's notice of approval or satisfaction or waiver of all of the contingencies to Buyer's obligations hereunder, as provided for in Section 11; and (c) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the Grant Deed required by Section Unless otherwise instructed in writing, Escrow Holder is authorized to record at the Close of Escrow any instrument delivered through this Escrow if necessary or proper for issuance of the Policy, including the Grant Deed. 6. Escrow. The parties hereby establish an escrow ("Escrow") to accommodate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Opening of Escrow shall mean the date on which Escrow Holder shall have received a fully executed original of this Agreement from Buyer and Seller. Close of Escrow shall be the date upon which the Grant Deed to Buyer is delivered and recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside. The Close of Escrow shall be on the date which is not later than the first business day occurring sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement and, mnless extended in writing by Seller, such escrow shall be deemed thereupon terminated and canceled. Before the Close of Escrow, all risk of loss and damage to the Property from any source whatsoever shall be solely that of Seller. 7. Escrow Charges and Prorations. Buyer shall pay for the cost of the CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance, the Escrow fees and Escrow Holder' s customary out-of-pocket expenses for messenger services, long distance telephone, etc. Buyer shall pay for recording the Grant Deed and any documentary or other local transfer taxes, and any other recording R:\HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 2 fees. If the Escrow shall fail to close through no fault of either party, Buyer shall pay all Escrow cancellation charges. 8. License to Enter. Seller hereby grants to Buyer and Buyer's authorized agents, contractors, consultants, assigns, attorneys, accountants and other representatives an irrevocable license to enter upon the Property for the purpose of making inspections and other examinations of the Property, including, but not limited to, the right to perform soil and geological tests of the Property and an environmental site assessment thereof. Buyer shall give Seller reasonable notice before going on the Property. Buyer does hereby indemnify and forever save Seller, Seller's heirs, successors and assigns, and the Property, free and harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, damages and costs and expenses, demands, causes of action, claims or judgments, whether or not arising from or occurring out of any damage to the Property as a result of any accident or other occurrence at the Property which is in any way connected with Buyer's inspections or non-permanent improvements involving entrance onto the Property pursuant to this Section. If Buyer fails to acquire the Property due to Buyefts default, this license shall terminate upon the termination of Buyefts right to purchase the Property. In such event, Buyer shall remove or cause to be removed all Buyer's personal property, facilities, tools and equipment from the Property. 9. Warranties and Representations of Seller. Seller hereby represents and warrants to Buyer the following, it being expressly understood and agreed that all such representations and warranties are to be true and correct as of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow: (a) Seller has no notice of any pending or threatened action or proceeding arising out of the condition of the Property or alleged violation of any environmental, health or safety statutes, ordinances or regulations. Pursuant to paragraph 8 hereinabove, Buyer and/or Buyer's agents and/or employees shall have the right upon opening of escrow at Buyer's sole expense to enter upon such property and conduct whatever tests or inspections are deemed necessary by Buyer to determine whether or not any environmental hazardous waste of any kind has or nature exist upon or under such property. It is hereby expressly understood and agreed that Seller shall not be obligated or liable in any way whatsoever to Buyer or Buyer's assigns or successors in interest in regard to any such hazardous wast or environmental hazardous condition that may exist and/or be discovered by Buyer's inspection prior or subsequent to such Closing and that upon such Closing Buyer shall be deemed to have purchased such Property in an "AS IS" condition. (b) The Seller is the sole owner of the Property free and clear of all monetary liens, except for certain delinquent property tax in the approximate amount of $4,000. Escrow holder has been instructed herein to remove and pay such taxes concurrently with closing from said sale proceeds. Seller shall not further encumber such Property or allow the Property to be further encumbered prior to close of escrow. Seller makes no representation concerning the existence of any non monetary encumbrance, encroachment or easement of any kind and has no duty of and kind hereunder for removal thereof. It is, however, understood in this regard that Buyer shall have the right to terminate Escrow if Buyer shall disapprove for any reason of any such encumbrance. R:\HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 3 (c) Neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done hereunder including the transfer of the Property to Buyer, violates or shall violate any contract, agreement or instrument to which Seller is a party, or which affects the Property, and the sale of the Property herein contemplated does not require the consent of any party not a signatory hereto. (d) There are no mechanics', materialmen's or similar claims or liens presently claimed or which will be claimed against the Property for work performed or commenced prior to the date of this Agreement. Seller agrees to hold Buyer harmless from all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, charges, fees, including attorney fees, arising from or relating to any such lien or any similar lien claimed against the Property and arising from work performed or commenced prior to the Close of Escrow. (e) There are no written or oral leases or contractual right or option to lease, purchase, or otherwise enjoy possession, rights or interest of any nature in and to the Property or any part thereof, and no persons have any right of possession to the Property or any part thereof. (f) Seller has no knowledge of any pending, threatened or potential litigation, action or proceeding against Seller or any other Party before any court or administrative tribunal which is in any way related to the Property. 10. FULL PAYMENT OF ALL OBLIGATIONS OF CITY. It is understood and agreed between Seller and Buyer that the payments made to Seller as set forth in this Agreement represent an all inclusive settlement and is full and complete payment for just compensation for the acquisition of all property interests pertaining to the Property and includes and satisfies any and all other payments, if any, which may be required by law to be paid to Seller arising out of the acquisition and displacement of the Seller and persons residing on the Property, and specifically includes, but is not limited to, claims for severance and other damages, attorney's fees, interest, expenses of litigation, expert's fees, precondemnation damages, inverse condemnation, owner participation rights under the Redevelopment Plan, relocation assistance and/or benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), if applicable, or under Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.), and loss of business goodwill under the Eminent Domain Law, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.510, and all costs and expenses whatever in connection therewith. Seller hereby acknowledges that Buyer has advised Seller of the possible availability of such relocation assistance rights to Seller and that the waiver of all rights by Seller herein set forth are free and voluntary. 11. Buyer's Contingencies. For the benefit of Buyer, the Closing of Escrow and the Buyer's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Buyer's written waiver thereof, it being agreed that Buyer can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow: (a) That as of the Close of Escrow the representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement are all true and correct. (b) The delivery of all documents pursuant to Section 4 hereof. R:tHOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 do 4 (c) Title Company's commitment to issue in favor of Buyer of a CLTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance with liability equal to the Purchase Price showing Buyer's fee interest in the Property subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. (d) Buyer's approval prior to the Close of Escrow of any environmental site assessment, soils or geological reports, or other physical inspections of the Property or the underlying real property that Buyer might perform prior to the Close of Escrow. 12. Certification of Non-Foreign Status. Seller covenants to deliver to Escrow a certification of Non-Foreign Status in accordance with I.R.C. Section 1445, and a similar notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 18805 and 26131, prior to the Close of Escrow. 13. Default. In the event of a breach or default under this Agreement by either Buyer or Seller, the non-defaulting party shall have, in addition to all rights available at law or equity, the right to terminate this Agreement and the Escrow for the purchase and sale of the Property, by delivering written notice thereof to the defaulting party and to Escrow Holder, and if Buyer is the non-defaulting party, Buyer shall thereupon promptly receive a refund of all prior deposits, if any. Such termination of the Escrow by a non-defaulting party shall be without prejudice to the non-defaulting party's rights and remedies at law or equity. 14. Notices, All notices and demands shall be given in writing by certified mail, postage prepaid, and return receipt requested, or by personal delivery. Notices shall be considered given upon the earlier of (a) personal delivery, (b) two (2) business days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered, return receipt requested, or © one (1) business day following deposit with an overnight carrier service. A copy of all notices shall be sent to Escrow Holder. Notices shall be addressed as provided below for the respective party; provided that if any party gives notice in writing of a change of name or address, notices to such party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice: BUYER: City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attn: Executive Director COPY TO: Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 So. Hope St., 38th Flr. Los Angeles, California 90071 Attn: Peter M. Thorson, Esq. SELLER: Pujol Joint Venture 32562 Crete Road Dana Point, California 92629 R: \HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 5 ESCROW HOLDER First American Title Company 3625 Fourteenth Street Riverside, CA 92502 Attn: Escrow No. 15. Broker's Commissions. Seller shall pay all claims of brokers, agents or finders, licensed or unlicensed, and all claims of real estate or other consultants which exist or may arise as a result of Seller's actions with respect to the Property. Buyer shall not be liable for any such fees or claims and Seller shall indemnify Buyer, its officers, employees and agents, from any and all costs, liabilities or judgments, including attorneys' fees, incurred in defending or paying any such claims. 16. Further Instructions. Each party agrees to execute such other and further escrow instructions as may be necessary or proper in order to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 17. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement shall be effective only when duly executed by Buyer and Seller and deposited with Escrow Holder. 18. Miscellaneous (a) Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted under, and governed and enforced according to the laws of the State of California. (b) Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement, oral or written, and together with the Exhibits hereto and any agreements delivered pursuant hereto, contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller on the subject matter hereof. No subsequent agreement, representation or promise made by either party hereto, or by or to any employee, officer, agent or representative of either party, shall be of any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby. No person is authorized to make, and by execution hereof Seller and Buyer acknowledge that no person has made, any representation, warranty, guaranty or promise except as set forth herein; and no agreement, statement, representation or promise made by any such person which is not contained herein shall be valid or binding on Seller or Buyer. (c) Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. (d) Time of Essence. The parties acknowledge that time is of the essence in this Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Escrow company's general Escrow instructions. (e) Remedies Not Exclusive and Waivers. No remedy conferred by any of the specific provisions of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy and each and every remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now R:\HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 6 or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of the right to pursue other available remedies. (f) Interpretation and Construction. The parties agree that each party has reviewed and revised this Agreement and have had the opportunity to have their counsel and real estate advisors review and revise this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. In this Agreement the neuter gender includes the feminine and masculine, and singular number includes the plural, and the words "person" and "party" include corporation, parmership, firm, trust, or association wherever the context so requires. The recitals and captions of the sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only, and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. (g) City Manal~er Authority. The City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to execute such other documents, including without limitation, escrow instructions and amendments thereto, certificates of acceptance, agreements for payments of lost rent, or certifications, as may be necessary or convenient to implement the terms of this Agreement. 19. Attorneys' Fees. If either party hereto incurs attorneys' fees in order to enforce, defend or interpret any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement or because of a breach of this Agreement by the other party, the prevailing party, whether by suit, negotiation, arbitration or settlement shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees from the other party. 20. Assignment. Buyer may assign its rights under this Agreement or may designate a nominee to acquire title to the Property, provided, however, that any such assignment or designation shall not relieve Buyer of any of its obligations under this Agreement. 21. Escrow Holder Need Not Be Concerned. Escrow Holder is not to be concerned with Section 8, 9, 10, and 15 hereof, and Buyer and Seller release Escrow Holder from liability or obligation as to Section 8, 9, 10, and 15 hereof. ///// IIIII R:\HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. SELLER Pujol Joint Venture By Joseph Delp By Robert L. Thatcher By Frank Mungia By John Johnson BUYER CITY OF AGENCY: TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT Steven Ford, Agency Chairperson ATTEST: By June S. Greek, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: R: %HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 8 By Peter M. Thorson Agency Counsel EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description of the Property .21 ACRES M/L IN POR LOT 3 BLK 34 MB 015 R:\HOUSING\PURCHAGR 8/19/97 dc 9 ITEM 5 APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER_/~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT Executive Director/Agency Members Mary Jane McLarney, Redevelopment DirectorXWZ~N~. August 26, 1997 Demographic and Workforce Study and Approval of Contract for Labor Market Survey RECOMMENDATION: That the Redevelopment Agency: 1) Receive and file the 1997 Demographic Report from ECAP; 2) Receive and file the 1997 Workforce Study; 3) Receive and file Report from Mount San Jacinto College on Workforce Development; 4) Approve a contract with the Resource Group to perform a labor survey and authorize the Executive Director and Agency Chairperson to execute the agreement. DISCUSSION: In order to implement the Economic Development Strategic Plan, it is necessary to obtain an understanding of the existing employment base to maintain and grow employment. Attached you will find two reports, the first prepared by Dr. John Husing, Ed. D., which provides our demographic profile including historical and current employment data for the City. Second, is a workforce survey prepared by the Resource Group. The purpose of the study was to determine the needs of our local businesses. In response to the findings of this survey, Mount San Jacinto College has prepared a document addressing the employers' needs. These measures and communication of them is critical to our business retention efforts. We are also requesting approval of a contract for a study of our labor market to identify our workers' occupations, salary levels, educational levels, as well as commute times and distances. R:\SYERSK\STAFFREP\HUSING.EST 8/18/97 kgs The cost of the study is $14,300. I have approached the County of Riverside to expand the scope of the study to include an additional 20 mile radius, but have not yet received a response. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds exist in RDA Consulting for the Labor survey. The City of Murrieta anticipates participating in the study. ATTACHMENTS: 1997 ECAP Demographic Report 1997 Workforce Study Mount San Jacinto College Workforce Development Report Consultant Services Agreement with the Resource Group The Resource Group Scope of Work R:\SYERSK\STAFFREP\HUSING.EST 8/19/97 kgs 1997 ECAP DEMOGRAPHIC REPORT Index CITY OF TEMECULA DEMOGRAPHIC, ECONOMIC, QUALITY OF LIFE DATA INDEX INDEX OF EX!tiBITS !jj'-78~lt~j}~'Gt%' v'iE~.~:":-::"'" ~'~]~.~" '. ......... : ....-- Ifil_"~iit/.' ~1~,' '"Era:: .....:-.---,--,--~ ': .~.,,,,,~.---~,-.,~,~.,'-~ ' .........=: .......................... ~ ........~.r~i.~:.:.~ ..........................= ..................................................._~I .... ('it) of Temccuht IfiTh~' Pmx, pamrd b).hdm I;.. lhmsin.,.,, Ph.l). .~.ll~USl 21), 1997 Index of Exhibits CITY OF TEMECULA No. Description DEMOGRAPHICS 1 20 Fastest Growing Cities 2 Population Growth Rates, 1990-1996 3 Population Growth Rates, Annual 4 Population & Growth Rates, 1986-1996 5 Age Distribution, 1990 6 Age Distribution, 1990 7 Household Income Distribution, 1996 8 Median Income, 1989 9 Income Distribution, 1996 10 Income Distribution, 1996 11 Educational Attainment, 1990 12 Population Attended College, 1990 13 Ethnic Distribution, 1990 14 Ethnic Distribution, 1990 15 Household Marital Status, 1990 16 Household Heads, Children at home, 1990 17 Marital Status, 1990 18 Marital Status, 1990 HOUSING 19 New Home Dccd Recordings, Tcmccnla 20 New Home Dccd Recordings, Quarterly, 1990-96 21 New Home Deed Recording Growth 22 New Home Dccd Recording Growth 23 Existing Home Deed Recordings, Temccula 24 Exist Home Deed Recordings, Quarterly 1990-96 25 Existing Home Dccd Recording Growth 26 Existing Home Deed Recording Growth 27 New Home Prices 28 New Home Prices, Quarterly 29 New Home Price Changes, 1990-1996 30 Tcmecnla Price Advantage 31 Existing Home Prices 32 Existing Home Prices, Quarterly 33 Existing Home Price Changes, 1990-1996 34 Temecnla Price Advantage 35 Mnlti-Tenant Rental & Occupancy Rates 36 Multi-Tenant Housing: Size, Occupancy, Rent 37 Types & Number of Dwelling Units 38 Dwelling Unit Growth 39 Types of Dwelling Units 40 Single Family Residential Permits Trend 41 Single Family Residential Permits 42 Valuation of Permits, 1996 EMPLOYMENT 43 Employment Trend, Annual Average 1991-1996 44 Employment Sector Summary, 1991-1996 45 Employment Gains, Sector, 1991-1996 46 Employment Growth Rates, 1991-1996 47 Employment By Sector, 1996 Detail Tables & Summary Comments Table, Inland Empire, January 1990-1996 Chart, Inland Empire, Major Cities Chart, City of Temecula, 1990-1996 Table, Temecula, Inland Empire Counties Table, Temecula & So. California Counties Chart, Temecula & Riverside County Table, Temecula & Riverside County Chart, Temecula & So. California Counties Pie Chart, Temecnla Pie Chart, Riverside County Table, Temecula & So. Califorma Counties Chart, Temecula & So. Califorma Counties Table, Temecula & So. California Counties. Pie Chart, Temecula Pie Chart, Temecula Table, Temecula & So. California Counties Table, Temecula & So. California Counties Pie Chart, Temecula Tables & Summary Comments Chart, Seasonally Adjusted By Quarter, 1988-1996 Table, Temecula, not seasonally adjusted, Table, Temecula & So. Calif. Counties, 1988-96 Graph, Temecula 1988-1996 Chart, Seasonally Adjusted By Quarter, 1988-1996 Table, Temecula, not seasonally adjusted, Table, Temecula & So. Calif. Counties, 1988-96 Graph, Temecula 1988-1996 Graph, Temecula 1988-1996 Table, Temecula 1988-1996 Table, Temecnla & So. Calif. Counties Graph Compared to L.A. & Orange Counties, 1988-96 Graph, Temecula 1988-1996 Table, Temecnla 1988-1996 Table, Temecula & So. Calif. Counties Graph Compared to L.A. & Orange Counties, 1988-96 Graph, Investment Grade Projects Inland Empire 1996 Table, Selected Inland Empire Areas, June 1996 Graph, Temecula 1980-1996 Table, Temecula 1980-1996 Graph, Temecula, January 1996 Graph, Temecula 1988-1996 Table, Temecula & Inland Empire Counties Graph, Highest Riverside County Cities Tables & Summary Comments Graph, Temecula Table, Temecula Graph, Temecula Graph, Temecula Pie Chart, Temecula Index of Exhibits CITY OF TEMECULA Detail No. Description 48 Employment By Sector, 1991 Pie Chart, Temecula 49 Total Payroll, 1991-1996 Chart, Temecula 50 Real & Inflated Payroll, 1991-1996 Graph, Temecula 51 Payroll By Sector, 1991-1996 Table, Temecula 52 Payroll Gain By Sector, 1991-1996 Chart, Temecula 53 Payroll Per Worker, 1991-1996 Chart, Temecula 54 Real & Inflated Payroll Per Worker, 1991-1996 Graph, Temecula 55 Pay Per Worker By Sector, 1991-1996 Table, Temecula 56 Pay Per Worker By Sector, 1996 Chart, Temecula 57 Number of Firms, 1991-1996 Chart, Temecula 58 Firms By Sector, 1991-1996 Table, Temecula 59 Growth In Firm, By Sector, 1991-1996 Graph, Temecula 60 Distribution of Firms By Sector, 1996 Pie Chart, Temecula 61 Average Size of Firms, 1991-1996 Chart, Temecula 62 Average Workers Per Firm, by Sector, 1991-1996 Table, Temecula 63 Employment & Payroll Summary, 1996 (6-mos.) Table, Temecula 64 Employment & Payroll Summary, 1995 (annual) Table, Temecula RETAIL SALES Tables & Summary Comments 65 Total Taxable Sales, 1981-1996 Graph, Temecula 66 Taxable Sales Growth Rates, 1981-1996 Graph, Temecula & Riverside County 67 Total Taxable Sales, 1996 Graph, Temecula & Major Inland Empire Cities 68 Taxable Sales Per Capita, 1991-1996 Graph, Temecula & Riverside County 69 Taxable Sales Per Capita, 1991-1996 Table, Temecula & Major Inland Empire Cities 70 Taxable Sales Per Capita, 1996 Graph, Temecula & Major Inland Empire Cities 71 Taxable Sales By Retail Sector, 1981-1996 Table, Temecula 72 Taxable Sales Growth By Sector, 1991-1996 Graph, Temecula 73 Taxable Sales by Sector, 1996 Pie Chart, Temecula 74 Taxable Sales by Sector, 1996 Pie Chart, Temecula 75 Sales Per Outlet, By Sector, 1996 Table, Temecula & SB-Riv Counties 76 Total Sales Per Outlet, 1996 Graph, Temecula & SB-Riv Counties INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE Tables & Summary Comments 77 Total Industrial Space, 1996 Graph, Temecula 78 Total Industrial Space, By Market, 1996 Graph, Temecula & Inland Empire Cities 79 Industrial Sites & Availability, Size Ranges, 1996 Table, Temecula 80 Industrial Sites Available by Size Ranges, 1996 Graph, Temecula 81 Industrial Space Vacancy Rate, 1991-1996 Graph, Temecula 82 Industrial Space Vacancy Rate, by Market, 1996 Graph, Temecula & Inland Empire Cities 83 Industrial Space Cost Per Foot, 1996 Table, Inland Empire & So. California Sub-Markets 84 Industrial Space Cost Per Foot, 1996 Graph, Temecula & So. California Markets 85 New Firms Locating, By Sector, Number & Jobs Table, Temecula & Inland Empire 1994-1996 86 New Firms Locating, Number By Sector Graph, Temecula, 1994-1996 87 New Firms Locating, Employment By Sector Graph, Temecula, 1994-1996 88 New Firms Locating, 1994-1996 Table Listing, Temecula COMMUNITY CHARACTER Tables & Summary Comments 89 School District Students, Teacher Ratios, 1996 Table, Riverside County Districts 90 School District Enrollment, 1996 Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts 91 District Student-Teacher Ratios, 1996 Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts 92 High School Completion Rates, 1996 Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts 93 Minority Student Enrollment, 1996 Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts 94 Seniors Entered CA Colleges, 1996 Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Index of Exhibits CITY OF TEMECULA No. Description 95 Vocational Class Enrollment, 1996 96 UCR Eligible Class Enrollment, 1996 97 Senior Test Scores: SAT 900+ & ACT 21+, 1996 98 Sr/Jr Passing Advanced Placement Tests, 1996 99 Seniors: SAT Average Verbal Score, 1996 100 Seniors: SAT Average Math Score, 1996 101 Higher Education Enrollment, By Campus, 1997 102 Higher Education Enrollment, By Type, 1997 103 Developed Parks, 1997 103a Wineries, 1997 104 Major Crimes, Per 100,000 People, 1991-1996 105 Crime Rate Trends, Major Crimes, 1991-1996 106 Violent Crime Per 100,000 People, 1991-1996 107 Property Crime Per 100,000 People, 1991-1996 108 Major Crime Per 100,000 People? 1996 Detail Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Graph, Riverside County 10 Largest Districts Table, Inland Empire Communities Pie Chart, Inland Empire Region Table, Temecula Table, Temecula Graph, Temecula Table, Temecula Graph, Temecula Graph, Temecula Graph, Temecula & Major Inland Empire Cities Introduction CITY OF TEMECULA SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION As Southern California's economy moves into the recovery and expansion phases of its business cycle, the City of Temecula is rapidly emerging as potentially one of the most prosperous new communities in the region. A variety of simultaneous factors are behind this. Geography is playing a role as the city is receiving growth impulses both down the 1-15 from Orange County and up from San Diego County. Also, the mountain gap which allows ocean breezes to tail into the city provides it with a moderate climate by inland standards. Attitude because Temecula's leadership been approaching economic growth from a qualitative standpoint since the city's in- ception. Thus, it has created an infrastructure that has lured firms in higher paying sectors than the average for the Inland Empire. Environmental and residential factors are playing a role, in that the community rests in a beautiful setting that is luring relatively young, well educated fami- lies, to homes that are inexpensive by Southern California standards. The city's average income levels are thus higher than for most of the surrounding region; the educational performance of its young people is the highest in Riverside County and above state averages. These statements are not public relations statements. They are documented by a range of hard data on the communities. These data are discussed below. 2. Demoqraphics For decades, Southern California has grown outward along its transportation corridors. During each decade, the current outer ring of development has eventually become saturated. This has driven up its cost of living and level of congestion, pushing people and firms still farther out. At different times, this "spill over" process has made the San Fernando Valley and Orange County metaphors for Southern California energy and growth. Today, that mantle is falling on the western edge of the Inland Empire, roughly bounded by the I- 15 freeway. Temecula has been an unusual beneficiary of this phenomenon in that firms and peo- ple have located in the city, despite many miles of undeveloped land between it and Corona. Meanwhile, the city's southern Riverside County location has caused it simultaneously to be in the path of an equally powerful growth impulse from San Diego County. This is an entirely new phe- nomenon, giving it the best of two different Southern California worlds. ('it) of Tt'mccul:,, I~,"fl~hln 1 lhx, pan, d h).l. hn E. 11u~,in~. I'h.I). I'a~e i Introduction Temecula's demographic profile shows it to be a very rapidly growing, ethnically diverse place, where relatively young, well educated families are raising children, and succeeding economically. Since 1990-1997, the city has grown from 27,099 to 43,100 people. The 59.0% growth rate is the fastest of any Inland Empire community with over 40,000 residents. Its 1990 mean age of 25.8 was significantly younger than that of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles or Orange Counties. Temecula is an ethnically diverse city, though considerable less so than Southern Cali- fornia as a whole. Temecula is a place for young families. Thus, the Census showed that the city's largest popula- tion group was the 20.7% in the 30-39 year old baby boomer group; its second largest was the 20.3% who are their 0-9 year old children. Reflecting the city's young, two of three Temecula adults are married people living with their spouses, far above Southern California averages. Temecula's families benefit from above average income and education. Thus, the city's 1996 me- dian income of $54,000 is well above that for Riverside, San Bernardino, or Los Angeles Coun- ties, and nearly equal to Orange County. The largest percentage of its families make $45,00- $74,999. And, 63.0% of Temecula's residents have attended some college, with 23.9% receiving bachelors or graduate degrees. 3. Home Markets Temecula's housing stock is feeling the influence of its position of receiving growth impulses from both the north and the south. Since incorporation in 1990, the number of city dwelling units has increased 45.8%, despite the recession. The vast majority of these structures are single family detached homes (76.1%). In first quarter 1997, existing home sales were up 25.4% from 1996. New home sales were up 4.2%. Meanwhile, existing home prices were up 6.6% from year ago levels; though new prices were off 5.1% as developers are bringing a more affordable product to the market. Young families are migrating to Temecula from Orange and San Diego Counties both because the city is in a beautiful location, and because housing stock is new and a bargain by Southern Cali- fornia standards. Thus, the average first quarter new home sold for $145,168 compared to $259,671 in Orange County and $235,075 in San Diego County. The average existing home sold for $173,748 compared to $231,956 in Orange County and $207,289 in San Diego County. In the investment grade multi-family housing market, 3.5% of the Inland Empire's 54,481 units are found in Temecula, making it a relatively small market. The average rental rate of $659 mar- ket's ranks sixth in a region where the top rate is $791 in Chino Hills. Nineteen of twenty units are occupied. Looking ahead, Temecula can look forward to seeing several consecutive years of continuous growth in single family residential building permits. With the recession ending, Temecula's hous- ing markets will now benefit from interest rates that are over 2% below historic averages, and the lowest average monthly payments for new and existing homes in a decade. In addition, Southern California job markets are strengthening, giving consumers the confidence they have been lacking for some time. (it3 of 'l'cmccula k'f'~'ifln- I lh~,pat[,d h.~ .Iohn E. Ilusin~, Ph.l). Pa~e ii Introduction 4. Employment Temecula's emergence as a center of job growth is primarily the result of the migration of firms and people to the Inland Empire from the Southland's coastal counties. This migration is occur- ring as the density of land development in Orange, Los Angeles and San Diego Counties has cre- ated a shortage of manufacturing, distribution and housing space, and increased space costs. Also, inland workers have shown a willingness to work for less money to avoid commuting. As indicated early, this phenomena has largely increased the demand for business space and homes along transportation corridors in cities directly adjacent to Orange and Los Angeles Counties.. Temecula is unique in that firms and families moved many miles through undeveloped land to lo- cate within its borders. And, the jobs coming to the city are better paying than the Inland Empire average. This has occurred as local leaders have undertaken a consistent and successful program to lure high technology firms to the area. These efforts have been aided by the city's physical beauty and moderate climate. Meanwhile, the completion of the I-15 freeway has given commut- ers and firms located in Temecula ready access to San Diego and Orange County markets, while allowing them to avoid the land restrictions and high costs of those areas. From 1991 and 1996, Temecula's employment has increased a very rapid 45.1% to 19,714 jobs. The city's economy has begun to specialize with a very high 28% of these jobs in manufacturing. Consistent with the city's development policies, manufacturing and distribution & transportation have accounted for an unusually high 47% of all new jobs since 1991. In this period, Temecula's job growth rates have far exceeded the Inland Empire 0.6% to 3.7% annual rates. Meanwhile, the payroll expended by firms located in Temecula has followed a similar though more aggressive path than employment. Thus, from 1991-1996, city payrolls grew 62% to $248 million. When deduction is made for Southern California's 11.7% inflation, the purchasing power of the payroll was still up 50.3%. Not surprisingly, manufacturing alone accounted for 50.5% of the city's payroll growth. Pay per worker in Temecula rose 11,7% from 1991 to 1996, an 11.7% increase that was exactly matched by the increase in the cost of living. The average worker had roughly a constant stan- dard of living in this period. The entire growth in the Temecula's purchasing power thus came from the increased number of jobs in the city. Among city sectors, Temecula was unusual in having the highest pay in manufacturing. The number of firms in Temecula grew 29% to 1,533 from 1991-1996. The 133 new firms in distribution & transportation, business service and manufacturing roughly matched the 115 new firms in consumer and retail trade. This roughly conforms to economic theory that states that when new basic tier firms bring money to an area, a secondary tier of firms will be created as that money is recycled locally. Finally, Temecula's economy is largely made up of small firms, with the average number of employees of 12 in 1996. Only local government and schools exceeded an average of 100. No other sector exceed an average of 50. 5. Taxable Retail Trade Throughout the Southern California recession, Temecula's taxable retail sales have continued set- ting records. In 1996, they reached the $0.75 billion dollar level, 76% above 1991. The city has (ily J,,~t~'iml I lhvpaf~,(I by John E. llu~,in~, Ph.1). Pa.L'e iii Introduction exceeded the sales tax growth rate of Riverside County in every year of its existence. In 1996, it was the Inland Empire's 18th largest city, but had the 9th high level of retail sales despite having no regional retail mall. Given the importance of the retail sales tax to municipal finance, Temecula is fortunate to find its retail trade per capita back above the $17,700 level. This is substantially above the level of any Inland Empire city with over 100,000 people or more, and double the Riverside County average. In the 1990s, its per capita sales have been grown faster than those of any inland area major city. Interestingly, the largest share of Temecula's sales tax growth has been from retail sales by non- retail outlets. This includes retail sales by professional & service firms, manufacturing and distri- bution firms, and validates its strategy of encouraging the expansion of these sectors. The next two fastest growing categories, automotive and general merchandise, indicate that the city is capturing regional sales of these items. The latter category will become even more important once the new regional mall is developed and opened. Temecula's retail sales performance is benefiting outlets in the city. In seven of twelve retail sec- tors, they have average sales above Inland Empire averages. Over all, city outlets average $861,000 a year in sales, 27% above the Riverside County average. Finally, when Temecula's per capita retail sales by sector are related to those of Riverside and San Bernardino County (adjusted for the difference in per capita income levels), it is evident that the city is capturing both spending by both local residents, and those of residents of nearby communi- ties. The only sectors with a negative gap were in apparel and construction materials. The new mall will close the former, the recovery in residential real estate will probably take care of the lat- ter. 6. Industrial Real Estate (to be written) 7. Community Characteristics Temecula expanding economy has given it the wherewithal to devote an increasing amount of community resources to education, parks and law enforcement. The results have been significant. The community's students are leading Riverside County on most measures of achievement, citi- zens enjoy a substantial number and variety of parks, and the city's crime rate is both very low and has fallen dramatically. Temecula's young people attend classes in the Temecula Valley Unified School District, the tenth largest in Riverside County. In 1996, students in this district had a 98.4% graduation rate, highest in the county and above the California average. City high school students also led Riverside County and exceed state averages in the percentage exceeding national scores on the SAT and ACT tests, and the percentage completing the difficult math and science Advanced Placement Tests. On SAT scores, city seniors were ranked first in the County in Verbal and second in Math. Within a forty-five minute drive of Temecula, are 19 private and public colleges & universities with a combined enrollment of over 114,000 students. Included are nationally known private (ify of'l'eniecula K'~iin I Prt'pal~,d I).~ ,h~hn E. Ilu~in~, Ph.l). Parc i'~ Introduction schools like the Claremont Colleges, the University of Redlands; and Loma Linda Medical School. There are two State University campuses, one specializing in engineering; the University of California at Riverside; and four Community Colleges including nearby San Jacinto Community College. Meanwhile, Temecula residents looking to enjoy their leisure time now find that the city has 23 parks covering 199 acres. They offer every conceivable form of recreation from tot lots and bar- becue facilities, to lit and unlit ball and soccer fields, to in-line skating, swimming, basketball and tennis facilities. The highlight of this system is a 128 acre sports facility and community center. Among Inland Empire cities, Temecula's is totally unique in boasting one of the premier varietal wine growing areas of California. This is made possible by the previously mentioned mountain gap than funnels ocean air into the area. Twelve wineries grow a wide range of grapes, including such California favorites as Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, and Cabernet Sauvignon. All of the wineries have tasting facilities, many offer tours, picnicking and banquet facilities.. Finally, not only is Temecula a prosperous community, it is also one of the safest in California. Its 1996 crime rate was 50% below that of the next safest Inland Empire city. The crime rate per 100.000 people is down 57.8% since 1991, with violent crime down 42% and property crime off 60.6%. Summary The City of Temecula is becoming one of Southern California's most prosperous communities. Its population is rapidly becoming larger, better educated and more prosperous, with an increas- ing proportion of younger families with children. Reflecting these trends, the city's residential real estate sales are the strongest in the Inland Empire with single family detached homes representing the vast bulk of activity, and prices rising. Consistent with this environment, Temecula's retail sales are surging, with per capita sales the highest among major Inland Empire cities of any size, and city outlets generally exceeding sales averages for the region. Meanwhile, a combination of strong cost and Iocational advantages, plus shrewd governmental policies have lured many high technology firms to Temecula, giving it a qualitative and broadening economic base. Temecula residents are fortunate to have a school system with graduation rates and achievement levels that generally lead Riverside County and exceed state averages. Meanwhile, city residents have access to a very well developed park system, and live in a city where the crime rate is the lowest in the Inland Empire and has fallen substantially in the past six years. When a city is hit by the type of prosperity coming to Temecula from both the north and the south, city leaders have the opportunity to shape its long term character. Temecula is developing as a family community, with a solid financial base from the retail sales, and a sound economic base built around high technology manufacturing. Its citizens clearly have the benefit of good schools, numerous parks, and a very low crime rate. ('ily of'l'clnccula k~'[t~ill)l 1 l]lx'palx~tl Ii)' ,h~hn 1,:. Ilusin¢, Ph.l). Parc v Demographic Characteristics CITY OF TEMECULA SECTION 2 DEMOGRAPHICS Temecula is rapidly becoming one of the nicest places to live in Southern California. The city's climate is milder than most inland areas. It has a growing wine industry. Its housing stock is quite new, and much of it is upscale. The community has been carefully planned. Its shopping and entertainment possibilities are increasing. The economy is expanding and the schools are ex- cellent. The city is unique in that its residents are about equidistant from both San Diego and Orange County via the Interstate 15 freeway. As a result, it is receiving growth impulses from the south as well as the noah, as families spill into the Inland Empire from Southern California's more con- gested coastal counties. Since 1990, Temecula has added 16,001 people to become the 13th largest city in the Inland Em- pire and 5th largest in Riverside County (Exhibit 1). Its growth rate of 59.0% during this period was the fastest among inland area cities with more than 40,000 people (Exhibit 2). Strong popu- lation growth occurred straight through the recession, with rate varying from 3% to 13.8% (Exhibit 3-4). It will remain strong as Southern California has enter its recovery phase and home sales are increasing. Temecula is succeeding, in part, because young families are migrating inland in search of upscale, affordable housing and an uncongested environment. As a result, in 1990, the city's largest population group was its 30-39 year old baby boomers (20. 7%). Interestingly, its second largest group was their children, in the 0-9 year old age range (20.3%) (Exhibit 5-6). With a mean age of 25.8 years, the community's population is younger than that of San Bernardino (25.6), Riverside (33. 3), Los Angeles (L.A.) (34. 2), San Diego (34. O) or Orange counties (33.5). Temecula is an upper middle class community. In 1990, its $44,270 median income was substan- tially above that of San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego or L.A. Counties, though a little below Orange County's level (Exhibit 8). In 1996, the city's median income is estimated to have reached $54,379, compared to $40,176 for Riverside County (Exhibit 7). Today, the largest per- centage of Temecula families (32.6%) are thought to be in the $45,00-$74,999 bracket; while the county's largest group is in the $0-$29,999 range (Exhibit 9-10). ('it3 of'l'cmccula k~/~ Ihrpa~rd h3 .hdm E. 1Iusin~, Ph.l). Pa~e I Demographic Characteristics Temecula benefits from having a well educated population. In 1990, 63.0% of the city's residents had at least attended college (Exhibit 12). That is a larger share of the adult population than for Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Orange or L.A. Counties. 21.9% of city residents have either a bachelor degree or advanced degree, more than San Bernardino (14.9%) or Riverside (14.6%) Counties, though less than L.A. (22.3%), San Diego (25.3%) and Orange (27.8%) Counties (Exhibit 11). Though Temecula is an ethnically diverse community, it is much less so than surrounding coun- ties. The 1990 census showed that 14.2% of city residents classified themselves culturally as His- panic versus 26.3% in San Bernardino and 25.8% in Riverside County (Exhibit 13-14). Mean- while, Black residents made up 1.5% of the city, much lower than Riverside County's 5.1% or San B ernardino's 7.8%. And, 2.4% of Temecula residents were Asian or Pacific Islanders, close to the 3.3% to 3.9% range for the Inland Empire generally. Temecula's relative youth shows up in the martial status of its households. In 1990, 67.7% con- tained a married couple living together (Exhibit 15-16). That was 7% to 17% higher than in the surrounding counties. In addition, 39.5% of households contained married couples with children under 18. That was 6% to 14% more than in those counties. Clearly, a significant number of young families are either moving to or remaining in Temecula and raising their children. Looking at individuals, 64.8% of adults are married and living with a spouse, again a much higher per- centage than for Southern California as a whole (Exhibit 17-18). To summarize, demographically, Temecula emerges as a growing city, with some ethnic diversity, where relatively young and well educated families are raising children, and doing well economi- cally. Note: The 1990 Census has served as the basis for parts of this section. Since 1990, the baby boomers have aged six years. California has had a severe recession. Hispanic families have had more than the average number of children. Asian families have become a somewhat stronger influence in Southern California. And, Temecula's new home market has been strong. As a result, the Temecula of today is undoubtedly an older, somewhat better educated, slightly more diverse city, with a larger share of married couples with children. The natural forces af- fecting the city's resident population have provided the extra age and diversiO;. The influx of new home owners to the community has likely added families with better education and income. The latter is the case owing to the difficulty of qualifying for mortgages during recent stressful times. ('it.~ or' l'emt'cula I~'iEm 2 l'Et'patx'd h.~ .h~hn E. !Iusin~, Ph.D. Pa~e 2 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit 1.-20 Fastest Growing Cities Inland Empire, January 1990-1997 City 1 Corona 2 Victorville 3 Fontaria 4 Hemet $ Temecula 6 San Bernardino 7 Riverside 8 Temecula 9 Moreno Valley 10 Blythe 11 Palm Desert 12 Hesperia 13 Peres 14 Lake Elsinore 15 Ontario 16 Rialto 17 LaQuinta 18 San Jacinto 19 Adelanto 20 Apple Valley 1990 75 943 40 674 87 535 36 094 27 099 164 676 226 546 101 409 118 779 8 448 23 252 50 418 21 500 18 316 133,179 72,395 11,215 16,210 6,791 46,079 1997 102,800 60 400 104 200 52 300 43100 180 300 241 600 116 000 132 600 20 550 33 650 59 500 29 850 26 300 141 100 80 200 18 950 23 800 13 600 52 800 Change 26,857 19,726 16,665 16,206 16,001 15,624 15,054 14,591 13,821 12,102 10,398 9,082 8,350 7,984 7,921 7,805 7,735 7,590 6,809 6,721 Source: CA Department of Finance, E-5 Reports, 1990-1997 Population Growth... January 1990-1997 Change 35.4% 48.5% 19.0% 44.9% 59.0% 9.5% 6.6% 14.4% 11.6% 143.3% 44.7% 18.0% 38.8% 43.6% 5.9% 10.8% 69.0% 46.8% 100.3% 14.6% · In the 1990s, Temecula has been the Inland Empire's fastest growing city over 40,000 people with population up 59%. Victorville (48.5~ and Corona (44.9~ ranked second and third. · The 16,001 residents that the city has added since 1997 make it the 5th fastest growing city in the Inland Em- pire in absolute numbers. The largest gains were in Corona (up 26,857) and Victorville (up 19, 726). · With 43,100 people, Temecula now ranks 54 among Riverside County's 24 cities behind Riverside, Moreno Valley, Corona and Hemet. Exhibit 2.-Population Growth Rates, 1990-1997 Top Eight Inland Empire Cities of over 40,000 48..5% '~'~:,~ .............................. i ..................................................................................................................................................................................... Temecula Victorville Hemet Corona Fontana He~3eria Apple Valley R. Cucamonga [Source: CA Department of Finance, E-5 ReportsI ('it.~ ol'Trmecula k't~'lff~ l)frp;m'd by John E. Ilu~in~, I)h.1). l)a~e 3 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit 3.-Population Growth Rates, Annual City of Temecula i I Temecula ............................................................ i'~'i'~';'~'~ ...............................................................................................................................................................................I"-1 Riverside County ............................ )-4:6% ........... 3.6% :-- 3.0% 1991 1996 1992 i 1993 1994 1995 Isource: CA Department of Finance, E-5 Reportsl i -0.1% 1997 Population Growth... · Since its founding in ]990, Tcmecu]a's population growth rate has been substantially faster than that of River- side County in all but its first year. The city has never bccn slower than the 3.0% of ]996-1997. It peaked at 13.8% from 1991-1992. · Since 1990, Temecula's growth rate of 59.0% compares favorably with the 17.9% experienced by Riverside County as a whole and the 19.1% of San Bernardino County. From 1993-2005, the Inland Empire will add 928,000 people, Number #1 among 172 U.S. Metropolitan Areas! -U.S. Department of Commerce- . Temecula sits along the 1-15 corridor and is receiving growth impulses from both San Diego County in the south and Orange County to the north and west. The natural beauty and ambience of the community, along with its new housing stock and growing job base are contributing to this position. · Temecula's population growth will accelerate in the coming months owing both to its location, and the fact that Southern California's recovery is again generating city home sales and construction activity. Exhibit 4.-Population City of Temecula & Inland Empire Counties Year Temecula Riverside County 1990 27,099 1,170,413 1,418,380 1991 27,250 3.6% 1,223,320 4.5% 1,464,775 1992 31,000 13.8% 1,268,685 3.7% 1,508,775 1993 33,250 7.3% 1,304,490 2.8% 1,539,800 1994 35,750 7.5% 1,331,890 2.1% 1,559,250 1995 39,300 9.9% 1,355,655 1.8% 1,572,650 1996 41,850 6.5% 1,381,830 1.9% 1,587,200 1997 43,100 3.0% 1,380,000 -0.1% 1,587,400 Source: CA Department of Finance, E-5 Reports San Bernardino County 3.3% 3.0% 2.1% 1.3% 0.9% 0.9% 0.0% 'it) ol' 'l'ell~CC[da h3 .k)lul F,. Ilu~inR, Ph.l). !'a~e 4 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit 5.-Age Distribution, 1990 Tcmccula & Adjacent Counties Riverside San Bernardino LA. San Diego Orange Age Group Temecula County County County County County 0-9 20.3% 17.3% 18.7% 15.5% 14.7% 14.4% 10-19 14.8% 13.9% 15.2% 13.8% 13.0% 13.1% 20-29 16.4% 15.7% 17.2% 19.0% 20.2% 19.5% 30-39 20.7% 17.3% 18.0% 18.0% 18.2% 18.2% 40-49 12.0% 11.2% 11.6% 12.3% 12.0% 13.5% 50-59 6.0% 7.5% 7.2% 8.1% 7.5% 8.8% 60-69 6.5% 8.4% 6.3% 6.8% 7.2% 6.7% 70-79 2.5% 6.1% 4.0% 4.3% 5.0% 3.9% 80 & Up 0.8% 2.6% 1.7% 2.1% 2.3% 2.0% Population 27,099 1,170,413 1,418,380 8,863,164 2,498,016 2,410,556 Source: U.S. Census, 1990 Age Distribution, 1990... In 1990, the largest share of Temecula's population, 20.3%, was in the 30-39 year old age baby boomer group. This is a greater concentration in this age group than in the surrounding counties. This was almost exactly matched by children from 0-9 year old. They were the city's second largest popula- tion group at 20.3%, and represent the so-called echo of the baby boom. Temecula had a much greater per- centage of young children than the surrounding counties and nearby cities. Temecula Is Young: 1990 Mean Age Was 25.8! Riverside County (33. 3), San Bernardino County (25. 6), Los Angeles (34.2), San Diego (34.0), Orange County (33.5) -U.S. Census Bureau- In 1990, just 9.8% of Temecula's population was over 60. This was much less than the 17.1% for Riverside County, 14.5% in San Diego County, or the 12.0% for San Bernardino County. Exhibit 6.-Age Distribution, 1990 city of Temecula :; ....... .....................! ...................................!'""'3 ...................![- I Source: U.S. Census, 1990 I ('it3r O[ 1 cnwcula k~hm 2 l'svpalvd h3 .hdln E. !hl~inR, Ph.]). l'a~e 5 Demographic Characteristics Exhil)it 7.-Household Income Distribution, 1996 Temecuhl & River.~i(le County Temecula Riverside County Income Range Families Percent Families Percent $ 0,000-$14,999 1,070 7.6% 77,880 16.4% $15,000-$29,999 2,000 14.1% 96,046 20.2% $30,000-$44,999 2,532 17.9% 90,257 19.0% Under $45,000 5,602 39.6% 264,183 $S.6% $45,000-$59,999 2,437 17.2% 72,065 15.2% $60,000-$74,999 2,172 15.3% 51,943 10.9% $75,000-$99,999 1,917 13.5% 44,454 9.4% $100,000 and up 2,024 14.3% 42,474 8.9% Over $45,000 8,550 60.4% 210,935 44.4% Median household income $54,379 $40,176 Total Income (000) $867,361 $23,941,665 Average Household Income $61,288 $50,391 Per Capita Income $20,725 $17,326 1 Estimates allow for changes in CPI and population. 2 Assumes stable relative income levels, no purchasing power change. Source: U.S. Census, 1990, and ECAP estimates for 1996. Exhibit 8.-Median Income, 1989 ~ll~ '1 emecula & Southern California Temeculs Orange San Bernardino LA County Riverside San D~ego Isou~,: u.s. c,n,us. 19901 INCOME, 1990 & 1996... · 60.4% of Temecula's households are estimated to have incomes over $45,000 in 1996 versus 44.4% for River- side County. · Temecula's 1996 estimated median income of $54,379 is substantially above that of Riverside County ($40,176). · In 1990, Temecula's median income ($44,270) was well above the $33,000 to $35,000 in Riverside, San Di- ego, L.A. and San Bernardino Counties, but just below that of Orange County ($45,922). · In 1996, the largest share of Temecula's households were in the $45,000-$74,999 income group (32.6,%), for Riverside County it was the 0-$29,999 group (36. 6~. ( 14.3~ $100.0C0 & (3~e*~ $45.crr~74,~ (8.9%) $100,000 & ~ $75,000-$99,999 (9'4%) ~36.6%) $0-$29,999 (26.1%) $45,000-$74,999 (19.0%) $30,000-$44,999 ('il> ,)f'l'cmerula L't'~ilIT'~ !)lt'palx"d by .l. lm E. IIusio~, l)h.]). Pa~e 6 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit I l.-Education Attainment, 1990 Tcmccula & Adjacent Counties, Persons 25 & Ohlcr Highest Education Level Temecula Riverside San Bernardino Los Angeles San Diego Orange Less 9 Years 4.2% 10.2% 8.8% 15.6% 7.6% 9.0% 9 to 12 Years Non-graduate 8.3% 15.7% 15.8% 14.4% 10.5% 9.8% High School Diploma/GED 24.6% 26.4% 27.0% 20.7% 22.8% 20.1% Some College 30.5% 25.6% 25.0% 19.7% 25.6% 24.5% Associated Arts 10.6% 7.5% 8.5% 7.4% 8.2% 8.9% Bachelor Degree 16.2% 9.6% 9.8% 14.5% 16.5% 18.7% Graduate Degree 5.7% 4.9% 5.2% 7.8% 8.8% 9.1% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: U.S. Census, 1990 Educational Levels, 1990... · Temecula has a well educated population with only 12.5% of residents 25 & over not having graduated from high school in 1990. This was better than the performance of the surrounding counties where the percentage varied from a low of 18.1% in San Diego and 18.8% in Orange County, to a high of 29.0% in L.A. County. In Riverside County, it was 25.9%; for San Bernardino County, 24.6% were not graduates. · 63.0% of Temecula's adults attended some college in 1990. This was just above Orange (61.1%) and San Di- ego (59.1%), and well above the 47%-49% in San Bernardino, Riverside, and L.A. Counties. · 21.9% of Temecula's adults in 1990 had a Bachelor's Degree or higher. This was far more than San Ber- nardino (15.0%) and Riverside County (14.5%), but less than L.A. (22.3%), San Diego (25.3%) and Orange County (2 7.8%). Exhibit 12.-Population Attended At Least Some College, 1990 City of Temecula & Southern California Counties 63.0% i I~ At Least Sorre College I---t B.A. Or Higher 61.1% 59.1% 21.9% 25;'3'% ............... Ternecula Riverside San Bemamlino LA County AA, BA, MA, PH.D. orno degree Source: U.S. C, ens~s, 1990 Orange I San Diego ('it)' of Tcmccula I~ lhvpa[x,d by .h~lm E. Ilusin~, Ph.1). Pa,L,c 7 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit 13.-Ethnic Distribution, 1990 Tcmccula & Adjacent Counties Ethnic Group Temecula Riverside White 80.8% 64.7% Hispanics°) 14.2% 25.8% Black 1.5% 5.1% Asian/Pacific Islander 2.4% 3.3% American Indian 0.5% 0.8% Other Race 0.5% 0.2% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% San Bernardino LA County San Diego Orange 61.0% 41.0% 65.6% 64.6% 26.3% 37.3% 20.0% 23.1% 7.8% 10.7% 6.0% 1.6% 3.9% 10.4% 7.5% 10.1% 0.8% 0.3% 0.7% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Note (1): Hispanics are deducted from all other ethnic groups Source: U.S. Census, 1990 ETHNICITY, 1990... · With 80.8% of Temecula's population being white in 1990, the city was substantially less ethnically diverse than Southern California generally. · Hispanics made up 14.2% of all city ethnic groups during 1990. That was much less than for Riverside (2690, San Bernardino (2690, L.A. (3790, San Diego (2090 or Orange (2390 Counties. · African-Americans represent 1.5% of Temecula's population. That was far less than Riverside (5.190, San Diego (6.090, San Bernardino (7.890, and L.A. Counties (10. 790, and about equal to that of Orange (1.690 County. · Asians and Pacific Islanders made up 2.4% of Temecula's population. This a little less than for Riverside (3.390 and San Bernardino (3.990 Counties, but a fraction of that in San Diego (7.590, L.A. (10.490 and Or- ange (10.1%) Counties. · Other Races and American Indians made up 1.0% of Temecula's population. That was roughly equal to the proportion for the surrounding counties. Exhibit 14.-Ethnic Distribution, 1990 City of Temecula (14.2%) Hispanics (1) (80.8%) White ('it) of Temccula KxlT~nl, 2 l',x. pa,x.d b.x John I:.. llusin~. Ph.l). Parc 8 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit l$.-Household Status, 1990 City of Temecula (20.1%) Non-Family (2.3%) Female Alone (6.1%) Female & Children (1.5%) Male Alone (2.3%) Male & Children (28.2%) Marfled Alone (39.5%) Marded & Children Isoume: U.S. Census ECAP I Types Of Households, 1990... · Temecula households are more likely to be composed of married couples than those in the surrounding coun- ties. And, the city's married couples are more likely to have children under 18 years old. · This is a reflection of Temecula's status as a fast growing, younger suburban community. · In 1990, 67.7% of Temecula households were married couples. That was more than Riverside (60.990, San Bernardino (60. 090, Los Angeles (49.890, San Diego (53.990or Orange (57. 690 Counties. 39.5% of Temecula's households were married couples with minor children at home. This was also much more than in Riverside (29.890, San Bernardino (33. 090, Los Angeles (25.590, San Diego (25. 490or Orange (27.990 Counties. Exhibit 16.-Househohl Characteristics, 1991} Tcmccula & Ad.iaccnt Counties Household Type Temecula Riverside San Bdno. Los Angeles San Diego Orange Mamed Couple, children under 18 39.5% 29.8% 33.0% 25.5% 25.4% 27.9% Married Couple, alone 28.2% 31.0% 27.0% 24.2% 28.5% 29.7% Male, children under 18 2.3% 1.9% 2.5% 2.2% 1.7% 1.7% Male, no children home 1.5% 2.0% 2.1% 3.2% 2.1% 2.7% Female, children under 18 6.1% 5.7% 7.5% 6.8% 6.4% 4.7% Female, no children home 2.3% 3.8% 4.2% 6.0% 4.2% 4.6% Non-family Group 20.1% 25.8% 23.6% 32.0% 31.8% 28.8% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Population/Households 2.96 2.91 3.04 2.96 2.81 2.91 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 ('it)' of Tclnccula K~l~lfl~: l'~x'p:ux, d by .hdm E. llusin.(.,. l'h.I). l'a~c 9 Demographic Characteristics Exhibit 17.-Marital Status, 1990 Temecula & Ad.jaccnt Counties Temecula Riverside San Bernardino Los Angeles San Diego Orange Never Married 19.8% 22.9 % 25.2 % 33.8 % 29.7 % 29.2 % Married, Together 64.8% 56.5 % 54.8 % 44.8 % 49.4% 51.2% Separated 2.3 % 2.3 % 2.9 % 3.0 % 2.4 % 2.0 % Living Apart 1.4% 2.9 % 2.5 % 3.7 % 3.1% 3.4 % Widowed 2.8 % 6.4 % 5.4 % 5.9 % 5.5 % 5.1% Divorced 8.9% 8.9 % 9.3 % 8.7 % 9.9 % 9.0 % TOTAL 100.0% 100.05 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Marital Status, 1990... · Again, reflecting Temecula's status as a younger, family oriented community, 64.8% of its citizens 15 and over were roamed and still living together in 1990. That was a much larger percentage than in Riverside (56.590, San Bernardino (54.890, Los Angeles (44.890, San Diego (49.490 or Orange Counties (51.290. · Meanwhile, at 8.9%, Temecula residents were as likely to be divorced as people in the surrounding counties generally. · Reflecting Temecula's younger population, only 2.8% of residents were widowed in 1990. The proportion was 5.1% to 6.4% in the surrounding counties. Exhibit 18.-Marital Status, 1990 City of Temecula (8.9%) Divorced (1.4% (2.8%) Widowed ) Living Apa'rtW*~ (2.3%) Separated (19.8%) Never Married (64.8%) M arried,Together ISource: ISource: U.S. Census, ECAP ~ ('it) of Tt'mecula k~lffi~ l'n'pmx'd by John 1,2 Ilusin~, l'h.l). l'a.,oc 10 Residential Informatio a CITY OF TEMECULA SECTION 3 RESIDENTIAL As Temecula enters the last few years of the 20th Century, the city is poised to be one of the fastest growing and most prosperous communities in the Inland Empire. It has one of the nicest settings in the region, providing a natural lure for families seeking a good living environment while avoiding the high prices of the coastal counties. Its location on the I-15 freeway, mid-way between San Diego and Orange Counties, is allowing it to receive growth impulses from both directions, a new phenomena in Southern California. As a consequence, Temecula was one of the first communities to see its residential real estate markets begin recovering in the wake of Southern California's steep aerospace recession. Thus, seasonally adjusted existing home sales surged as early as 1993 (Exhibits 19). They slowed somewhat when interest rates increased during late 1994 through 1995. In 1996, and continuing into 1997, sales are again up strongly. In first quarter 1997, Temecula's existing home sales were 25.4% above first quarter 1996, a faster growth rate than that of all the adjacent and sur- rounding counties but Orange (Exhibits 20-22). Temecula's new home market also began recovering in 1993, with seasonally adjusted sales go- ing from a low of 125 units per quarter to as high as 400 (Exhibit 23). In 1996, the sales rate level off at just under 300 units. In first quarter 1997, Temecula's new home sales were 4.2% above first quarter 1996 (Exhibit 24-26). In this period, the city outperformed Riverside County, though it lagged behind San Diego, Orange, and other Southland counties. Looking forward, Temecula's location advantages will allow the community to benefit from the best set of housing conditions to exist in many years. Interest rates are 2.0%-2.5% below aver- ages of the past 30-years. The low home price-interest rate combination has made monthly payments the best that Southern Californians have seen in a decade (even without adjusting for inflation). And, in 1997, the Southland economy is averaging 150,000 new jobs, up from 97,000 last year. This is giving consumers the income and the confidence they have lacked for several years. Meanwhile, Temecula is also benefitting from residential prices that are well below those in San Diego, Orange or L.A. Counties. ¢ 'iD' of Iem¢cula kqT~,'l~g P~epm~ed by Jolm E. ttusin~, Ph.l). Pa~e 11 Residential Informatio a Temecula's existing home prices were among the first in the Inland Empire to stabilize. Existing home prices peaked at about $215,000 in 1990. By 1991, they were trading in a range from $170,000 to $180,000, where they have remained. In first quarter 1997, the city's existing home prices averaged $173,748 up 6.6% from first quarter 1996 (Exhibits 27-28). This price increase roughly matched that of Riverside and exceeded those of other Southland counties. Temecula's existing homes remain a bargain with prices averaging from $24,000 less than San Diego County to $58,000 less than Orange County (Exhibit 29-30). In the new home market, Temecula's prices peaked at $215,000 in 1990. By 1993, they were trading in a range from $145,000 to $155,000 were they remain. In first quarter 1997, the city's average new home price was $145,168, down 5. I% from first quarter 1996 (Exhibits 31-32). This performance was poorer than that of Riverside and other Southland counties. However; the fluctuation was within the range of the prior four years. Temecula's new homes are also a bar- gain compared to coastal counties, with prices averaging from $90,000 less than San Diego County to $115,000 less than Orange County (Exhibit 33-34). Turning to multi-family housing, Temecula's market is small. The city has eight grade A invest- ment projects with 1,893 units. Occupancy for these units is strong at 95.4%, and the $659 av- erage monthly rental rate is the sixth highest in the Inland Empire (Exhibit 35-36). There are a total of 3,257 multi-family units in the city, a number that has barely changed since 1990. When Temecula's housing data are viewed from an historical perspective, they show why it has been one of Riverside County's fastest growing cities. In the 7 years from 1990-1997, the num- ber of dwelling units increased from 10,659 to 15,545, up 45.8%. In this short period, the char- acter of the city has been established in that 76 1% of city dWellling units are single family de- tached homes. This contrasts with 59.4% for Riverside County as a whole (Exhibit 37-39). Since 1990, the number of single family detached homes in the city has grown by 64.2%. Looking to the future, the development community has been quite active in Temecula, despite the real estate recession affecting the Inland Empire generally. Building permits reached 1,123 single family homes in 1994, before settling to 817 in 1995 and 806 in 1996. At the current rate, developers will pull 772 such permits in 1997 (Exhibit 40-42). ¢ID' of Temecula khw~rlt~lt: lhVlmred by Jolm F~ Ilusing, PIgD. Page 12 Residential Info rmat'/J Exhibit 19.-Existing Home Deed Recordings City of Temecula, Seasonally Adjusted, By Quarter, 1988-1997 300 i 25O 2O0 150 I00 i I I I i I I I i I I I i I ~ I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I lst-88 lst-89 lst-90 lst-91 lst-92 lst-93 lst-94 lst-95 lst-96 lst-97 [Source: Expedan. ECAP SeasonalityI Existing Home Sales... · Since the trough in 1991, seasonally adjusted existing home deed recordings (3-month lag to sales), in the zip codes that constitute Temecula, have moved upward in an uneven pattern. The low was about 125 units a quarter. The high has been over 250. The recent average has been about 225. The increase started during a period when Inland Empire and Southern California real estate markets were declining owing to the extended influence of the recession. · In the last two quarters of 1996 (13.7%; 6.5~ and first quarter 1997 (25.4~, Temecula's existing home recordings have been up over the prior year. This strength should continue through 1997 as the growth of Southland employment, the key variable for a real estate recovery, is up to 150,000 jobs a year versus 97,000 in 1996. Exhibit 20.-Existing Home Deed Recordings, Quarterly Temecula (not seasonally adjusted) t 988-1997 Quarter Recordin~,q 1-Year Chg, Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg, I st-88 113 1 st-93 148 8.0% 2nd-88 168 2nd-93 190 11.1% 3rd-88 204 3rd-93 243 58.8% 4th-88 218 4th-93 216 41.2% lst-89 208 84.1% lst-94 190 28.4% 2nd-89 249 48.2% 2nd-94 267 40.5% 3rd-89 257 26.0% 3rd-94 181 -25.5% 4th-89 203 -6.9% 4th-94 177 -18.1% 1 st-90 198 -4.8% 1 st-95 156 -17.9% 2nd-90 207 -16.9% 2nd-95 218 -18.4% 3rd-90 238 -7.4% 3rd-95 226 24.9% 4th-90 155 -23.6% 4th-95 185 4.5% lst-91 95 -52.0% lst-96 134 -14~1% 2nd-91 152 -26.6% 2nd-96 196 -10.1% 3 rd-91 179 -24.8% 3 rd-96 257 13.7 % 4th-91 131 -15.5% 4th-96 197 6.5% 1 st-92 137 44.2% 1 st-97 168 25.4% 2nd-92 171 12.5% 3rd-92 153 -14.5% 4th-g2 153 16.8% Source: Experian ( ~t3. of'l'emecula k~l'~t Prepared by John E. IlusinR, Ph.D. Page 13 Residential Informatio Exhibit 21.-Existing Home Deed Recording Growth Temecula & Southern California Counties, 1988-1996 Year Temecula Riverside San Bdno Los Angeles Orange San Diego 1988 1989 30.4% 13.5% 11.0% -14.1% -22.4% -9.1% 1990 -13.0% -9.8% -7.6% -16.0% -2.9% -24.4% 1991 -30.2% -26.0% -27.9% -28.0% -24.4% -22.8% 1992 10.2% -12.2% -10.8% -12.6% -12.9% -4.7% 1993 29.8% -0.9% -6.1% -1.7% 1.2% 1.2% 1994 2.3% 18.5% 12.2% 15.9% 13.3% 7.4% 1995 -3.7% -5.1% -3.9% -8.7% -20.5% -19.2% 1996 -0.1% 14.7% 9.9% 10.7% 21.7% 23.3% 1997 YTD 25.4% 9.1% 2.3% 18.4% 45.4% 12.9% Source: ExperJan Existing Home Sales... · Following an uncommon surge in 1994, Temecula's existing home sales were off down 3.7% in 1995 and flat in 1996 (-0.156), before surging 25.4% again at the beginning of 1997. Temecula's existine homes are more affordable and offer families upscale neighborhoods and good access to Orange & San Diego Counties, without their congested life style! · Existing home sales in the adjacent and surrounding counties began to match Temecula's earlier growth, surge during 1996: Riverside (14. 7~, San Diego (23.3%), Orange (21.7%), San Bernardino (9.9~ and L.A. (lO 7~ County. They have continued growing in early 1997. · Temecula's existing home sales should continue growing through 1997 and beyond with the rise in Southern California employment, strong consumer confidence, and the build-up of six years of pent-up demand. 30J4% 1989 Exhibit 22.-Existing Home Deed Recording, Growth City of Temecula, 1988-1995 -13~% ! 1990 10.2% 29.8% -3.t% -30i2% 1991 1992 1993 1994 Source: Expedan 1995 1996 1997 YTD ( 'it3. of Temecula k ' ~"~"lfl~: Pn~pa~ed by Jolm F, Ilusinl!l, Ph.D. PaRe 14 Residential Informatio a 8OO Exhibit 23.-New Home Deed Recordings City of Temecula Seasonally Adjusted, By Quarter, 1988-1997 6OO 400 200 lst-88 lst-89 lst-90 lst-91 lst-92 lst-93 lst-94 lst-95 lst-96 lst-97 ISource: Expedan, ECAP SeasonalityI New Home Sales... · After a surge in late 1993 through 1994, seasonally adjusted new home sales in the zip codes that constitute Temecula have remained at roughly a 300 unit pace, over double the rate of the dormant 1990 to early-1993 period. · First quarter 1997 sales (not seasonally adjusted), at 199 units, were up 4.2% from the same period of 1996. Exhibit 24.-New Home Deed Recordings, Quarterly Temecula (not seasonally adjusted), 1988-1997 Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. l st-88 143 1 st-93 128 25.5% 2nd-88 196 2nd-93 261 46.6% 3rd-88 336 3rd-93 336 214.0% 4th-88 461 4th-93 347 10.2% 1 st-89 420 193.7% 1 st-94 278 117.2% 2nd-89 477 143.4% 2nd-94 322 23.4% 3rd-89 204 -39.3% 3rd-94 411 22.3% 4th-89 206 -55.3% 4th-94 362 4.3% 1 st-90 125 -70.2% 1 st-95 193 -30.6% 2nd-90 125 -73.8% 2nd-95 277 -14.0% 3rd-90 108 -47.1% 3rd-95 284 -30.9% 4th-90 132 -35.9% 4th-95 279 -22.9% 1 st-91 86 -31.2% I st-96 191 -1.0% 2rid-91 126 0.8% 2nd-96 245 -11.6% 3rd-91 117 8.3% 3rd-96 221 -22.2% 4th-91 186 40.9% 4th-96 324 16.1% 1 st-92 102 18.6% lst-97 199 4.2% 2nd-92 178 41.3% 3rd-92 107 -8.5% 4th-92 315 69.4% Source: Experian { 'it of Temecula Prepared by John F~ !Ittsin~, PIgl}. Pa~e 15 Residential Info rinat Wl Exhibit 25.-New Home Deed Recording Growth Temecula & Southern California Counties, 1988-1996 Year Temecula Riverside San Bdno Los Angeles Orange San Diego 1988 1989 15.1% 37.3% -10.1% -27.8% -29.3% -37.5% 1990 ~62.5% -30.4% -22.6% -19.8% -9.3% -35.2% 1991 5.1% -39.0% -16.1% -11.8% -12.1% 2.4% 1992 36.3% -12.1% -13.8% -22.0% -13.8% -3.6% 1993 52.7% -0.6% -4.3% -8.8% 0.4% -6.8% 1994 28.1% 4.5% -0.6% -13.0% 32.7% 15.1% 1995 -24.8% -20.2% -267% -7.0% -13.7% -11.4% 1996 -5.0% 16.6% 11.0% 11.0% 10.5% 15.2% 1997 YTD 4.2% -3.4% 21.7% 12.8% 12.9% 26.9% Source: ExperJan New Home Sales... · Temecula experienced spectacular growth in new home sales during 1992-1994. High interest rates slowed the market in 1995 (-24.8%), and it fell a little further in 1996 (-5.0%). In 1997, city sales have again turned upward (4. 2%). · Data from every Southern California county show that a new home recovery' began in 1996, with double digit sales increases: Riverside (16.6%), San Diego (15.2%), Orange (10.5%), San Bernardino (11.0%), and Los Angeles (! ]. 0%). This pace was maintained during first quarter 1997, except in Riverside County (-3.4%). · Temecula's new home sales will continue to grow in the balance of 1997 as the area is receiving positive growth impulses from both Orange and San Diego Counties. Exhibit 26.-New Home Deed Recording Growth City of Temecula, 1988-1996 ................... , ..........................., ....................................................; .......................*.. .........................~ ................................................. ........................ ............. 52.~% i ...... 28.7% 4.~% -24.i8% ...................................... ~;Z,:~.~ 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 YTD ISource: Experian I ( It3. of 'l'e~necula k~lllt' P~vlra~ed by John F~ !lusinR, Ph.D. pa~oe 16 Residential Informatio Exhibit 27.-Existing Home Prices City of Temecula, '1988-1997 220,000 200,000 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 lst-88 lst-89 lst-90 lst-91 lst-92 lst-93 lst-94 lst-95 lst-96 lst-97 ISource: Expedan, EOAP SeasonalityI Existing Home Prices... * At $173,748, Temecula's lst quarter 1997 existing home prices averaged 6.6% more than in 1~t quarter 1996. The city has been one of the first Inland Empire places to see existing home prices start to rise. · With real estate markets strengthening throughout Southern California, Temecula's existing home prices should trend upward for the foreseeable future. Exhibit 28.-Existing Home Prices, Quarterly Temecula, 1988-1997 Quarter Avg. Prices 1-Year Chg. Quarter Avg. Prices 1-Year Chg. 1 st-88 $140,762 1 st-93 $164,790 -6.5% 2nd-88 $152,536 2nd-93 $171,765 -8.3% 3rd-88 $187,038 3rd-93 $176,874 6.6% 4th-88 $161,110 4th-93 $181,541 2.1% 1 st-89 $177,952 26.4% 1 st-94 $183,174 11.2% 2nd-89 $164,676 8.0% 2nd-94 $170,869 -0.5% 3rd-89 $200,022 6.9% 3rd-94 $183,134 3.5% 4th-89 $187,923 16.6% 4th-94 $180,059 -0.8% lst-90 $207,898 16.8% lst-95 $169,989 -7.2% 2nd-90 $189,961 15.4% 2nd-95 $178,272 4.3% 3rd-90 $214,579 7.3% 3rd-95 $173,163 -5.4% 4th-90 $199,552 6.2% 4th-95 $177,410 -1.5% lst-9l $171,788 -17.4% lst-96 $162,987 -4.1% 2nd-91 $180,596 -4.9% 2nd-96 $166,467 -6.6% 3rd-91 $176,837 -17.6% 3rd-96 $166,279 -4.0% 4th-91 $183,594 -8.0% 4th-96 $186,897 5.3% lst-92 $176,313 2.6% 1 st-9? $173,748 6.6% 2nd-92 $187,242 3.7% 3rd-92 $165,857 -6.2% 4th-92 $177,873 -3.1% Source: TRW REDI Property Data t ~it3.' of'[emecula kNW'~'I~g Ihvpaved by John F. ilusin~, Ph.D. Pa~e 17 Residential Info rmat': TI Exhibit 29.-Existing Home Price Changes Temecula & Southern California Counties, 1988-1997 Temecula Riverside San Bdno Los Angeles Orange San Diego 1988 1989 11.9% 12.3% 15.4% 11.5% 16.5% 14.4% 1990 11.4% 7.0% 3.6% 2.9% 0.3% 5.3% 1991 -12.2% 10.4% 4.4% 7.7% 3.2% 8.2% 1992 -0.8 % 2.0% 0.2% -2.2% -1.7% -0.1% 1993 -1.4% -5.6% -1.6% -4.3% -1.6% -1.3% 1994 2.2% -1.2% -2.3% -1.9% -0.9% 2.4% 1995 -1.9% -4.3% -5.1% -5.3% -2.7% -2.6% 1996 -2.3% -0.1% -0.6% -0.9% -1.1% -0.2% 1997 YTD 6.6% 6.9% -1.3% 3.8% 2.7% 4.0% Source: TRW REDI Property Data Existin9 Home Prices... · In 1996, Temecula's existing home prices averaged 2.3% below 1996. In first quarter 1997, prices are up 6.6% from the same period of the prior year. · The 1997 existing home price rise in Temecula was consistent with those for Riverside (6.9~, San Diego (4. 0~), Orange (2. 7~), and L.A. (3.8%) Counties, though not San Bernardino County (-1.3,%). · Given the general recovery in Southern California real estate markets, and the gain in city prices in 1997, this augurs well for city property values. Temecula's competitive existine home prices create an advantage for high tech firms in the city. They can hire nationally without asking workers to sacrifice their living standards. · Looking forward, in first quarter1997, Temecula's existing home buyers were paying $24,000-$58,000 less than buyers in San Diego ($207,289), Orange ($231,956)and L.A. ($219,915) Counties, laying a base for the long term health of its housing market. Exhibit 30.-Existing Home Price Comparison Temecula & Southern California Counties, 1st Quarter 1997 $173~,748 Temecula San Bernardino PJverside Los Angeles Orange ISource: ExpedanI San Diego ( ~t).' of 'l'emecula k't*~[~i~' Prepared by John E. il~ino~, Ph.D. Pa~oe l 8 Residential Informatio Exhibit 31 .-New Home Prices City ofTemecula, 1988-1997 240,000 220,000 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 200,000 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 : I ~ ~ ] I t I i I I I i I ~ ~ i I ~ I J ~ I ~ i I I ~ J I ~ I i I ~ ~ J 1 st-88 1 st-89 1 st-90 lst-91 lst-92 1 st-93 1 st-94 1 st-95 1 st-96 1 st-97 ISource: Expedan, ECAP Sea~nalityI New Home Prices... · Temecula's new home prices averaged $145,168 in first quarter 1997. Prices for the new home product have been almost constant since early 1993, moving in a band from $145,000 to $155,000. ~ · New home average prices can be expected to rise in the near future with the general recovery of the Southern California economy and the strengthening of real estate markets. ~ Exhibit 32.-New Home Prices, Quarterly Temecula '1988-1997 Quarter Avg. Prices 1-Year Chg. lst-88 $118,963 2nd-88 $128,103 3rd-88 $133,582 4th-88 $144 350 lst-89 $155 989 2nd-89 $156 647 3rd-89 $17(3 141 4th-89 $190 522 lst-90 $197 761 2nd-90 $203 950 3rd-90 $215 917 4th-90 $212.898 lst-9! $188 135 2nd-91 $187 566 3rd-91 $183 312 4th-91 $176 489 lst-92 $164 955 2nd-92 $176 393 3rd-92 $156 974 4th-92 $154 597 Source: TRW REDI Property Data Quarter I st-93 2nd-93 3rd-93 4th-93 31.1% lst-94 22.3% 2nd-94 27.4% 3rd-94 32.0% 4th-94 26.8% lst-95 30.2% 2nd-95 26.9% 3rd-95 11.7% 4th-95 -4.9% 1 st-96 -8.0% 2nd-96 -15.1% 3rd-96 -17.1% 4th-96 -12.3% lst-97 -6.0% -14.4% -12.4% Avg. Prices $146,229 $144 360 $143 727 $149 364 $153 016 $154 272 $149 381 $153 938 $152 760 $147 397 $142,180 $147,239 $152,986 $153,076 $149,659 $152,412 $145,168 1-Year Chg, -11.4% -18.2% -8.4% -3.4% 4.6% 6.9% 3.9% 3.1% -0.2% -4~5% -4.8% -4.4% 0.1% 3.9% 5.3% 3.5% -5.1% Cit3' of Temecula I, -'"f"J'Jlfff~' Plypaved by John E. Ilusing, Ph.l). Pa~e 19 Residential Informatio Exhibit 33.-New Home Price Changes Temecula & Southern California Counties, 1988-1996 Temecula Riverside San Bdno Los Angeles Orange San Diego 1988 1989 21.2% 17.0% 18.0% 10.4% 18.3% 25.6% 1990 26.6% 12.1% 10.7% 11.4% -0.0% 5.2% 1991 -12.0% 0.6% 3.0% 3.9% 0.5% 7.5% 1992 -11.3% -5.1% -7.0% -7.8% -2.5% .-4.3% 1993 -9.9% -4.3% -7.5% -2.5% -4.9% -5.1% 1994 4.4% 1.0% -0.9% 4.9% 4.8% 0.6% 1995 -3.6% -0.6% 2.8% 4.4% -3.1% 2.7% 1996 3.5% 5.3% -0.0% 11.0% 1.6% 3.7% 1997 YTD -5.1% 6.1% 8.9% -3.4% 4.6% 4.5% Source: TRW REDI Property Data New Home Prices... After moving upward 3.5% in 1996, Temecula's new home prices were off 5.1% in first quarter 1997 com- pared to the same quarter of 1996. City prices moved in contrast to upward trends in most Southern Califor- nia counties, including Riverside (6.1~, Orange (4. 6~ and San Bernardino County (8. 9~, though not L.A. (-3.4~. By contrast, Temecula's 3.5% average new home price rise in all of 1996, was consistent with the general performance of the surrounding counties. Temecula's average new home price of $145,168 was below that of Riverside ($166,451) and San Bernardino ($159,189) Counties, and substantially below those of San Diego ($235, 075), Orange ($259, 651) and L.A. ($234,581) Counties. Given the region's physical beauty, this should lure many families to the commtmity. Exhibit 34.-New Home Price Comparison Temecula & Southern California Counties, 1st Quarter 1997 $25~,671 $145..,168 ~ $1661451 $159.' 189 Temecula San Bemardino Riverside Los Angeles I Source: ExperianI Orange San Diego ('it3.' of Temecula b'f~T/~: P~vpmvd by Jolm E. Ilu~sin~, Ph.D. Pa~e 20 Residential Informatio Exhibit 35.-Multi-Tenant Rental Rates & Occupancy Levels Investment Grade Projects, Inland B'npire, 1995-1997 ...................... : .............................. ............................: .........................................................~ ......................................................................................~ ..................92% ................. .................. ................... .................. .................. ................. .................. ................ ..............o1% 90% Jun-95 1 Rent · Occupancy Sep-95 Dec-95 Mar-96 Jun-96 Sep-96 Dec-96 Isource: ReaiFacts (415)884-2480, Calculations By ECAPI 96% 95% 94% 93% 89% 88% 87% 86% 85% 84°,6 83% 82% 81% -- 80% Mar-97 Multi-Family Housing... · Temecula has 1,893 investment grade A, multi-family housing units in 8 complexes, averaging 237 units. This number places it in the middle tier of Inland Empire cities. · These grade A multi-family units rent for an average of $659 per month, sixth highest in the Inland Empire and $29 a month above the region's average. · Occupancy in Temecula's multi-family grade A units, at 94.9%, is above the 92.5% average for competitive Inland Empire units. · Inland Empire occupancy levels have recently been trending slowly downward to 92.5%. Average area rents have recently increased, rising from $615 in March 1996 to $631 in March 1997. Exhibit 36.-Multi-Family Housing: Size, Vacancy Rates, Avg. Rents Selected Inland Em,ire Areas, March 1997 City Complexes Units Units/Complex Occupancy Avg. Rent Chino Hills 7 1,533 219 96.6% $791 Corona 19 5,441 286 95.2% $784 Montclair 1 165 165 95.0% $742 R. Cucamonga 25 6,769 271 95.4% $707 Ontario 14 3,137 224 93.5% $689 Temecula 8 1,893 237 94.9% $659 Chino 8 1,208 151 93.9% $647 Bermuda Dunes 3 694 231 94.3% $631 Loma Linda 5 1,006 201 95.2% $627 Redlands 12 2,786 232 93.8% $627 Upland 17 3,570 210 93.6% $626 M urrieta 4 1,260 315 96.5% $624 Palm Springs 2 265 133 94.5% $613 Riverside 33 6,366 193 89.4% $602 Inland Empire 234I 54,481 I 233 I 92.5% I $630 Source: RealFacts (415)884-2480 ( 'i13' of Temecula Iv'f~,'fI~' Ptvpmvd by Jolm E. Ilusin~o, Ph.l). Page 21 Residential Informatio. Exhibit 37.-Types Of Dwelling Units City of Temecula, 191t0-1997 Single Family :~ Multi-Family I I 1990 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 ISource: CA Department of Finance, E-.5 Report ] Exhibit 38.-Dwelling Unit Growth Temecula, 1981-1996 Year Total Single Family Multi-Family Mobile Home Occupied Vacant Persons/I-IH 1990 10,659 7,314 3,070 275 9,130 14.3% 2.967 1993 12,202 8,670 3,257 275 10,452 14.3% 3.178 1994 13,004 9,472 3,257 275 11,139 14.3% 3.210 1995 14,090 10,558 3,257 275 12,069 14.3% 3.254 1996 14,920 11,388 3,257 275 12,780 14.3% 3.237 1997 15,545 12,013 3,257 '275 13,315 14.3% 3.237 Source: CA Department of Finance, E-5 Reports Dwelling Units .... · From 1990 to 1997, the number of dwelling units in Temecula increased from 10,659 to 15,545, up 45.8%. The CA Department of Finance has assumed that the city's residential vacancy rate has remained constant at 14.3%. · Most of the 4,886 growth in units has occurred in single family dwellings. They have gone from 7,314 to 12,013 in 7 years (64.2~. This large increase is why Temecula has been one of Riverside County's fastest growing communities since 1990. · Since 1990, the number of persons per household is estimated to have risen from 2.967 to 3.237. · In January 1997, 76.1% of Temecula's housing units were detached single family homes. That was a much higher proportion than the 59.4% for all Riverside County. Exhibit 39.-Types of Dwelling Units, January 1997 Temecula & Riverside County, 1988-1996 Single Family Cetached Single Family Attached Mural-Family (2-4 units) Multi-Family (5* units) Mobile Home 1 Temecula r'm'l Riverside County I Source: CA Department of Finance, E-5 Report I CiD' of Ielnecula I,'l~il~'f~: Prypined by .Iolm E. Ilusin~o, Ph.l). Pa~e 22 Residential Informatio Exhibit 40.-Single Family Residential Permit, Trend City of Temecula, 1980-1996 ..................................................................................................................................................... %$2.3- .......................................................................................................... 807 817 806 521 .! 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 [Source: Temecula Building DepartrnentI Exhibit 41 .-Single Family Residential Building Permits Temecula & Riverside-San Bernardino Counties Year~ Temecula Growth Riverside Growth San Bdno Growth Co. Share 1991 378 6,976 5,969 5.4% 1992 521 37.8% 7,607 9.0% 5,882 -1.5% 6.8% 1993 807 54.9% 7,012 -7.8% 5,354 -9.0% 11.5% 1994 1,123 39.2% 7.690 9.7% 4,585 -14.4% 14.6% 1995 817 -27.2% 6,803 -11.5% 3,852 -16.0% 12.0% 1996 806 -1.3% 7,021 3.2% 4,703 22.1% 11.5% Note 1. 386 permits issued through June 1997 Source: Construction Industry Research Board, Temecula Building Department Building Permits... · Temecula's single family residential permits leveled off in 1995 (817) and 1996 (806) after a surge in 1994 (1,123). The 1995-1996 permit decline of 1.3% was in contrast to 3.2% growth for Riverside County. · Through June 1997, 386 new single family permits have been issued, an annualized rate of 772. · Temecula's share of Riverside County's single family permits was 11.5% in 1996, down from 12.0% in 1995. To date in 1997, city permits are running at 10.5% of the county total. Exhibit 42.-Share of County Single Family Permits Temecula & Riverside County, 1988-1995 14.6% 12.0% 1 u.5% ................... 6.8% 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997YTD Source: Temecula Building Department I (ii3 or' Temecula I~h'~'fl1~: P~vpmvd by John E. ]lusin,~, Ph.D. Page 23 Taxable Retail Trade CITY OF TEMECULA SECTION 5 TAXABLE RETAIL TRADE Temecula's taxable retail sales record should be the envy of most Inland Empire (Riverside & San Bernardino County) cities. In 1996, city sales surged to $751 million, an all time high (Exhibit 65). Growth was strong, up 16.6%, and has exceeded that of Riverside County since the city's incorporation (Exhibit 66). City retail sales growth has been consistently robust during the 1990s, even growing substantially during the 1991-1994 recession (4.4%-20.1%). In 1996, Temecula ranked eighteenth in the inland region in population (43,100). However, its retail sales ranked 9th (Exhibit 67). It should pass four of these cities once its regional mall is opened. Given the importance of the retail sales tax to California municipalities, taxable retail sales per capita is a good barometer of a community's ability to provide services to its population. Teme- cula has fared extraordinarily well on this standard. In 1996, its per capita sales were $17,679, an amount that was substantially higher than that of the region's seven cities with over 100,000 people, and well above Riverside County's $8,041 level (Exhibits 68-70). Since 1991, the city sales per capita have increased 20.5%. Throughout the 1990s, its per capita sales have exceed those of the region's major cities. In the past six years, Temecula's retail trade has increased by $324 million or 75.9% (Exhibits 71-72). The largest share of this gain came from retail sales by non-retail outlets (up $102 mil- lion), a group including professional & service firms, construction contractors, and manufactur- ing & distribution firms selling directly to the public. This would appear to validate the city's strategy of encouraging manufacturing and distribution firms of this type. The next largest gains came from sales by automotive dealers and parts suppliers (up $95 million) and general merchandise sales (up $54 million). The former shows the city capturing more than its share of the highly competitive auto and truck market. The other indicates that even without a regional mall, Temecula's shoppers are tending to stay in the city. Between 1991 and 1996, three of Temecula's retail sectors have grown in importance. The large non-retail outlet group's share of city taxable sales has gone from 18.6% to 24.1% (Exhibits 73-74). Automotive dealers have increased their share from 16.2% to 21.9%. And, general ('it) of Tclut'cula k'~ffim, 5 l',rpatrd h.x .k)lm E. 11usin~. I'h.I). Pa~e 37 Taxable Retail merchandise stores have gone from an 11.2% share to 13.7%. Moving in the opposite direction have been retail sales in other retail outlets (largely specialty shops) which fell from to 17.2% to 13.0% of sales, and building materials suppliers which dropped from a 6.5% to a 2.9% share. Retail outlets in Temecula generally outperform those in other Inland Empire areas. Thus, the city's average retail store had sales of $861,213, which was $233,083 per year more than the average for Riverside County (Exhibit 76). Its average of $422,824 for all outlets exceeded the county average by $101,159. In seven out of eleven sectors, average sales by city outlets did better than Riverside County, with the strongest per store performance general merchandise ($2.4 million higher), auto & parts dealers ($1.6 million higher), and service stations ($1.2 million higher) (Exhibit 75). The city most under-performed the county among building material suppliers (-0.8 million less). Finally, Temecula's 1996 per capita taxable sales average of $17,679 was far above the per cap- ita sales levels for Riverside ($9,510) and San Bernardino ($10,581) Counties after adjustments are made for the lower per capita income in the two counties as a whole (Exhibit 77). An up- ward adjustment of 18.3% was made to Riverside County per capita sales, as this was the amount by which its per capita income and purchasing power were below those of the average Temecula resident. The adjustment was 28.2% for San Bernardino County. In all but two sectors, per capita sales in Temecula exceeded those for Riverside County (Exhibit 78) even after the latter were increased by the 18.3% factor. The city is thus a net importer of sales tax dollars overall and in nearly every part of its retail economy. The only exceptions were minimal drains in apparel and building materials. When the regional mall is complete, these ad- vantages should increase. ('il,~ of Tcmccula k~iml 5 lhvpaml h.x &tim E. 11usin~, !'h.I). l'a~e 38 Taxable Retail Exhibit 65.-Total Taxable Sales (000) City of Temecula, 1991-1996 ............................................................... i ............................................................................~ .........................$o~4;o2~ ............ [. $57~.,179 $51~ 968 $427:,207 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 ISource: CA Board of Equalization I Total Taxable Retail Sales... In 1996, Temecula's taxable retail sales surged to $750.9 million, an all time record. Since 1991, sales have increased a remarkable 75.8%. Throughout the 1990s, Temecula's sales have grown substantially stronger than those for Riverside County as a whole, including a very strong 16.6% rate in 1996. This has been accomplished without the existence of a regional shopping mall. Even during the worst years of the recession (1991-1993), the city's taxable sales growth rate were 20.1%, 4.4% and 8.1%. Exhibit 66.-Total Taxable Sales Growth Temecula & PJverside County, 1992-1996 ............................................................................................. 1I Temecular--I River~de CountyI......................................................................................... 20.1% [ .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. .16.6.~t,.4 ....................................... 4.4% . l ............. 1~2 1~3 I 8.1% ..... 6;IF/~ ................ 1994 Source: CA Board of Equalization 5.2% 1995 7.6% 1996 ('it.~ 4,1' 'l't'me¢'ula k't~nl 5 l']t'pmt, d h.x .1ohn E. ]!usin.,o, I'h.I). l'a~e 3') Taxable Retail Tt'-' Exhibit 67.-Total Taxable Sales (000) Major Inland B'npire Cities, 1996 $2,25~..:, 706 .........T ................i i ! i i i , ~{ ?i{~. ............... i ..............................i ....~ { . .......... i i~ .... :.. ~ ......... ~0~05~ ~ .......................... 5 .........................-:- ..........................5 ..............................'..: ........................ ....... :a"~q "r ~'~' ' ," :i" i ~ ~ ~ ~ i= ~ .... [==I ., -,.=~ --= Ill-- [] : ~ -- ' ..... ; ,~ ..... .,-,-,,,,-,,*,,,,-,~...' , ~ a= ~=: , ~ = =, ,, ,~, ,: ..... ,== ~4 = ....... :,~ .... .;~-, ...... ~ ~= .... ====~ -.- ::~, : .... === ~ .......... ,~== : ~ ............. ............. ~:.-"?-.-i-' ~'"L : ....' .....'~'i~,'-.-~,i ........~' i ............. , Riv~rsid~ Ontm'io 5ira B~o Cor~a R. Cuca Montelair Victorville Fontina Tem~cula Palm Desert I Soume: CA Board of Equalization; CA Department of Finance I Retail Sales Compared... · Temecula (43,100) is the Inland Empire's 18th largest city. However, its 1996 retail sales of $750.9 million, ranked 9th. All but two of the cities with more sales have more than double its population. Those two, Montclair and Victorville, are home to major regional malls. · With a regional shopping mall now under construction in Temecula, the city's retail trade could easily jump to 5th in the near future. It only needs to close a $75 million gap to do so. · In 1996, Temecula'sper capita retail sales of $17,679 were $9,638 more (119.9%) than Riverside County's $8,041. · Temecula's per capita taxable sales have been more than double that of Riverside County throughout its en- tire six year history (see below), and the gap is widening. $14,66~ Exhibit 68.-Taxable Sales Per Capita Ternecula & Riverside County, 1991-1996 $15,529i $1 .= $17,67~ $7.172 $7.036 $8,O41 1991 1992 [.~l Ternecula r~l Rive~de Counly 1993 1994 Source: CA Boazd of Equalimtion 1995 I 1996 (117 ol'Temecuh~ K'f~qEu, 5 lh't'pa~vd by ,Ioh,i E. Ilusin~, l'h.l). l'a,',Z'e 40 Taxable Retail Exhibit 69.-Taxable Sales Per Capita, 1991-1996 Inland Empire Cities Of Over 100,000 People Year Temecula Ontario Corona San Bdno Riverside Fontana R. Cucamonga Moreno V. 1991 $14,668 $9,903 $8,989 $10,543 $8,725 $6,541 $4,950 $3,381 1992 $15,968 $10,793 $8,670 $9,868 $8,581 $6,670 $5,239 $3,846 1993 $15,529 $10,707 $8,840 $9,307 $8,462 $6,416 $5,638 $4,207 1994 $15,434 $12,086 $9,604 $9,562 $8,839 $6,605 $6,038 $4,367 1995 $15,872 $12,245 $10,163 $9,650 $8,836 $7,028 $6,681 $4,478 1996 $17,679 $13,463 $10,595 $9,902 $9,286 $7,285 $7,135 $4,457 1991-1996 20.5% 36.0% 17.9% -6.1% 6.4% 11.4% 44.1% 31.8% Source: CA Board of Equalization; CA Department of Finance Taxable Retail Sales Per Capita... · Given the importance of retail sales to city finances, sales per capita are a key measure of a municipality's ability to provide services to its population. · Temecula 1996per capita retail sales of $17,679 exceeded those of the seven Inland Empire cities with over 100,000 people. The closest of the major cities were Ontario ($13,463) and Corona ($10,595). · The city has had higher per capita sales than its larger neighbors throughout its history. · Temecula'sper capita sales have grown 20.5% since 1991, rising from $14,668 to $17,679. $17~.~79 Exhibit 70.-Taxable Sales Per Capita Major Inland Empire Cities, 1996 ................... ................................ .........................................i .................................. ........................................? ............................. ' - ' , ' :'!;= ~: -~ ...... ~ ...........7:;"' ..........";,; .........................i .............................. ~'5~'. ........' L,~ i";I;- '; ',' ,1t ',. ';.~ ..r~,~? .........'i ,~ ......''i .....,, ,,,'~i'~ ' .......',' : - i i :., :11 , Ontario Corona San Bdno Riverside Fontana R Cucarmnga Moreno Valley Source: CA Board of Equalization; CA Department of Finance (il3 ofTcmecula I~'~illl, 5 lhx'pa,x,d by John E. lIu~in~. l'h.l). l'a~e 41 Taxable Retail Trade Exhibit Sector Apparel General Merchandise Drug Stores Food Stores Eating & Drinking Furniture/Appliance 1 1 Building Material/Farm 27 Auto Dealer/Supplier 69 Service Stations 25 Other Retail 73 Total Retail $347 All Other 79 Total All Outlets $427 Source: CA Board of Equalization 71 .-Taxable Sales By Temecula, 1991-1996 (000) 1991 $13 509 49 076 8 890 29 748 39 204 521 890 231 240 477 786 241 027 1992 $13,215 87,369 6,218 29,654 38 635 11 335 19 633 89 864 29 341 80 060 $405 324 116 644 $521 968 1993 $14,232 91,112 7,413 25,205 48,011 6,424 19,104 94,884 36,488 62,902 $405,775 126,960 $532,735 Retail Sector 1994 $14,854 97,944 6,677 25 971 53 980 10 3O3 18 807 122 753 39 108 70 127 $460 524 118 655 $579 179 Retail Sales By Sector... 1995 1996e $14,702 $16,184 100,248 102,713 6,375 7,129 28,805 32,191 58,081 64,840 10,760 13,466 18,861 21,463 134,866 164,257 45,283 50,496 77,822 97,385 $495,803 $570,123 148,219 180,812 $644,022 $750,935 · In the period 1991-1996, Temecula's retail sales grew by $323.9 million (75.9~, from $427.0 million to a record $750.9 million. · The largest share of Temecula's retail growth (up $101.6 million) occurred in non-retail outlets. These in- clude retail sales by professionals & service firms, construction contractors, and industrial & distribution firms selling directly to the public. The group also ranks first in city retail sales ($180.8 million). · The large volume of sales growth in the non-retail category validates the city's strategy of recruiting manu- facturing and distribution outlets that sell directly to the public. · The second and third largest share of Temecula's retail growth occurred in auto sales & parts stores (up $95.0 million) and general merchandise stores ($53.6 million). The latter is significant in light of the ab- sence to date of a regional mall facility. Exhibit72.-Taxable Sales Growth By Sector City of Tern ecula, 1991-1996 ..............................................................................................................................................................................Temecula's Taxable Sales grew by .............. ............................................................................................................................................................................$323.9 million between 1991-1996,· ............. up 75.9%, despite the recession. ' ............. ............... $1el-;s~-t .................................................................................................................................................. ........... $95 026 $53.~3.r S 25,6 .'1,6 S25 2f6 S23.a38 ............................................................ ~OUrC*: CA Board ofEqualizalionI ('it3 -f Temecula Rt'~im~ 5 l'rt'pan, d h.x John E. 11usin~, l'h.I). PaRe 42 Taxable Retail Exhibit 73.-Taxable Sales, By Sector Tern e cula. 1991 (3.2%) Apparel (11.5%) Gen. M erch. (18.6%) Non-Retail ~ ~ ~, ,..~ [, .,~ ,~,~,. '~i ........... ' '" %) Drug Store (2.7~) Fu m.lAppl. (S g%) Se~ Statio'~"~~ ~ ~ ~6.=~) Bldg. Mater. ISource: CA Board of Equalization~ Share of Retail Sales... Then (1991) & Now (1996) · The rapid growth of sales in Temecula's non-retail outlets has moved the sector group from 18.6% of sales in 1991 to 24.1% in 1996. The sector is significant in that it depends more on the national and state econo- mies than the local economy for its success. · Retail sales by auto dealers & parts stores also saw their share of city retail trade expand from 1991-1996. The increase was from 16.2% to 21.9%. As long as sales taxes remain a key part of municipal finance, it is crucial for the health of cities like Temecula to retain sales of large ticket items like automobiles and trucks. · General merchandise stores expanded from 11.2% to 13.7% of city sales, to some extent reflecting the city's isolation from large urban shopping malls. When the city's new mall opens, this category should jump substantially. · The two sectors that lost the largest market share were other retail stores (largely specialty shops) which fell from to 17.2% to 13.0% of sales, and building materials suppliers which went from 6.5%to 2.9%. The for- mer reflects the lack of a regional mall. The latter is symptomatic of the decline in residential construction activity. Both these situations are being corrected in 1997. Exhibit74.-Taxable Sales, By Sector Tern ecula. 1996 (2.2%) Apparel (13.7%) Gen. Merch. (24.1%) Nt ....'a ........~ ..........' '-"'~ ..........,., .......~.." .'I :, / Ir, '[' '..,.:~'~' :4.3%) Food Stores , ............~, ..............~ ~. ~~ (0.0%) Liquor ........~.,'~;~ ....... L.' ! '2' .~.,.. ,,~ (e.*~) EaUO~nk ~ 'L9%) Bldg. Mater. .7%) Se~. Station - (21.9%) Auto & Isource: CA Board of EqualizationI ('it) of 'l'enlccula K~iun ~ lhx. pm,.d by .hdm E. Ilu~in~, l'h.I). l)a~e 43 Taxable Retail Trade Exhibit 75.-Taxable Sales Per Sector Tcmccula & Rircrsidc -San Bernardino Counties, 1996 Temecula Riverside County San Bernardino County Sector Per Outlet Per Outlet Temec. less Riv Per Outlet Temec. less SB Apparel $394,729 $467,570 ($72,841) $413,483 ($18,753) General Merchandise 6,847,535 4,418,425 2,429,110 5,036,540 1,810,995 Drug Stores 1,188,230 1,132,932 55,298 799,697 388,533 Food Stores 1,609,527 833,593 775,934 732,107 877,420 Eating & Drinking 514,606 393,729 120,877 370,768 143,838 Furniture & Appliances 220,749 355,362 (134,613) 423,037 (202,288) Blding Materials & Farm 794,918 1,608,100 (813,182) 1,648,829 (853,911) Auto Dealers & Supplies 3,099,182 1,444,650 1,654,533 1,382,681 1,716,501 Service Stations 3,155,971 1,892,231 1,263,740 1,958,531 1,197,440 Other Retail 327,897 526,411 (198,514) 261,285 66,612 Total Retail $861,213 $628,131 $233,083 $660,689 $200,525 All Other 162,309 143,040 19,269 155,104 7,205 Total All Outlets $422,824 $321,664 $101,159 $323,745 $99,079 Source: CA Board of Equalization Retail Sales Per Outlet... · Temecula's 1996 sales per retail outlet averaged $861,213, above the average for Riverside ($628,131) and San Bernardino ($660, 689) Counties. The same was true of average sales for all city outlets ($422, 824). · City average sales for all outlets averaged $101,159 more than Riverside County and $99,079 more than San Bernardino County. · Average sales among Temecula retail outlets exceeded those for Riverside County in 7 of 11 sectors. The greatest advantages were among firms in general merchandise ($2.4 million), auto & parts dealers ($1.6 million), and service stations ($1.2 million). · City firms with sales per outlet averaging the farthest below Riverside County average sales were in building materials (-$0.8 million), furniture & appliances (-$0.1 million), and other (specialty shops) retail (-$0.1 million). Exhibit 76.-Total Taxble Sales Per Outlet Temecula and San Bernardino & Riverside Counties, 1996 Temecula Riverside County )Soume: CA Board of EqualizationI San Bernardino County ('il3 of Tcm¢,('ula I~h*~'ilnl 5 Iht'pmx'd I}y J. lm E. Ilusin~, l'h.I). l'a~c 44 Taxable Retail Trade Exhibit 77.-Taxable Sales Per Capita (adjusted for per capita income dil'lYrcncc) Temecula aqd San Bernardino & Rixerside Counlie~, 1996 Temecula Riverside County~ San Bernardino County2 Sector Sale~ Per Capita Sale~ Per Capita R.C.-Riv. Sales Per Capita R.C.-SB Apparel $381 $404 ($23) $286 $95 General Merchandise 2,418 1,094 $1,325 1,261 1,157 Drug Stores 168 142 $26 112 55 Food Stores 758 593 $165 606 152 Eating & Drinking 1,527 842 $684 814 712 Furniture & Appliances 317 286 $31 275 42 Building Matehals & Farm 505 596 ($91) 551 (46) Auto Dealers & Supplies 3,867 1,286 $2,582 1,402 2,465 Service Stations 1,189 707 $482 810 379 Other Retail 2,293 890 $1,403 1,083 1,210 Total Retail $13,423 $6,839 $6,584 $7,203 $6,220 All Other 4,257 2,672 $1,585 3,379 878 Total All Outlets $17,679 $9,510 $8,'169 $10,581 $7,098 1. Increased 18.3 % for amount Riverside County per capita income is below that of Temecula. 2. Increased 28.2% for amount San Bernardino County per capita income is below that of Temecula. Source: CA Board of Equalization Retail Sales Gap By Sector... · Temecula's 1996 per capita taxable sales average of $17,679 was well above the averages for Riverside ($9,510) and San Bernardino ($10,581) Counties, even after adjustments are made for their lower per capita income levels. · Upward adjustments to the Riverside (18.3~ and San Bernardino (28.2~ County per capita sales data were made in order to allow for the fact that Temecula's per capita income, and thus the purchasing power of its residents, was significantly higher than that for the region. · Temecula's higher per capita sales figures, even after these adjustments were made, mean that the city is a net importer of sales taxes from outside of its boundaries. · Only two sectors showed any weakness compared to Riverside County and both were quite small: building material sales ($91) and apparel sales ($23). The gaps mean that in these sectors there is some small drain- age of city retail sales tax potential to other jurisdictions. Exhibit 78.-Taxable Sales Per Capita Gap Temecula vs Riverside County(adjusted for 18.3% per capita income difference), 1996 i Auto & PartsNon-Retail~h. Re~i ~n. ~mh. ~i~ ~w. ~n ~od ~res Furn./A~[ ~ ~re A~rel ~g. ~r~l I Source: CA Board of Equalization I ('it) or' Tcmecula L"f'~inn 5 P~vpatvd h.x .h)hn E. lh.~i.~, Ph.I). Paffe 45 Employment CITY OF TEMECULA SECTION 4 EMPLOYMENT Temecula's emergence as a center of job growth is primarily the result of the migration of firms and people to the Inland Empire from the Southland's coastal counties.. This migration is oc- curring as the density of land development in Orange, Los Angeles and San Diego Counties has created a shortage of manufacturing, distribution and housing space, and increased space costs. In most cases, this phenomena is increasing the demand for business space and homes along transportation corridors in cities directly adjacent to Orange and Los Angeles Counties.. Teme- cula is unique in two ways. It has been able to get firms and families to leap frog past many miles of undeveloped land to locate within its borders. And, the jobs coming to the city are better paying than the Inland Empire average. Why? Since the city's inception, local leaders have undertaken a consistent and successful pro- gram to lure high technology firms to the area. These efforts have been aided by the city's physi- cal beauty and moderate climate. Meanwhile, the completion of the 1-15 freeway has given commuters and firms located in Temecula ready access to San Diego and Orange County mar- kets, while allowing them to avoid the land restrictions and high costs of those areas. Emolovment Between the first six months of 1991 and 1996, CA Employment Development Department show that Temecula's employment rose from 13,590 to 19,714 (Exhibit 43), up 6,124 jobs or an very rapid 45.1%. The city's economy has begun to specialize with 5,455 of its total jobs in manu- facturing (Exhibit 44). Consistent with the city's development policies, Manufacturing (2,246) and Distribution & Transportation (643)accounted for 47.2% of new jobs (Exhibit 45). From 1991-1996, Temecula's annual job growth rates have far exceeded the 0.6% to 3.7% rates for the Inland Empire (Exhibit 46) except in 1995. This growth trends has altered the make up of the city's economy with manufacturing moving from 23.6% of employment in 1991 to 27.7% in 1996 (Exhibit 47-8). Payroll ('it) of Tt'mecula k~l~l~m 4 lh,'pan. d h.x .h~hn E. llusin~, Ph.I). l)a~e 24 Employment The payroll expended by firms located in Temecula has followed a pattern similar to employ- ment, though its growth has been more aggressive. In 1991, city payrolls totaled $153 million. In 1996 they reached $248 million, up $95 million or 62.1% (Exhibit 49). When adjustment is made for the 11.7% increase in the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside Consumer Price Index, the purchasing power of this payroll was up 50.3% (Exhibit 50). From 1991-1996, payroll growth in Temecula was dominated by Manufacturing ($48 million) which alone accounted for 50.5% of the city increase (Exhibit 52). Construction, and Engineering & Management suffered declines. In 1996, the Manufacturing sector had the largest payroll ($95 million), followed by Retail Trade ($35 million) and Government, Education & Utilities ($26 million) (Exhibit 51). Averaee Pay Per Worker Pay per worker in Temecula rose from $22,480 in 1991 to $25,115 in 1996, an 11.7% increase. However, this was exactly offset by the 11.7% increase in prices, leaving the average worker with almost exactly the same standard of living (Exhibit 53-53). The entire growth in the pur- chasing power of Temecula's payroll was thus from the increased number of workers in the city. Within the sectors, Temecula is unusual in having Manufacturing and Distribution & Transporta- tion as its highest, and third highest paying sectors. Along with Engineering & Management and Finance, Insurance & Real Estate these sectors averaged over $30,000 (Exhibits 55-56). The lowest paying sectors, averaging below $20,000, were those involving consumer services, agri- culture and employment agencies. Number & Size Of Firms The number of firms in Temecula grew slowly from 1991-1994, rising from 1,189 to 1,255. In 1995 and 1996 the number increased rapidly to 1,533 as Califomia's recession began to end (Exhibit 57). The 133 new firms in Distribution & Transportation (53), Business Service (41) and Manufacturing (39) firms were roughly matched by the 115 new firms in Consumer Service (59) and Retail Trade (56) (Exhibit 58-60). The gains in the latter were in rough conformance to economic theory that states that when new basic tier firms bring money to a community, a sec- ondary tier of firms will be created as that new money is spent locally on consumer goods and services. Temecula's economy is dominated by small firms, with the average number of employees fluctu- ating from a low of 11.4 employees in 1991, to a high of 14.2 in 1994 (Exhibit 61). In 1996, the only exception to the small size rule was in the Government, Education & Utility sector (103). Otherwise, only the Manufacturing (42), Hotel & Amusement (21) and Retail Trade (16) sectors exceeded the city average (Exhibit 62). AccuracyCheck Comparing data for the full years 1991-1995, to those for the six months 1991-1995, reveals no essential differences in the behavior of employment, payroll or firm information. The use of first six months data, to allow the inclusion of 1996 information, thus seems warranted. ('it) of Telnccula !,,'ffi~iml 4 l)vt. pavt. d hy .h)lm E. Ilu~in~, l)h.I). l)a~e 25 Employment Exhibit 43.-Wage & Salary Employment, Annual Average City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 19,714 17,768 ..................................................................................................... · t6~,66 .................~ ~,--* ....... 14,505 - 13,590 .......... , _= ........ ............ -'~ ......... I i '~ E 7]~z . ........... ,'~ ~ ........ .~. 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 ISource: CA Employment Development DepartmentI 18,056 i , L,, ........... · ; rl~_=] ........, r ' , City Employment, 1991-1996... · In 1996, employment within the City of Temecula reached 19,714. This was a 6,124 job gain since the first half of 1991 or 45.1%. · Despite the recession, Temecula's employment has increased consistently from 1991-1996. · Manufacturing has become the city's largest sector with 5,455 jobs. It is followed by Retail Trade at 4,370 and the Government, Education & Utility sector group at 1,910. The smallest sector was Engineering & Management at 393 workers. · The fastest growth rate from 1991-1996 was found in Hotel & Amusement, up 238.5% to 860 jobs. Next was Business Services, up 112.0%; and Distribution & Transportation, up 80.2%. In that period, two sectors re- lated sectors have lost jobs: Engineering & Management and Construction. Exhibit 44.-Employment Summary City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 Sector 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 %91-96 Manufacturing 5,455 5,281 5,108 4,750 3,605 3,209 70.0% Retail Trade 4,370 4,178 4,074 3,498 3,204 2,867 52.4% Government & Education & Utilities 1,910 1,819 1,759 1,483 1,383 1,225 55.9% Distribution & Transportation 1,445 1,201 999 986 1,026 802 80.2% Agriculture 1,193 956 1,109 1,127 986 1,086 9.9% Construction 1,130 866 894 898 1,172 1,463 -22.8% Other Services & Help Supply Agencies 1,048 1,102 1,262 931 831 617 69.9% Hotel & Amusement 860 434 470 427 289 254 238.5% Business Services 777 726 584 521 346 366 112.0% Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 571 570 675 575 541 554 2.9% Health Services 563 600 472 442 416 371 51.8% Engineering & Management 393 325 363 729 708 776 -49.4% TOTAL 19,714 18,056 17,768 16,366 14,506 13,590 45.1% SOURCE: CA Employment Development Department (ii3 of'l'cmecula k~ll'lf~. l'~x'patx, d IJy .h,hn E. 11usiqff. l'h.I). Pa~e 26 Employment Mfg Retail Gov/Edu Dist Travel Serv/Help Bus_Sv Health Agr Fin/RE Const Eng/Mgt Soume: CA Employment Development Department Employment By Sector 1996, & Job Growth, 1991-1996... · Temecula's beautiful surroundings, and concerted effort to lure high technology firms have made manufac- turing the city's fastest growing sector numerically since 1991, up 2,246 jobs. When a community sees increasing monies flow to it from the outside world, owing to the expansion of sec- tors like Manufacturing and Distribution & Transportation, the secondary tier of its economy, including Re- tail Trade (1,503), government & education(685) expands as a result. In five of the past six years, Temecula has added jobs much faster than the Inland Empire. For instance, in 1996, it grew 9.2% versus 3.6% for the region. In 1993, it was 12.8% versus 0.6%. the only pause was a slow 1.6%job growth in 1995, against 3.7% for the region. Exhibit 46.-Wage & Salary Employment Growth Rates City of Temecula & Inland Empire, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 I1Temecula E:I Inland Empire I 12.8% 8.6% 9.2% 1992 0.6% 2.2% 3.7% 3.6% 1993 1994 1995 Source: CA Employment Development Department] 1996 ¢ 'it3 or'l't, nwcula k"f~'iEIll 4 l'lt, palt, d h).lohn 1'2 Ilusin~, Ph.I). l'a~(. 27 Employment Exhibit 47.-Employment Distribution By Sector, 1996 City of Tern ecula, First 6-Months, 1996 (21.4%) Other (5.7%) Cons~ (6.1%) Agr (7.3%) (9.7%) Gov/Edu (27.7%) Mfg (22.2%) Retail Souroe: CA Employment Development Department Employment Distribution, 1996 & 1991... · In 1996, 27.7% of Temecula's jobs were in Manufacturing. This was up from 23.6% in 1991 as the sector added 2,246 jobs. · Most of other sectors maintained a relatively stable share of the city's jobs. An exception was Distribution & Transportation which rose from 5.9% to 7.3%. · Construction employment fell from 10.8% to 5.7% of the market as city housing sales slowed dramatically. This sector will increase its share of employment in 1997 as residential markets are beginning to recover. Exhibit 48.-Employment Distribution By Sector, 1991 City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991 (21.6%) Other ~ ~ (23.6%) Mfg ,1o.8%>Con. (8 0%) Agr ---~7;~.~ ~ _ ' (21.1 %) Retail ¢.9%) Di~ (9.0%) Gov/Edu Isource: CA Employment Development Department ('it) of'l'enlt, cula k'fffffimi 4 l'n, palrd h.x .lohu F,. llusiu~, Ph.I). l'a~e Employment Exhibit 49.-Wage & Salary Payroll City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 nominal & CPI Adjusted nominal · CPI adjusted ....................................................................................................................................... $205 ......................... -- $183 ...................................................... ~1~ .................................................... $153 I .$.t.1.3 ............ $122 $248 $225 .................................................. $157 .............. $146 $135 · i 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 ISource: CA Employment Development Depa~ment~ Wage & Salary Payroll 1991-1996... In 1991, the payroll for firms located in Temecula's was $153 million. In 1996, it was $248 million. That was a gain of $95 million or 62.1% in just 5-years. When allowance is made for the increases in the Southern California Consumer Price Index, the purchasing power of Temecula's payroll (1982-1984 dollars) rose from $109 million to $157 million, a $48 million gain. · Of the $95 million increase in payroll, 11.7% or $18 million was attributable to inflation. The other $77 million represented a real increase in purchasing power or 50.3%. Exhibit 50.-Components of Payroll Growth City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 _ $95 mil (62.1%) $77 mil (50.3%) Nominal Growth Inflation Purchasing Power Growth Isource:CA Employment Development Department I ('it3 of'l'emccula I~h'Willll 4 I'lT, paix, d h3 .Iohn E. 1Iu4n~, Ph.I). Pa~e 29 Employment Exhibit 51.-Wage & Salary Payroll Summary City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 Sector 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 % 91-6 Manufacturing $94,755,93 $91,397,73 $80,642,08 $69,962,24 $56,167,81 $46,300,02 104.7% 3 5 4 6 9 8 RetailTrade 34,523,515 31,528,310 28,095,495 23,035,700 21,686,065 20,854,009 65.5% Govt. &Education. &Utilities. 26,355,771 24,879,021 24,496,370 21,238,920 19,650,701 17,677,432 49.1% Distribution&Transportation 22,484,673 18,110,445 14,790,175 13,838,499 12,954,562 9,710,962 131.5% Construction 15,744,401 12,331,961 11,078,009 11,438,225 13,859,939 16,473,465 -4.4% Agriculture 10,558,314 8,293,777 8,400,188 8,234,407 7,569,515 7,464,499 41.4% Other Services & Help Agcy. 9,322,289 8,605,825 8,194,670 7,031,789 6,000,793 4,731,514 97.0% Fina~ce, hsurance, RealEst. 8,578,573 8,910,207 10,616,338 8,552,836 7,863,238 9,037,977 -5.1% Business Services 7,507,968 6,170,119 4,784,707 4,046,442 3,275,495 4,371,733 71.7% Health Services 6,508,300 6,523,824 4,992,687 4,453,086 4,017,408 o 3,565,263 82.5% Engineering&Management 6,156,188 6,433,787 6,600,648 8,981,029 9,802,957 11,427,677 -46.1% Hotel&Amusement 5,068,238 2,265,383 2,395,228 2,325,688 1,626,472 1,130,785 348.2% TOTAL $247,564,163 $225,450,394 $205,086,599 $183,138,867 $164,474,964 $152,745,344 62.1% Payroll Trends By Sector... 1 991-1996 In 1996, Temecula's largest payroll was in Manufacturing ($94.8 million), followed by Retail Trade ($34.5 million). Government, Education & Utilities ($26.4 million), and Distribution & Transportation ($15. 7 mil- lion) The Manufacturing payroll was up a very strong $48 million or 104.7% from 1991-1996. In dollar terms, Retail Trade grew second fastest, up $13.6 million or 65.5%. Distribution & Transportation grew $12.7 mil- lion, or 131.5%, moving it from the sixth to the fourth largest paying employer group. The city's weakest growth was in Engineering & Management, off $5.3 million or -46.1%. Exhibit 52.-Wage & Salary Payroll Gain By Sector City of Temecula & Inland B-npire, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 Mfg Retail Dist Gov/Edu Sew/Help Travel Bus_Sv Agr Health Fin/RE Const Eng/Mgt Souroe: CA Employment Development Department ('it) .f 'l't'mrcula I~'!~;hm 4 l'~x'pan'd h.x .Iohn E. llusiq;, I)h.I). Pa~t' 30 Employment Exhibit 53.-Wage & Salary Payroll Per Worker City of Temecula, First 6-Months, '199'1-'1996 nominal & CPI Adjusted $24,972 $25,115 ....................................................................................................................................................... ~2~'08§ .................................................................................. S22,480 $22 678 S22,381 515 969 515 533 $14 931 ~15 231 S16 125 $15.967 ~nomnal 1CR ad~sted I I I 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Isoume: CA Employment Development DepartmentJ Pay Per Worker, 1991-1996 ... · Temecula workers were paid an average of $22,480 in 1991. In 1996, the average rose to $25,115, an 11.7% gain. The 1996 average was the city's $248 million payroll divided by its 19,714 full & part time workers. Southern California prices rose 11.7% between 1991 and 1996, roughly equal to the 11.7% growth in city average pay. Thus, the $2,636 gain in average pay, was matched by a $2,640 increase in prices, leaving workers $4.55 worse off in today's purchasing power. · In 1982-1984 constant prices, the purchasing power of the city's average pay also remained almost constant, falling $2 from $15,969 to $15,967. In 1996 prices, the decline was $4.55 · Note that average payroll is not average worker family income. The latter often includes income from more than one worker. Exhibit 54.-Components of Average Payroll Per Worker Change City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 $2,636 (11.7%) $2,640 (11.7%) t$4.55) (-o.0%) Nominal Growth Inflation Purebasing Power Growth ISource: CA Employment Development DepartmentI ('it3 of Temccula K'Rt'~?[,], 4 Pn'pan'd by .loire E. Ilusin~, Ph.l). Pa~e 31 Employment Sector Manufacturing Engineering & Management Distribution & Transportation Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Construction Exhibit 55.-Average Pay Per Worker City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 1996 1995 1994 1993 $34,710 $34 615 $31 577 $29,480 31,392 39 435 36 362 24,790 31,111 30 187 29 611 28,071 30,094 31 079 31 446 29,781 27,869 28 486 24 770 25,412 Government & Education & Utilities Health Services Business Services Other Services & Help Agencies Agriculture Retail Trade Hotel & Amusement TOTAL 27,624 27474 23 113 21.739 19 299 16.979 17 757 15,616 17 652 17,338 15 801 15,088 11 819 10,439 $25 125 $24,992 SOURCE: CA Employment Development Department 27 875 28,659 21 145 20,162 19 16 373 15,532 18 12 984 15,105 14 15,159 14,578 15 13,791 13,172 13 10,193 10,919 11 $23,093 $22,383 $22 1992 $31 191 27 682 25 230 29 095 23 645 28 447 333 902 682 310 542 272 687 1991 %91-96 $28,842 20.3% 29,458 6.6% 24,248 28.3% 32,624 -7.8% 22,544 23.6% 28,824 -4.2% 19,220 20.3% 24,046 -19.7% 15,335 15.8% 13,764 28.2% 14,555 8.6% 8,858 33.4% $22,480 11.8% Average Pay Per Sector, 1991-1996... · In 1996, Temecula's best paying sectors were Manufacturing ($34,710), Engineering & Management ($31,392) and Distribution & Transportation ($31,111). The greatest 1991-1996 growth in average pay was 33.4% in the low paying Hotel & Amusement sector, followed by 28.2% in Agriculture. · Temecula is unique in having Manufacturing workers average well over $30,000 and Distribution & Trans- potration also above that amount. In other Inland Empire cities, their average pay is in the $28,000-$29,000 range. · In the mid-range, average pay in Construction ($27,869) roughly equaled that in Government, Education & Utilities ($27,624), and exceeded Health Services at (23,113). Public and utility sector pay fell 4.2% since 1991. Temecula's lowest 1996 average pay was in the Hotel & Amusement industry ($11,819), Retail Trade ($15, 801), Agriculture ($17, 652) and Other Services and Employment & Help Agencies ($17, 757). $34i~710 Mfg Exhibit 56.-Average Pay Per Worker By Sector City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1996 $31792 $31ill1 $30~094 Eng/Mgt Dist Fin/RE Const Gov/Edu Health Bus._Sv Serv/Help Agr Retail Travel ISource: CA Employment Development Department ('it) of l't'lUt'cula k~l~'illli 4 P~rpa,t,d h.x .John E. 11usin~, lqi. l). Parc 32 Employment Exhibit 57.-Number of Firms City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 1,533 1,189 1,217 ............ tr . 1,238 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 ISource: CA Employment Development Department I Number Firms Per Sector, 1991-1996... · The number of firms located in Temecula has risen from 1,189 in 1991 to 1,533 in 1996. That is a gain of 344 companies or 28.9%. Most of the growth in new firms occurred in 1995 and 1996. This marked a time when the Southern Califor- nia recession was ending, and companies were looking for places to expand. The largest number of city finns are in Retail Trade (279), followed by Construction (222), Other Services & Employment Agencies (194). The greatest growth rate for new firms has come in Distribution and Transportation (57.3%), Business Serv- ices (55.1~, and Other Services and Employment Agencies (43.2~ and Manufacturing (42.3~. Exhibit 58.-Firms Per Sector City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 Sector 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 %91-96 Retail Trade 279 259 234 231 231 223 24.9% Construction 222 203 177 185 207 204 8.8% Other Services & Help Supply Agcy 194 188 164 153 138 136 43.2% Distribution & Transportation 146 136 118 108 95 93 57.3% Manufacturing 130 122 113 98 92 91 42.3% Business Services 114 100 85 80 69 74 55.1% Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 113 106 81 87 93 93 21.6% Agriculture '107 95 91 90 87 84 28.1% Health Services 101 101 89 94 90 83 21.7% Engineering & Management 71 66 57 67 70 69 2.9% Hotel & Amusement 41 34 33 29 29 29 39.7% Government & Education & Utilities 19 17 16 19 19 14 37.0% TOTAL 1,533 1,423 1,255 1,238 1,217 1,189 28.9% SOURCE: CA Employment Development Department ('it) of Tt'llltWtllll i.~iml 4 l'n'pan'd I).~ .lohn E. Ilusin~, I'h.I). Pa~e 33 Employment 56 53 41 39 24 20 18 18 12 Serv/Help Retail Dist Bus_Sv Mfg Agr Fin/RE Const Health Travel ISource: CA Employment Development Department] 2 Gov/Edu Eng/Mgt Every sector of Temecula's economy has added farms since 1991, led by Other Service & Employment Agencies with 59 new frans, Retail Trade with 56, and Distribution & Transportation with 53. Note that the 133 of Temecula's 344 new finns are in Distribution & Transportation, Business Services and Manufac- turing. These sectors largely sell services and products outside of the Inland Empire. This is a good sign as they bring fresh dollars to the community and expand its economic base. Though Temecula has specialized in terms of Manufacturing employment and payroll, it has not truly specialized in any sector, in terms of the number of t'ms. The largest concentrate is the 222 companies in Retailing. They represent just 18.2% of city fn'ms. Construction, is next at 14.4%. I=i~i~11,'11: 60.-Distribution of Firms By Sector city of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1996 (36.8%) Other (18.2%) Retail i '-~ ~ ~~/~ (14.4%)Const (8.4%) Mfg (12.7%) Sew/Help (9.5%) Di~ Source: CA Employment Development DepartmentI ('it3 ofTt'nlt, cula K~Q~imJ 4 lhx'palx'd by .Iohn E. Ilusin~, l'h.I). l'a~e 34 Employment Exhibit 61.-Average Size of Firms City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 ....................... +%4 11.9 13.2 14.2 12.7 12.9 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 ISource: CA Employment Development Department I · Temecula's economy is largely made up of smaller firms. The average number of workers per firm grew from 11.4 in 1991 to a high of 14.2 in 1994. It has since stabilized at just under 13 workers per firm. · Only one sector of Temecula's economy averaged over 100 workers: Government & Education (103.4) · The balance of the city's economy was composed of smaller firms led by Manufacturing at 42.1 workers, Ho- tel & Amusement at 21.3, Retail Trade at 15.7 and Agriculture at 11.2. · The balance of the economy is composed of firms with less than 10 employees. Exhibit 62.-Average Number Workers Per Firm City of Temecula, First 6-Months, 1991-1996 Sector 1996 Government & Education & Utilities 103.4 Manufacturing 42.1 Hotel & Amusement/c 21.3 Retail Trade 15.7 Agriculture 11.2 Distribution & Transportation 9.9 Business Services 6.8 Health Services 5.6 Engineering & Management 5.6 Other Services & Help Supply Agcy 5.4 Construction 5.2 Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 5.1 TOTAL 12.9 SOURCE: CA Employment Development Department 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 %91-96 107.0 110.3 80.2 75.2 90.9 13.7% 43.3 45.4 48.7 39.4 35.3 19.5% 12.9 14.3 14.7 10.2 8.8 142.3% 16.2 17.5 15.2 13.9 12.9 22.1% 10.1 12.2 12.5 11.3 13.0 -14.1% 8.9 8.5 9.1 10.9 8.7 14.6% 7.3 6.9 6.5 5.0 5.0 37.1% 5.9 5.3 4.7 4.6 4.5 24.7% 5.0 6.4 10.9 10.1 11.3 -50.8% 5.9 7.7 6.1 6.0 4.6 19.0% 4.3 5.1 4.9 5.7 7.2 -28.3% 5.4 8.4 6.6 5.8 6.0 -15.3% 12.7 14.2 13.2 11.9 11.4 12.6% ('it?.' of 'l'emecula k~l~lfiff~, lhx'pa~x'd by .h.lm E. Ilusin~, Ph.l). l'a~e 35 Employment Exhibit 63.-Employment & Payroll Summary, First Six Months City of Temecula, 1991-1996 1996 1995 1994 1993 Wage & salary employment 19,714 18,056 17,768 16,366 Wage & salary income $495,128,326 $450,900,788 $410,173,198 $366,277,734 Average pay level (annualized) $25,115 $24,972 $23,085 $22,381 Number of firms 1,533 1,423 1,255 1,238 Workers per firm 12.9 12.7 14.2 13.2 1992 1991 14,505 13,590 $328,949,928 $305,490,688 $22,678 $22,480 1,217 1,189 11.9 11.4 · In comparing the 1991-1995 first six months employment data for Temecula, to the full year data, there is no significance. · The use of first half data, to allow inclusion of the available information on 1996, is thus probably reflected of trends through 1996. Exhibit 64.-Employment & Payroll Summary, Annual City of Te~necula, 1991-1995 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 Wage & salary employment 18,616 17, 910 16,712 14,756 14,025 Wage & salary income $463,453,529 $416,328,128 $377,272,737 $330,472,945 $310,874,082 Average pay level (annualized) $24,896 $23,246 $22,575 $22,396 $22,165 Number of firms 1,470 1,280 1,251 1,229 1,197 Workers per firm 12.7 14.0 13.4 12.0 11.7 ('il)' of Ten;ecuhl K'l~iml 4 l'lrpalvd by ,h~hn E. llusin~, l'h.l). l':~e 36 Community Characteristics CITY OF TEMECULA SECTION 7 COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS Temecula is one of the most prosperous communities in the Inland Empire. This is reflected in the highest educational achievement rates in Riverside County, a large amount of land set aside for parks, and a low crime rate. In addition, a portion of the city is unique for an inland region in that it lies in the path of an ocean sea breeze through a gap in the mountains. As a result, the city's climate is moderate, and the area is home to several wineries noted for their fine varietals. Education Temecula's young people attend classes in the Temecula Valley Unified School District, River- side County's tenth largest district with 13,314 students and 521 teachers in academic year 1996- 1997 (Exhibits 89-91). The student-teacher ratios of 25.5 to one, is slightly above the county average of 24.4 (Exhibit 92). In terms of ethnicity, at 28.5%, the city ranks lowest in the percent of minority students among Riverside County's ten largest school districts (Exhibit 93). On most measures of academic performance, Temecula's students rank at or near the top for Riverside County, and above state averages. Thus, Temecula Valley High Schools 98.4% graduation rate is the highest in the county, and well above Califomia's 83.1% rate (Exhibit 92). Of the senior class of 1996, 50.3% entered the University of California, a Cal State University or a local Community College. This compared to 51.5% for all state students and 30.9% in the county: (Exhibit 94). Meanwhile, with many parents wanting their children prepared for the job market, enrollment in technical classes at Temecula Valley High School (46. 0°/6) exceeded statewide and county aver- ages (Exhibit 95). Though, enrollment in college preparatory classes was below those averages (Exhibit 96). On pupil assessment tests, Temecula's high school students consistently ranked at the top for Riverside County in 1996. Thus, 38.6% of Temecula Valley High Schools scored above the na- tional average on the SAT and ACT tests at rates exceeding students statewide (Exhibit 97). And, the percentage of city juniors and seniors (15.1°/6) exceeding national averages on the diffi- cult Advanced Placement Tests exceeded the state average and led Riverside County (Exhibit ('it) ol"i'cmt'cula K~'~'iI*I! ? !',~'pa,x'd h3 Jolm I';. Ilusi,z~. Ph.l). I)a~e 51 Community Characteristics 98). Verbal SAT scores at the city's high school (508) exceeded the 490 average for all Califor- nia seniors and led the county (Exhibit 99). Their math scores were second highest in the county, to Riverside city, and just below the state average (Exhibit 100). Finally, within a 45-minute drive of Temecula, residents and business leaders have access to an extraordinary array of private and public colleges & universities (Exhibits 101-102). Altogether, there are 19 campuses with a combined enrollment of over 114,000 students. The list includes nationally known private, liberal arts schools like the Claremont Colleges and the University of Redlands. Impressive scientific work is being conducted at Harvey Mudd College, California State Polytechnic University at Pomona, and the University of California, Riverside. Loma Linda University boasts one of the top medical schools in the world. California State University San Bernardino has an outstanding School of Business. And, there are four nearby Community Col- leges. Recreation & Tourism The City of Temecula has 23 parks and community facilities covering 199.35 acres (Exhibit 103), an average of one acre for each 216 residents. The system is family oriented and provides extensive access to soccer, baseball, tennis, in-line skating, swimming and basketball facilities, many of them lighted. Nearly every park has children's play areas plus picnic and barbecue fa- cilities. Areas and facilities have been set aside for serious joggers and cyclists. The city's largest park covers 128 acres and offers nearly every conceivable form of sports and entertainment pos- sibility, including many lighted courts and fields, and a large community meeting facility. Temecula's wine growing area is a unique Inland Empire asset. Its twelve wineries grow a wide range of varietal grapes, including such California favorites as Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, and Cabemet Sauvignon. The area serves as a hub for city tourism activity. Low Crime Rates Temecula is the safest city in the Inland Empire (San Bernardino & Riverside Counties) and one of the safest in California. From 1991-1996, its crime rate per 100,000 residents fell 57.8% ac- cording to the U.S. Department of Justice (Exhibit 104-107). In this period, the city had 497 fewer crimes even though its population grew by 53.6%. According to the Justice Department, the already low violent crime rate dropped 42.0% in this period; the property crime rate fell an- other 60.6%. Temecula's outstanding and improving public safety record is reflected in the fact that its 1996 crime rate was 50% below that of Rancho Cucamonga, the next safest Inland Empire city (Exhibits 108-109). Its property crime rate was 55.2% lower than second place Rancho Cu- camonga. Its violent crime rate was just above the latter community, and well below third place Moreno Valley. (Exhibits 110-111). ('ib of 'l'emecula h,~J~'imi 7 l'n'paEwl h? .Iohn E. Ilusin~. Ph.I), I'a~e 52 Community Characteristics Exhibit 89.-School District Students, Teachers, Ratios Riverside County, 1996-7 District Enrollment Teachers Student/Teacher Riverside Unified 35,407 1,502 23.6 Moreno Valley Unified 31,303 1,299 24.1 Corona-Norco Unified 29,528 1,170 25.2 Desert Sands Unified 20,461 812 25.2 Palm Springs Unified 18,129 749 24.2 Jurupa Unified 17,686 717 24.7 Alvord Unified 16,746 665 25.2 Hemet Unified 15,500 632 24.5 Lake Elsinore Unified 14,588 574 25.4 Temecula Valley Unified 13,314 521 25.5 Coachella Valley Unified 11,300 447 25.3 Murrieta Valley Unified 9,111 352 25.9 Val Verde Unified 8,679 340 25.5 Peres Union high 5,142 166 30.9 San Jacinto Unified 4,814 185 26.0 Banning Unified 4,496 205 21.9 Menifee Union elementary 4,204 188 22.4 Peres Elementary 4,184 181 23.2 Pale Verde Unified 3,922 177 22.2 Beaumont Unified 3,555 144 24.8 Riverside Co. Office of Education 2,954 230 12.8 Nuview Union Elementary 1,256 53 23.7 Romeland Elementary 979 38 25.9 Desert Center Unified 63 5 12.6 Riverside County 277,321 11,353 24.4 California 5,612,965 250,527 22.4 Source: CA Department of Education School Districts... · Temecula is served by the 13,314 student Temecula Valley Unified School District, the tenth largest district in Riverside County. · The district has 521 teachem. Exhibit 90.-District Enrollment, 10 Largest Districts Riverside County, 1996-7 ................... 35A07_ ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... "''~ [ ; ~ a' a- 15.500 44.~ · · '· ~versi~ Moreno V, Corona-N. Ds~ ~ P~m ~r. J~a ~vord Hemet L. Elsin. T~ec~a I Soum~: CA D~paRm~nt of Education I ('i~ ol"lYmccula Cf~'iml 7 l'tx, pmrd by .I. hn E. Ilusin~, l'h.l). I'a~e 53 Community Characteristics Exhibit 91 .-District Student-Teacher Ratios Selected School Districts, Riverside County, 1996-7 25.5 25.4 25.2 Temecula 25.2 L. Elsin. Corona-N. Dsrt Sand 25.2 24.7 24.5 24A 24.2 24.1 23.6 Alvord Jurupa Hcmet Riv Co. Palm Spr. Moreno V Riverside Calif. I source: CA Department of Education I Student Teacher Ratios & Graduation Rates... · The Temecula Valley Unified School District has a student teacher ratio of 25.5. That is above the Riverside County average (24.4) and California state average (22.4). The new state emphasis on decreasing elementary school class sizes will lower this ratio. · By most measures, Temecula Valley High School is the number one achieving high school in Riverside County. · Thus, Temecula Valley High Schools 98.4% graduation rate is the highest in Riverside County and exceeds both the county (86,&%) and Statewide averages (83.1~. Exhibit 92.-High School Completion Rate Selected High Schools, R~verside County, 1995-6 T emec~8 I soume: CA Department of Education I ('it3 of'l'clUccula $.~[tn 6 l'lt, palt, d h).Iohn E. 11usin~, l'h.!). l'a~c 54 Community Characteristics Exhibit 93.-Minority Student Enrollment, 10 Largest Districts Selected School Districls, Riverside County, 1996-7 65.8% 6~.1% 62.8% 60.5% 59.5% 58.8% Calif. Alvord Jurupa Riv Co. Rivemide Corona-N. L El~in. Helmet Temeculs ISource: CA Depadmeat of Education I Student Ethnicity... · Iri 1996-7, 28.5% of students in the Temecula Valley School District were Hispanic, Asian, Black or Ameri- can Indian. This was lowest rate among Riverside County's largest districts, though more than adjacent Mur- rieta (25. 7%). The County average was 55.3%; statewide the average was 60.5%. College Entrance... · 50.3% of Temecula Valley High Schools 1996 graduating class entered the University of California, a Cali- fornia State University, or a California Community College in September. · Temecula Valley High School ranked first in Riverside County in 1996 college matriculation. The rate was just below the 51.5% for all California graduating seniors, and far above the 30.9% rate for all of Riverside County. Exhibit 94.-Seniors Entered CA Colleges Selected High Schools, Riverside Courtly, 1995-6 51.5% Calif. 50.$% ~ m .........-~"~- ...........~,. .............".~:;'~'~ ............";:';:; ............';;;;2 ................................................................................................................... ~ l ~...._ ',;~ ,.H_. ~*i ',~ H.. ~.i!~ ....ji~% H':'0''%'' .................................................................................................................................................. m!i"--jl ..................... ..........:":: ................... ~/"-'~!~'-- ~; .....j: ~'~ .....";; ---i~ ..........:~:: .....i~'""' i,~ .....{{,:,,...........~=~ ............... Temecula River~ids Corona-N. Alvord Mot. V. San Jac. Jm'upa L. Elsin. Riv Co.HennetPen'i~Mumeta Dsrt Sands Pslm Spr. ] Source: CA Department of Education I ('it> .t' 'i',.mt'rula kh'~'irm 6 m'm~,pam~,d h.~ .l. hll 1'2 IIu~in..,,, Ph.m). l';l~t. 55 Community Characteristics Exhibit 95.-Students With At Least One Vocational Class Selected School Districts, Riverside County, 1996-7 ............ R7"2% ..........55;3~ 52.5'/. E ' ~ 49.7% ........................................................................... -'-I~.,- ....~'-"'~,~~--~----.-.---4~.~% ............................................................................................................................................................................................. ~ ~ ~ ~ 42.7% 41 5% '~ i ~ ~////~ ' 39.9% : ~ ~ ~ 324% , :~ ~ ~.5% ~ ·~ ~ --' ......,.._. , ............................................................................. · '""T ~ ~""~'".=~=~[ ........ill !'-~,"-~ .""' ~.'"'~::: .............. ~ Jac. J~a ~vord H~et T~ec~ ~. ~rona-N. P~ ~r. ~v Co. L. E~. Mor. V. M~eta Dm Isource: ~ ~padment of Educati~ I Technical Skill & University Eligible Enrollment... Reflecting the new emphasis on preparing students for the job market, 46.0% of 1996-7 Temecula Valley High School students are taking at least one technically oriented course, 5t~ among Riverside County's major districts. The figure exceeded technical enrollment rates for both California (42. 755) and Riverside County (34.5%'). 28.1% of 1996-7 Temecula's high school students were enrolled in classes that are accepted for admission to the University of California and Cal State system, 6th among Riverside County's major districts. UC eligible class enrollment rate was 34.8% for the all California high school students and 29.0% for River- side County. E~hibit 96.2UC R Eligible Class Enrollment Selected School Districts, Riverside County, 1996-7 59.4% Dsrt S~d~ Mareeta Source: CA Depadment of Education I ('it3 ,t"l'cnwcula k~l'illn 6 l'lvpa,'d h? John E. 1Iu'~i,~, l'h.l). l'a~e 56 Community Characteristics Exhibit 97.-Senior SAT & ACT Scores Above U.S. Average Selected School Oistricls, Riverside County, 1996-7 38.8% ............................... · 0:5~ .... ~ ~!'""~ ......, .............:~ ~""'~"aJ'"'~(,[~ .............i'iS~ .................~i' ............................................. -, ~ ~.....~ ......~ ............~.....~h~J.. ~, ~ ............................~,,~ ............................................. ..... - ~ ........... , ............ ~ ..... ~ .... J~ ...... .~,.] .~ _ ...... i ~J ......... ........... ~..-+~.-,~,......~ ,. ..........~, ~,,~ _~............" ~- ~ ~ ~ TernecOa ~v~i~ ~ M~eta Hmet L. E~. ~rona-N. Mot. V. ~v Co. ~vord D~ ~ P~ Sp~. J~a P~ ~ Jac. I Source: ~ ~pa~ment of Education I Test Scores... In 1996, 38.8% of Temecula Valley High School seniors scored above the national average on the Scholastic Assessment Test or American College Test. That was the highest percentage for Riverside County. It was above the 32.5% rate for all California seniors, and the 22.7% for all Riverside County seniors. · 15.1% of Temecula's juniors and seniors successfully passed the very difficult Advanced Placement Tests that show they had college level comprehension in math and science fields. That was fled for the highest percent- age in Riverside County, with seniors from the City of Riverside. The 15.1% Advanced Placement Test pass rate for Temecula's students exceeded the 12.3% for all California juniors and seniors and the 8.4% for those in Riverside County. Exhibit 98.-Juniors & Seniors Passing Advanced Placement Tests Selected School Districts, Riverside County, 19964 15.1% 15.1% [ 13.1%12.3% ............. " I ~ I [] 8.5% 8.4% i':,',i"i. .....[" ................................... ..................................... -- 7.3% .6.Z.%-- ..................................................................... ": :! ......'[:"-"-"" ........'"' ............ ............................................... ................. ' .....~'~ ........................................... T~ec~ ~v~a~ H~et ~. ~. E~. ~ro~s-N. M~eta ~v Co. ~vo~ Mof. V.P~ P~ Spr. D~ ~ ]~3 ~ Jac. J Source: ~ ~peRment ofEduceti~ J ('it.x of Temecula I~Q~'iilll 6 lhx'p:ltx'd by .Iohn E. Ilu~in~, Ph.l). !'a~e 57 Community Characteristics Exhibit 99.-Seniors: SAT Average Verbal score Selected High Schools, Riverside County, 1995-6 Teanocula Mt~ieta Rive~de Calif. Hornet San Jac. Dm-t ~cg L. Elsin. palm :¥r. Riv Co. Mot. ~L Corona-N. Jumpa Alvord PenSs I Source: CADepar~mentoiEduca~on I Scholastic Aptitude Test Scores... · In 1996, Temecula Valley High School seniors averaged 508 on the verbal portion of the Scholastic Assess- ment Test. This was the highest in Riverside County. It was well above the 490 average for California and above the 475 average for Riverside County. · On the math portion of the SAT, Temectda Valley High School seniors averaged 504 in 1996, second highest in Riverside County. The score was just below the 511 average for California and well above the 477 for Riv- erside County. Exhibit 100.-Seniors: SAT Average Math Score Selected High Schools, San Be rnardino County, 1995-6 51t 5~5 504 457 ................. Mumeta Palm ~pr. Riv Co. Alvord Mot. V. Corona-N. Dsrt 8alld~ Jtlllpa I sou~,: ~ ~a~io, Educa~on I Calif. Riverade TernecOa San Jae. Hornet ('it) .f '|'t'lllt'cilla K~ilI)i 6 i'lvp:llvtl b) ,Iohn 1'2 !lusil]~, Ph, I), l'a~e 58 Community Characteristics Table 101.-Hi~her Education Enrollment, Inland Empire, 1996 Campus California Baptist College California State Polytechnic Univ. California State University, SB Chaffey Community College Claremont Colleges (6) Crafton Hills College La Sierra University Loma Linda University Mt. San Jacinto Comm. College Riverside Comm. College San Bernardino Valley College University of California, Riverside University of La Verne University of Redlands Total Enrollment Source: Each Campus Address City Year Specialty Main Degrees Students 8432 Magnolia Riverside 1950 Liberal Arts BA MA 1,250 3801 W. Temple Pomona 1838 Engineering BS MA 16,730 5500 University Pkwy San Bdno 1960 Comprehensive BA MA 11,984 5585 Haven Ave. R Cucamonga 1883 Community College A.A. 13,542 160 E. Tenth Claremont 1925 Science, Lib. Arts BA MA 6,556 11711 San Canyon Yucaipa 1972 Community College A.A. 5,100 4700 Pierce Riverside 1922 Liberal Arts BA MA Ph.D. 1,638 11234 Anderson St. Loma Linda 1905 Medical, Dental BA. M.D. DDS 3,083 14990 N. State St. San Jacinto 1963 Community College A.A. 5,300 4800 Magnolia Riverside 1916 Community College A_A. 20,090 701 S. Mt. Vernon San Bdno 1926 Community College A.A. 11,000 900 University Ave. Riverside 1954 Comprehensive BA MA Ph.D. 8,906 1950 Third St. La Verne 1891 Liberal Arts, Law B.S., M.A.+, Ph.D. 5,472 1200 E. Colton Redlands 1907 Liberal Arts BA MA Ph.D. 3,817 114,468 College and University Enrollment... Within 45-minutes of Temecula are 19 public & private colleges with a combined enrollment of 114,468. 49,732 students (43.4%) are at five comprehensive community colleges. · 28,714 students (25.156) attend two comprehensive California State University campus. One of these, Cal Poly, Pomona, has a long tradition as a state leader in preparing engineers and other scientific technicians. · 14,206 students (12.490 attend the undergraduate and graduate classes at the University of California, River- side. undergraduate, medical and dental school classes at world famous Loma Linda University. · 21,806 students (19.1%) attend local prestigious private liberal arts and science colleges including the Clare- mont Colleges, University of Redlands, and Loma Linda University with its medical and dental schools. Exhibit 102.-College & University Enrollment, '1996 City of Temecula Area (43.4%) Com rn unity Colleges (19.1%) Private Colleges & Universities (25.1%) State University Campuses (12.4%)UCR k~f~h,. 6 l'a,gc 59 Community Characteristics Park Name Bahia Vista Park Butterfiled Stage Park Calle Aragon Park John Magee Park Kent Hintergardt Memorial Loma Linda Park Nakayama Park Nicolas Road Park Old Town Temecula Senior Pala Community Park Paloma Del Sol Park Riverton Park Rotary Park Sam Hicks Monument Park Temecula Community Center Temecula Duck Pond Temecula Elementary School Temecula Middle School Temecula Skate Park Veterans Park Voorburg Park TOTAL Parks & Recreation... Exhibit 103.-Developed Parks, Temecula, 1997 Address Acres 41566 Avenida de la Reina 0.25 33654 De Portola Road 3.00 41621 Calle Aragon 0.25 44656 Corte Veranos 1.00 31465 Via Cordoba 9.00 30877 Loma Linda Road 3.00 30592 Nicolas Road 0.25 39955 Nicolas Road 3.00 41845 6th Street 0.25 44900 Temecula Lane 10.00 32099 De Portola 9.00 30950 Riverton Lane 5.00 28816 Pujol Street 0.25 41970 Moreno Drive 3.35 28816 Pujol Street 0.25 28250 Rancho Calif. Road 5.00 41951 Moraga Road 0.25 42075 Meadows Parkway 14.00 42569 Margarita Road 0.50 30965 La Serena Way 3.5 399690 Nicolas Park 0.25 199.:35 Type Specialty Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Indoor Center Sports Sports Neighborhood Neighborhood Neighborhood Indoor Center Specialty Specialty Sports Specialty Neighborhood Neighborhood Main Attraction Basketball facilities Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Basketball, Play & Picnic Areas Community Hall, Shuffleboard, Baseball, Tennis, Volleyball, Basket- Lighted Baseball & Soccer Fields, Lit & Unlit Sports Fields and Courts, Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Community Hall, Meeting Rooms Wildlife viewing Swimming Pool Lit Baseball & Soccer Fields In-Line Skating Children's Play Area, Picnic Area Children's Play Area, Picnic Area · Temecula has an extensive number of developed parks and community facilities, 23 in all, totaling 199.35 acres. With 43,100 people, the city has 216 people per acre of park land. · City parks are aimed at providing a wide variety of family activities. There is thus an extensive network of soccer, baseball, tennis and basketball fields and courts, many lighted. Nearly every park has picnic fa- cilities. There are facilities for joggers, in-line skaters, cyclists, and swimmers. · The city also has a 128 acre major sports facility and community center offering nearly every conceivable form of sports and entertainment possibility. { 'if3 of'l'cmccula &,'fll'~iml 6 I'repared b.,, .J. lm E. 1Iu.;in~. l'h.l). l'a~e 611 Community Characteristics Exhibit 103a.-Wineries Temecula, 1997 Winery Baily Vineyard & Winery Callaway Vineyard & Winery Cilurzo Vineyard & Winery Filsinger Vineyard & Winery Hart Winery Keyways Vineyard & Winery Maurice Came Winery Mount Palomar Winery Santa Margarita Winery Temecula Crest Winery Thornton Winery Van Roekel Vineyard & Winery Address 33833 Rancho Calif. Rd. 32720 Rancho Calif. Rd. 41220 Calle Contento 39050 De Portola Road 41300 Avenida Biona 37338 De Portola Road 34225 Rancho Calif. Rd. 33820 Rancho Calif. Rd. 33490 Madera Playa 40620 Calle Contento 32575 Rancho Calif. Rd. 34567 Rancho Calif. Rd. Attraction Tasting Room Tasting, Tours, Picnic Tasting, Lake, Picnic Tasting, Group Tours, Picnic Tasting Room Tasting & Picnic Tasting, Picnic, Banquet Tasting, Picnic, Tours Tasting Room Tasting, Picnic, Group Tours Tasting, Tours, Banquet Tasting & Picnic Phone Number (909)695-1895 (909)676-4001 (909)676-5250 (909)6764594 (909)676-6300 (909)676-1451 (909)676-1711 (909)676-5047 (909)676-4431 (909)676-8231 (909)699-0099 (909)699-6961 Wineries... · Temecula's wine growing area is a unique Inland Empire asset, made possible by a gap in the mountains which allows an ocean sea breeze to reach the inland valley. · The area boosts twelve wineries growing a wide range of varietal grapes, including such California favorites as Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay, and Cabernet Sauvignon. · All of the wineries have tasting facilities. · Most of the wineries have tours and picnic areas. · Some wineries have banquet facilities. ('it) of l't'lllccul~l Rfl~hin 6 l'n'pan'd h) .1ollll E. 11usin~, l'h.I). Pace 61 Community Characteristics Exhibit 104.-IVlajor Crimes, Per 100,000 People City of Temecula, 199%1996 1991 4,116 .......................... 3r7~ ...........................................$,81Q .......................................................................................................................................... 1992 1993 1994 ] 995 1996 Note: Population Revimd by CA Depa~ment Of Finance, 1996I Soume: U.S. Depa~ment of Ju~i~, Unifo~ Crime Repo~ I Falling Crime Rate... Since its incorporation in mid-1990, Temecula has had one of the lowest crime rate in the In- land Empire. From 1991 to 1996, the rate fell -57.8%, going from 5,178 to 2,184 crimes per 100, 000 residents. · This decline occurred because Temecula had 497 fewer crimes reported (-9.4%) even though its population increased by 14,600 (+53.6%). Exhibit 105.-Declining Crime Rate Temecula, 1991-1996 Crime 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Murder 0 6 3 0 0 Forcible Rape 10 13 11 15 9 11 Robbery 53 39 45 3{5 39 43 Aggravated Assault 148 121 134 190 144 134 Burglary 503 397 397 498 361 384 Larceny Theft 346 372 324 363 352 184 Motor Vehicle Theft 344 320 328 253 198 151 Arson 7 8 10 7 7 7 Total Crimes 1,411 1,276 1,252 1,362 1,110 914 Population 27,250 31,000 33,250 35,750 39,300 41,850 CHmes per 100,000 people 5,178 4,116 3,765 3,810 2,824 2,184 Change -20.5% -8.5% 1.2% -25.9% -22.7% Note: Decline In Crime, 1991-1996 = -57.8 % Note: Population Revised by CA Department Of Finance, 1997 Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Uniform Crime Report I ('it3 or' 'l'emect,I;, kh~iml 6 Iht. pawd by .hdm E. 11u~in~, Ph.I). p;,~oe 62 Community Characteristics Exhibit 106.-Violent Crime, Per 100,000 People City of Temecula, 1991-1996 774 ........................................................................................................................................ ~74 ............................................................................................................................................. 577 580 1991 1992 1993 1994 INote: Population Revised by CA Department Of Finance, 1996I Soume: U.S. Department of Justice, Uniform Crime Report I 489 449 1995 1996 Violent & Property Crime Rates... From 1991-1996, Temecula's violent crime rate per 100,000 residents fell from 774 to 449, a -42.0% drop. This occurred as the actual number of violent crimes fell from 211 to 188, while the population increased 53.6%. In that five year period, Temecula's property crime rate per I00,000 residents dropped -60.6% from 4,404 to 1,735. This occurred as actual property crimes fell from 1,200 to 776, while the population grew 53.6%. Exhibit 107.-Property Crime, Per 100,000 People City of Temecula. 1991-1996 4,404 ........ i== i ......................... ~'~'~'~ ............................................................................................................................. .............................. -,, ';1 ~,~ , , ~ ......................................................................................................................... ., . i' . ...................:", ,~ , , ._I ~ : o= .........,' . ......................_1~?~%5 ................................. 199] 1992 199~ [994 199~ 1996 ('ily ol'Telnt, rula Kh~'~flll 6 l'lvp;m,d by .l.h.E. ll,~in.,.,. l'h.]). PaRe 63 Community Characteristics Exhibit 108.-Major Crime, Per 100,000 People Temecula & Other Major Inland Empire Cities, 1996 .... ", ~' 22~ :,, ~,~. ~ .~ s,~ ..... ~' , .... =. ~ ................ ~ ~mar~o Moreno Valley ~versi~ ~tario Pomona Fontana K ~mon~ TernecOa Note: Population Revival by CA Depadment Of Finance, 1996I Soume: U.S. DepaAment of du~im, Uniform Crime Repo~ Crime Rates Compared... · Temecula is the Inland Empire's safest major city. In 1996, its 2,184 major crimes per 100, OOOpeople was below the rate for the region's major cities by 50% or more. · Temecula had, by far, the least number of crime rates in the Inland Empire in every major category. Exhibit 109.-Number of Offenses Known To Police, 1996 Temccula & Inhmd Eml)ire Cities Over 100,000 Forcible Major Larceny Vehicle City Murder Rape Robbery Assault Burglary Theft Theft Arson San Bernardino 43 79 1,281 1,831 3,544 7,201 2,992 149 Moreno Valley 13 52 418 709 2,280 4,216 1,045 29 Riverside 18 115 874 2,162 2,894 7,121 2,309 289 Ontario 17 44 504 860 1,479 4,292 1,711 121 Pomona 19 47 545 926 1,697 3,039 1,516 35 Fontana 16 72 414 845 1,143 1,447 1,493 30 R. Cucamonga 8 14 157 191 990 2,531 937 27 Temecula 0 11 43 134 384 184 151 7 Source: U.S. Justice Department, Uniform Crime Report CA Department of Finance, Revised Population Estimates, 1996 Per Total Pop. 100,000 17,120 180,850 9,466 8,762 133,000 6,588 15,782 242,500 6,508 9,028 141,650 6,373 7,824 141,400 5,533 5,460 103,650 5,268 4,855 115,900 4,189 914 41,850 2,184 ('it) of 'l'emrt'ula I~Q~'ifm 6 Prepared h.x .k,lm 15. !lusin~. Ph.I). l;aDc 64 Community Characteristics Exh/bit 110.-Violent C rime, Per 100,000 People Temecula & Other Major inland Empire Cities, 1996 ~n Bernardino Riverside Fontana Pomona Ontario Moreno Valley Temecula R. Oacamonga Note: Population Revised by CA Department Of Finance, 1996I Soume: U.S. Department of Justice, Uniform Crime Report I Crime Rates Compared... · Temecula's violent crime rate of 449 per 100, 000 residents was well below that of the major Inland Empire cities except Rancho Cucamonga (319). · Temecula's property crime rate of 1,735 per 100,000 residents was the lowest among major Inland Empire cities, and less than half that of second place Rancho Cucamonga. Exh/bit 111 .-Property Crime, Per 100,000 People Temecula & Other Major Inland Empire Cities, 1996 5,201 3,870 San Bernardino Moreno Valley Ontario Riverside Pomona Fontana Note: Population Revised by CA Department Of Finance, 1996 Soume: U.S. Department of Justice, Uniform Crime Report R_ Cueare onga Temecula (ity of 'l'emccuh~ k~'~im~ 6 l),~t,p;m,d h.x' .Iolm E. Ilusin~, !'h.I). PaDe 65 1997 WORKFORCE STUDY -HE WORKFORCE :,EPORT What City Of Temecula Businesses Need For A Competitive And Productive Workforce © City Of Temecula, June 1997 Prepared By The Resource Group LLL ExECUTiVE SUMMARY City of Temecula Office of the City Manager Project Research Counsel The Resource Group 5015 Canyon Crest Dr. Riverside, California 92507 (909) 682-5020 The Workforce Report presents the data generated by the Workforce Census conducted among a sample of City of Temecula businesses during April - May 1997. Nearly 200 businesses participated, and the report is based on the findings from the nearly 170 companies that responded by the deadline. The purposes of the workforce census were to learn from business owners and managers: (1) what were the types of skill sets and competencies most needed by their workforce, (2) the future skill sets that would be needed by their employees because of changes in technology and their marketplace, (3) the overall training needs of the City's emerging labor pool, (4) anticipated job creation and vacancies, and (5) other training and technical assistance needed by City companies to help them meet their business projections. City Labor Force and Unemployment Trends: · From 1991 to April 1997, the labor force has grown 12%. · From 1992-96, unemployment decreased 38%. · From 1992 to April 97, unemployment has decreased 54%. Projected Job Vacancies by Industry Over Next 5 Years: · The 170 participating firms alone will create 2,900 jobs. · Clerical, sales, and service occupations will be in demand. · Retail, wholesale, and manufacturing will have highest growth. Sk;!ls and Training Requirements of City Employers: · 45% say current staff have skills improvement needs. · Computer applications and networking most needed skills. · Customer service, communication, sales skills need to increase. · 64% say technology changes will impact needed skills of staff. · Computer software skills must improve due to technology. Top Training Programs Most Needed By City Companies: · Computer networking, applications, programming courses. · Accounting/bookkeeping principals. · Customer relations, services, and communication. · Sales, marketing, advertising practices. · Leadership, supervision, management techniques. Perspectives on Availability & Sufficiency of Training Pro,rams: · Majority of businesses are unaware of local training services. · Many in-ms say they are not adequately served by trainers. · · Colleges, schools, and job trainers must do more outreach. · Businesses across Inland Empire share these same views. Top Technical Assistance Needs of City Companies: · Business networking act/v/t/es and local customer data. · Workforce skills training and market plan development help. · Referral to assistance providers and local business workshops. ABLE OF CONTENTS Background Introduction ..................................................' ..................... The Census Process ...........................................................2 The Changing Workforce Labor Force, Employment And Unemployment .................. 3 Projected Job Vacancies And Opportunities ...................... 4 Skills and Training Requirements Workforce Skills .................................................................9 Training Programs And Services .......................................12 Services Critical To Growth Technical Assistance Needs ............................................. 15 Company Characteristics Industry Mix .....................................................................17 Size Mix ............................................................................17 Appendix Population Estimates ....................................................... 21 Project Foreword In toda.v's challenging climate, capable entrepreneurs and employers have come to agree on one operating constant: The sicills, competencies, and preparation of one's workforce is the key building block to a competitive, efficient, successful enterprise. From the smallest, most seemingly isolated business or agency in the City of Temecula to the largest companies and area employers, market forces are not limited to the competition across the street or across town. More than ever, economies are regional and competition can come easily from another city, county, or country. A capable workforce can help level the playing field and position City of Temecula companies as leaders in their marketplace. A crucial f~rst step in the building of such a capable, championship labor pool is knowing what type of workforce City employers require and the skills that their workforce must have. The Workforce Census Project has been designed for this specific purpose. It is an effort by the City of Temecula, as a companion effort to a larger countywide workforce census initiative by area colleges and training providers, to learn from businesses their workforce needs and skill requirements. With this information in hand, workforce education and training providers can ensure that their curricula, training programs, and employer/employee assistance programs fit precisely with local workplace needs. Researcher Foreword This project is based on the copyrighted instruments and protocols of The Resource Group (TRG). TRG served as research counsel and was responsible for study methodology, census administration, data analysis, and report production. TRG has conducted similar initiatives in over 250 communities. TRG welcomes comments and inquiries at (909) 682-5020. In addition to the presentation of original data, this report features information from a number of sources, including the California Employment Development Department and its Labor Market Information Division. Oftentimes, as several different research efforts feature EDD data, they may present data that are not identical across reports. This is due, primarily, to EDD featuring unadjusted, seasonally adjusted, and extrapolated versions of its data bases. Thus, the reader may find slight variations in some of the EDD data presented in this and other reports. While such variations are realities of contemporary research, in the case of the City of Temecula, the data of any particular version still point to an aggressive, exciting workforce and labor market environment for the City. AC KGROUND Introduction The City of Temecula is fast becoming the "jewel" of the Inland Empire, if not Southern California. Recent press coverage has discussed the very high rn~rks the City has earned in various quality of life studies and government data reports. A growing economy and improving employment rate have received part/cularly favorable attention of late. A number of economists, planners, policymakers and market ' researchers have routinely noted the importance of a trained, skilled, and qualified workforce to a solid, growing local economy. Having available a skilled and competent workforce is a complex undertaldng, requiring the participation of workers, employers, schools, colleges, workforce providers and training agencies. Further, given the changing nature of the workplace, the ever - expanding marketplace, and the evolving role of technology in the world of work, identifying and maintaining needed workforce skills is a continuing challenge and requisite to economic vitality. In February 1997, the City of Temecula pressed forward with an initiative to identify the status of the local workforce, the needs of area employers, and the skills and competencies that local businesses considered. essential in today's and tomorrow's workforce. The Resource Group, one of California's most utili?~d labor market/employer technical assistance research fnmas was engaged to assist in this effort. This City of Temecula effort was designed as a separate companion effort to a regionwide (San Bernardino and Riverside Counties) workforce assessment The Resource Group was preparing to launch in March 1997. A random, stratified sampling of City of Temecula businesses yielded the participation of nearly 200 companies. Some 170 local fn-ms responded by the assessment deadline and the views and data that follow are based on this cohort. Beyond the unique original data collected by the census phase of this project, the research team was able to compile a variety of demographic, population, sales, and economic data regarding the City of Temecula. Such functional information has been included in this narrative as well. 1 The Census Process The project relied on The Resource Group's copyrighted workforce training and economic advancement survey instruments as the base format for the census instrument. The census instrument was designed to be self-completed by a business owner, administered via face-to-face interviews, or completed using telesurvey fielding. Companies of any size and type were the focus of this effort, as long as they had a business address in the City of Temecula. The CiD' of Temecula provided a list of nearly 3,000 businesses operating in the City with a valid business license. From tlms total universe, a random sample universe of 1,000 companies was drawn and these fro-ns received a workforce needs assessment instrument. Through several additional mailings, fax transmissions, and telephone follow-ups, almost 200 businesses eventually responded. Nearly 170 complete and usable responses were received by the census deadline, and the data from this response cohort serves as the basis for the findings contained in this narrative. An initial comparison of the data from the first 170 usable responses with the several more received after deadline indicates essentially similar views. Overall, one in six surveyed businesses responded by the deadline and one in five surveyed businesses responded in total. This represents a substantially higher response rate compared w/th the balance of the Inland Empire businesses surveyed in the concurrent companion study undertaken for other sponsors. The City of Temecula should take great satisfaction in the range and number of business owners who took time from their livelihood to work with City leadership to identify the skills, training, and labor pool availability needed to ensure an efficient, competitive workforce and corresponding growing and dynamic local economy. HE CHANGING WORKFORCE I Labor Force, Employment and Unemployment From 1991 to April 1997, across the City of Temecula, the labor force has grown 12% from a total of approximately 14,700 employable individuals in 1991 to nearly 16,500 by April 1997. Employment And Unemployment lg91 To April 1997 City of Temecula Riverside County Number Unemployment Unemployment in Workforce Rate Rate 1991 14,717 7.2% 9.8% 1992 15,477 9.1 11.6 1993 15,403 9.4 11.9 1994 15,804 8.0 10.5 1995 15,995 7.0 9.5 1996 16,181 5.6 8.2 Apdl 1997 16,493 4.2 6.9 Unemployment Rate - 1991 To t995 City of Ternecula Percent of labor force 1992 9.1% 1993 ~ 9.4% 1994 ' 8.0% 1995 7.0% 1996 ~ 5,6% Apdl 1997 ~ 4,2% 0.0% 4.0% 8.0% 12.0% ~"- From 1992-1996 ~ Temecula's unemployment rate decreased 38%! From 1992-Apd11997 Temecula's unemployment rate has decreased ~/~ 54%/ The decade of the 1990s has seen a remarkable reduction in the unemployment rate of the City of Temecula's labor force. Not only has the unemployment rate for the City declined by 38-54% since 1992, the City's unemployment rate has been substantially lower than the rate for Riverside County for every year of this decade. I3 The top occupational clusters businesses indicate they will need in the coming months: Clerical Sales Service Managerial Machine Trades Projected Job Vacancies and Opportunities The business owners participating in this workforce census initiative indicated the occupations for which they anticipate a future need. For consistency in reporting, each job listed by a responding £nTn was coded into one of the 97 general occupational categories identified in the Dictionar~l of Occupatz'onaI Titles (DOT). Sampled f-n-ms anticipate approximately 745 new hires in the next 12 months and 2,150 over the next three to five years. Combined, this represents nearly 2,900 job vacancies or opportunities created just by the nearly 170 companies providing planning information for this report. Considering future employment by major DOT category, Temecula employers indicate a greater demand for individuals to fill clerical and sales positions. This category represents nearly 30% of the total number of anticipated new hires for responding companies. Projected Job Vacancies And Opportunities Among Responding Businesses By Major DOT Category City of Temecula Clerical and Sales Occupations Service Occupations Agricultural, Fishery, Forestry and Related Ma~;hine Trade Occupations Benchwork Occupations Number of positions Professional, Technical, Managerial ~ __1494 I Structural Work Occupations ~ 176 Miscellaneous Occupations i~ 119 0 200 400 600 ' 800 ~Next 12 rno~ths 53-5 yearsj~ Service related positions (e.g. food and beverage, lodging, cosmetology, amusement, protective services) represent hundreds of future employment opportunities, accounting for nearly 24% of expected new hires. As the economic base of the City matures, there will be increasing and very strong demand for those companies and workers classified as service related. The highly skilled positions classified as professional, technical and managerial account for some 17% of future occupations, while jobs classified as machine trades represent 16% of the future openings anticipated over the next 12 months and across the next three to five years. For just 170 of nearly 3,000 firms in the City, there is a projected demand for 2,900 new employees in the next 60 months. The type of employees and their salary ranges are as follows. Projected Job Vacancies And Opportunities Over The Next ~2 Months And In 3-5 Years Among Responding Businesses By Major DOT Category Professional, Technical, Managerial Clerical and Sales Occupations Service Occupations Agricultural, Fishery, Forestry and Related Machine Trade Occupations Benchwork Occupations Structural Work Occupations Miscellaneous Occupations TOTAL Next In 3-5 12 Monihs Years 164 330 209 654 116 564 9 30 146 327 16 35 50 126 35 84 745 2,150 Comb/ned (Over Next 5 Years) 494 863 680 39 473 51 176 119 2,895 Across the 97 general occupational DOT categories, average hourly wage ranges from $5.00/hour for jobs classified as information and message distribution, miscellaneous clerical, food and beverage preparation and service, metal machixfing, fabrication/repair of products made from assorted materials, and miscellaneous transportation to $37.50/hour for construction related positions. Average Hourly Wage Ranges Among Responding Businesses By Major DOT Category Professional, Technical, Managerial Occupations Clerical And Sales Occupations Service Occupations Agriculture, Fishery, Forestry Occupations Machine Trade Occupations Benchwork Occupations Structural Work Occupations Miscellaneous Occupations Average Hourly Wage Range $ 6.50 -$35.00 5.00 - 19.23 5.00 - 8.00 6.00 - 8.00 5.00 - 22.00 5.O0 - 13.00 7.50 - 37.50 5.00 - 15.00 5 Based on projected workforce needs by industry, companies involved in wholesale or retail trade will be doing a major share of the projected hiring over the next 12 months. Retail trade businesses, however, will take the lead in hiring three to five years from now, expecting to be responsible for some 35% of all job vacancies and opportunities in the year 2000 and beyond. Future Employment By Industry Percent Of All Percent Of All Percent Of All Employees Hired Employees Hired Employees Hi'ed Next 12 Months Vtr~thin 3-5 Years Over Next 5 Years AgricultureJForestry/Fishing 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% Construction 7.0 5.8 6.1 Manufacturing 22.3 13.9 16.0 Transportation/Utilities 1.1 -- 0.3 Wholesale Trade 23.5 25.3 24.9 Retail Trade 23.6 35.2 32.2 FinanceJl nsu rance/Real Estate 3.5 2.3 2.6 Services 16.9 15.5 15.9 The business sectors in the City that will experience the greatest growth in new employee hires over the next 60 months: · Retail Trade · Wholesale Trade · Manufacturing · Professional Services Beyond the anticipated employment needs of wholesale and retail trade businesses in the City, manufacturing fwms project a strong and sustained demand for additional employees over the coming months. Fully 22% of all new hires projected by sampled businesses will be for jobs in the manufacturing sector of the City. Transportation, utilities, agriculture, finance, insurance, and real estate businesses do not project the need for significant additions to their current workforce over the next 12 to 60 months. The following are the top occupations, from a list of 97 general DOT occupational categories, for which there is highest anticipated need for additional new hires in the next 12 months (now through June 1998) and over the next three to five years. OCCUPATIONS SLATED FOR MAJOR ADDITIONAL HIRING IN NEXT 12 MONTHS Metal machining Food and beverage preparatioNservice Production/stock clerks and related Construction Administrative specializations Managers and officials Medicine and health Architecture, engineering and surveying Mechanics and machinery repair Sales of commodities //~ Responding City ~ businesses anticipate \', nearly 2, 900 job vacancies and opportunities--about 750 in the next 12 months and 2,150 over the next three to five years, for a total of 2,900 over the next 60 months -- for just the 170 ~usinesses in this sampl~/f OCCUPATIONS SLATED FOR MAJOR GROWTH IN 3-5 YEARS Food and beverage preparation/service Production/stock clerks and related Metal machining Construction Administrative specializations Sales of commodities Managers and officials Miscellaneous transportation Mechanics and machinery repair Miscellaneous clerical 7 Within the group of food and beyerode preparation and service, anticipated demand is highest for cooks and food se~wers, while in the area of production~ stock clerks and related, the greatest need will be for shippin§ and receiving clerks. New hires classified under metal machining will primarily be f-filing machinist or tool making positions. Among the group of construction, the highest anticipated demand will be for general consinmction laborers. / The top types of occupati ,, businesses indicate they will ~! need in the coming months: · food and beverage servers/service · production clerks and stock clerks · metal machining trades workers · construction trades workers · administrative support · sales personnel · managers Occupations Targeted For Major Growth Over Next 5 Years Among Responding Businesses City of Temecula Number cf positions Food&beverage prep/ser~ce '~///~~~//~//~~ 660 ~ 513 Production/stock clerks & related: ¢/~J~/~/~~ 5' Metal machining ~/~/~~/'~ 393 Construction ~ 173 Administrative specializations ~ 167 Sales of commod~es i~ 127 Managers & offic/als ~6 93 Mechanics & machinery repair 1 Misc. sales occupations ~ 54 Architecture, engineering & sur~e~ng i~ 54 Medicine & health ~ 54 0 4O0 80O Office managers and accountants, which fall under the category of administrative specializations, v,511 also be in high demand in the near future. ILLS AND RAINING REQUIREMENTS Workforce Skills What are the skills City of Temecula business owners require for their employees? What are the competencies that entrepreneurs indicate will enable a competitive, efficient, and productive workforce? Are There Skills Areas Where Some Of Your Staff Are Not At The Highest Level You Would Prefer Them To Be? City of Temecula Yes 45.4% No 54.6 Yes 45.4% ,/,' '~.!';)ij:;, .','~:.~,,, '~,,'. :'"'.',~ .... /::,,~ .. '.,",, ~'i~( ',/ ;;, >~:: ....,. ~',,"?, . '! .;~'. ~,~,~,, ~,z?,.:,',, z;;" ' .;'.',/,.,~,~ .;z,~ ', '!, '.:' 'L,;,,,;',"///"'; ;'1;;~>,, ';k~,~f~,::P/,..':",,"" .,~... , 7, ;',',z~/,l¥,; Z';:'~: :r,,'~ ',,:~ ~,. :,.;;~:. ' ' ,,,' , (,,';,: ,~,~.,, .' ,( , :: ,' . ¥,,, ..,;.. ,~ ~.~;~ '/~ ..;;,',~,¥?;,~/...~/~ The percentage of businesses confirming that there are skill areas that, if improved by training, would strengthen the company's ability to compete is 40% among self-declared small size businesses, 51% among medium size companies, and 64% among businesses indicating their business is relatively large. Overall, some 45% of City companies indicate there are skills among current staff that could benefit from improvement. Across the Inland Empire (San Bernardino and Riverside Counties), 47% of employers answered that current skills could be improved. City of Temecula employers are primarily in need of workers with demonstrated comt~ter proficiencies and skills (33% say that additional training is needed for this skill area). Training which wou/d develop or improve sales, marketing and/or advertising skills is also deemed important by 28% of City firms, which is consistent with similar studies conducted across the State. Throughout the Inland Empire some 43% of companies indicate that cttrrent staff could use additional skills in computer software applications proficiencies. City of Temecula employers (22%) also want employees that can effectively communicate orally and in wr'/t/ng and workers who know how to interact with and provide good service to customers and clients. This compares with 17% of Inland Empire companies indicating this was a skill set requiring improvement. No 54.6% 45% of local companies say their current staff could use some improved skills More proficiency with computer software applications is the skill area most in need of improvement among staff today Top Skills Areas That Current Workforce Could Use Improvement City of Ternecula Customer relations/service/communication skills Machine trades skills Accounting~nance skills Leadership/supervision/management skills Office skills/clerical skills Wdting skills Basic skills (reading, writing, math) Business adminisb-ation skills I~j~.o~ Engineering technology skills L 0.0% 20.0% Percent of businesses Corn pater soft'ware applications skills i~//x/~33'3% Sales/marketing/advertising skills i~6-7% i~J 5.0% 40.0% 600% 80~0% Regardless of size in relation to similar businesses, computer sicills, skills sets related to sales, marketing and advertising and communication and customer service skills have been identified as the top skills areas to develop or improve through training. Top Skill Areas That, If Improved By Training, Would Strengthen Company's Ability To Compete By Self-Declared Size Self-Declared S~ze Top Skill Areas Small Size Computer software applications skills Sales/marketing/advertising skills Customer relations/service/communication skills Accounting/finance skills Machine trades skills Medium Size Computer software applications skills Sales/marketing/advertising skills Customer relations/service/communication skills Basic skills (reading, writing, math) Office skills/clerical skills Large Size Computer software applications skills Customer relations/service/communication skills Is Technology Beginning To Change Your Industry, Marketplace And The Way You Do Business? City of Temecula Yes 64.1% No 35.9 Yes No 35.9% Technology and related manufacturing is changing the economic landscape of the City. Nearly two out of three Temecula business owners agreed that technology is beaming to change their industry and the way they do business. A majority of this group--- nearly 56%--believe their workforce of tomorrow will benefit most from ir~'reased computer knowledge and skills. New Skills Workforce Will Need Due To Technology Changes And Competitive Pressures In Industry City of Ternecula Percent of businesses Computer software applications skills ~ 92.9% Computer networking/programming skills · Customer relations/service/communication skills ~ Drafting/CAD/CAM skills ~ 6'0°/= Business administration skills ~ 4.8% Electrical/electronics skills ~ 4.8% AJlied health care skills i~ 3.6% ~ ' Sales/marketing/adverUsing skills 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% nature of their workplace and that new workforce skills will be needed. New skills to be needed because of technology: · computer software skills · computer networking skills The percentage of businesses confirming that technology is rapidly changing their industry is 57% among small size companies and 71% and 92% among self-declared medium and large size businesses, respectively. A nearly identical 64.5% of businesses throughout the Inland Empire confirm that technology changes in the workplace is placing an increased pressure on hauing current and future staff more computer proficient. Some 90% of Inland Empire companies say that additional computer skills training is critical. · customer relations skills · new business ~ practices skills~ The specific training programs identified as important by city firms range from accounting and recordkeeping proficiencies to leadership/ supervisory training and communication skills training. Across the City, computer training was identified as the most immediate and critical training area. Training Programs and Services City of Temecula employers have identified an inventory of training programs they indicate are important in producing and maintaining a competitive and efficient workforce. Understanding and having the skills to use the most current computer technology and software applications is considered an important and pressing training need of city employers. Top Workforce Training Programs And Services Of Interest To City Businesses City of Temecula Computer software applications Computer networking/programming Accounting/finance Customer relations/services/communica~on Sales/marketing/advertising Leadership/supe~sion/management Business administration Office skills Employee healtlVsafetyhvellness Small tiusiness/entrepreneurship 0.0% Percent of businesses 34.4% 33.8% ,~ 29,4% i~ 29,4% 2~ 28.1% 26.3% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% Also important are training programs that will focus on providing current workers with knowledge in accounting and recordkeeping and the ability to work well with people and to serve or relate to customers. Some 29% indicate that present day workers could benefit substantially from training that instills effective marketing and/or advertising sicills. Training programs that provide individuals with leadership, supervisory or management skills and business administration skills are each considered important by 28% and 26% of city employers, respectively. The needs and views of companies in the balance of the Inland Empire are essent/ally identical to those of fn-ms in the City. For businesses in the two-county area, some 39% indicate that training programs relating to computer applications is the most needed training resource in the region. Almost 29%, too, believe that there should be available local training programs that instill sales and marketing skill sets in the local labor force. Trainhag programs promoting leadership and management skills is considered important by 29% of other fn-ms throughout the Inland Empire. Thus, City of Temecula companies share the same views as other companies regarding the importance of training programs in computing, customer relations, sales, and management skills. Top Workforce Training Programs And Services Of Interest To City Businesses By Self-Declared Size Self-Declared Size Small Size Top Training Programs Computer networking/programming Accounting/finance Computer software applications Medium Size Computer software applications Computer networking/programming Drafting/CAD/CAM Large Size Computer software applications Customer relations/service/communication Office skills/clerical For businesses to be able to act on the skills needs of their employees, they must know about the availability and sufficiency of training programs designed to respond to those skill needs. Clearly, most employers are unaware of any such training programs in their immediate are~ The clear maioriW of businesses in the City of Temecula simply are unaware of any available workforce training programs offered by area colleges, schools, and training agencies. Perceived Availability Of Worldorce Training Programs And Services Accounting/finance Agriculture/agribusiness Basic skills (reading, writing, basic math) Biotechnology Business administration Child development/parenting Computer networking/programming Computer software applications Customer relations/services/communication Drafting/CAD/CAM Employee health/safety/wellness Engineering technology English as a Second Language (ESL) Environmental regs/hazardous materials Food and beverage preparation/service Health professions International trade/marketing Leadership/supervision/management Manufacturing technology Multi-media applications Office skills Quality control Sales/marketing/advertising Small business/entrepreneurship Transportation technologies Writing (e.g. business, technical, reviews) Is this type of workforce training sufficiently available to city companies? Yes No Don't Know 45.3% 14.0% 40.7% 10.4 27.1 62.5 48.4 19.4 32.3 6.3 18.8 75.0 43.2 13.5 43.2 29.1 21.8 49.1 41.8 22.8 35.4 47.1 21.8 31.0 34.2 15.8 50.0 21.1 15.8 63.2 38.2 13.2 48.5 18.5 27.8 53.7 25.0 20.0 55.0 37.5 18.8 43.8 17.6 17.6 64.7 26.9 17.3 55.8 17.3 15.4 67.3 32.9 18.4 48.7 22.2 24.1 53.7 19.0 19.0 62.1 49.3 12.3 38.4 29.3 20.7 50.0 30.9 16.0 53.1 25.4 20.9 53.7 14.0 18.0 68.0 25.4 22.2 52.4 13 Perceived Availability Of Training Programs And Services Of Greatest Interest To City Businesses City of Temecula Percent of businesses Computer software applications ,,~%,%~ Computer neb~orking/programming ~ ';~ Accounting/finance i~~ Leadership/supervision/management ~l Bu.in.s a.m .,str .on 0.0% 20o% 4o.0% 6o.o% 8o.o% 1coo% ~Available ~ N~ A~ilable ~ Don't Kn~j Businesses in the City need area workforce development/training service providers to do more aggressive outreach and information-sharing to companies regarding available training resources, Where there are insufficient local training resources and programs, businesses need training providers to work together to develop or broker a more extensive array of needed training services. Most businesses in the City of Temecula are unaware if any training programs exist or are available to meet their current and pressing training needs. Much of this can be explained by the reality that the City is not home to a local community college or state university or very many proprietary career schools. It may well be that needed training programs are not readily available. For many of the skill sets for which City of Temecula businesses indicate a training need, the majority of businesses are not aware of the availability of local programs in this regard. This is particularly true for needed training in such skill areas as customer relations, sales, marketing, leadership skills, management skills, office skills, small business entrepreneurship, and computer programming. When local companies do know that training services are available, they clearly believe that such programs are sufficient, adequate, and accessible. The need is for workforce preparation and trainin~ providers (community colleges, state universities, proprietary schools, regional occupational programs, and job training program providers) to work more closely with City and local business leadership to focus more localized training resources to meet the identified needs of local businesses. This lack of awareness of the availability of local training options is reported to be at the same level by businesses throughout the Inland Empire. Universally, the lesson for training providers is that they must do a better job informing local businesses of their training programs. Further, they must dedicate more resources to addressing local business needs on a local basis. RVICES RITICAL TO GROWTH Technical Assistance Needs As Temecula business owners and operators envision the type and range of technical assistance they require for business stability, retention and growth, they recognize the value of business networking activit/es. One out of three city firms indicate the/mportance of business networking. An nlrnost equal percentage (32%) indicate a need for local demographic or customer data, and one-fourth indicate a need for workforce skills training. Top Technical Assistance And Services Needed By City Businesses City of Temecula Percent of businesses Business networking activities ;I~ 33.1% Local demographic/customer data ~.~ 31.9°/o , r:.'~.-~-X.'X'???'.. [Workforce skills ========================================= 23.8% Marketing plan development assistance ~ 21.3% Business services/assistance refen'al ~ 20.6% Business topic seminars/workshops i~ 20.6% Area permitting/code/regulation/information i:~ 19.4% Small business development assistance ,~ 18.1% Loan packaging assistance i~ 15.0 Yo Business plan development assistance ~ 13.1% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% Top Technical Assistance And Services Needed By City Businesses By Self-Declared Size Self-Declared Size Technical Assistance Small Size Business networking activities Local demographic/customer data Small business development assistance Area permitting/code/regulation information Marketing plan development assistance Medium Size Workforce skills training Local demographic/customer data Business networking activities Business services/assistance referral Business topic seminars/workshops Large Size Business networking activities Local demographic/customer data Workforce skills training Marketing plan development assistance I15 Perceived Availability Of Technical Assistance And Services Area permitting/code/regulation/information Business incubator program Business networking activities Business plan development assistance Business services/assistance referral Business siting/location assistance Business topic seminars/workshops Loan packaging assistance Local demographic/customer data Marketing plan development assistance Procurement assistance/services Retention intervention teams SCORE/similar business counseling Small business development assistance Workforce skills training Is this type of technical assistance sufficiently available to city companies? Yes No Don't Know 38.1% 14.3% 47.6% 13.8 24.6 61.5 50.5 16.5 33.0 19.4 9.7 70.8 29.6 12.7 57.7 19.4 16.4 64.2 34.6 12.8 52.6 28.9 15.8 55.3 33.0 11.4 55.7 14.3 17.9 67.9 8.5 11.9 79.7 8.8 12.3 78.9 21.1 12.7 66.2 21.0 8.6 70.4 19.0 16.7 64.3 Perceived Availability Of Technical Assistance And Services Of Greatest Need To City Businesses City of Temecula Business networking activities Local demographic/customer data Workforce skitIs training Marketing plan development assistance Business seP/ices/assistance referral Business topic seminars/workshops Area perm itting/codelregulation/]n form ation Small business development assistance Loan packaging assistance Percent of businesses 0.0% 20.0% 40,0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% J.~Avai able ~Not Available ~Don't Knowj 16 MPANY HARACTERISTICS Industry Mix The types and composition of the nearly 3,000 companies in the City of Temecula somewhat parallels the mix of businesses in the State. More than two out of five of the businesses in the city are service related (e.g. architects, engineers, health professionals, attorneys). One-in-four businesses operate as retail trade outlets or stores, while one out of 10 companies provide financial, insurance, or real estate services. Industry Mix Of Businesses City of Temecula Percent of businesses Agriculture/Forestry/Fishing i~ 3.2% c cu i~ ] onstru 'on i~ Manufacturing i~ ]5.7% Transportation/Utilities '~ 2.0% Wholesale Trade ~ ~ 7.5% Retail Trade ~~ 22.5% Finance/insurance/Real Estate ~ 39.2% Services Public Administration I]0'9% Non Classifiable i~0'2% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% Size Mix Traditionally, company size is measured by number of employees. Various federal government size formulas define a "small size" firm as employing less than 350 employees. Using these benchmarks, nearly all f-n-rns in any Califorrfia county or city would be considered small. Perhaps a more relevant indicator of company size is the self- declared size of a company in relation to other companies within the same industry. This is a more descriptive measure of business size. For example, a dry cleaning establishment employing a total of 20 individuals may consider itself to be medium in size as compared to other businesses within the same industry and a company involved in manufacturing with a total of 175 employees may also consider itself to be medium in size. I17 As of Apr# 1997, there are 3, 000 companies operating with a business license in the City of Temecula Self-Declared Size Of Businesses City of Temecula Small 62.9% _Large 7.5% Medium 29.6% Temecula firms self-declared their own company size in relation to their industry. The 63% small, 30% medium, and 7% large size reported by city £nTns resembles the size mix reported by companies in similar studies conducted in California. In those studies, the typical size mix of a region's or county's businesses has been 65% small, 26% medium, and 9% large size. Across all companies in the city, approximately one-half of businesses employ five or fewer employees. Nearly 6% employ more than 100 employees, while fewer than 1% report employing n~ore than 500 workers. Number Of Employees I - 5 employees 6 - 25 employees 26 - 50 employees 51 - 100 employees 101 - 200 employees 201 - 500 employees 501 or more employees Median number of employees: city of Temecula 51.3% 34.4 3.2 5,2 2.6 2.6 0.6 5.0 Temecula businesses employ a median of five individuals. Firms consider/ng themselves small in size employ a median of three individuals, while medium and large size fwrns each have reported medians of 12 employees. 18 [ I Sales and Income Trends A standard economic measure of any city or region is the amount of taxable sales per year and the number of taxable sales permits held in the area. Taxable Sales The California State Board of Equalization reports taxable sales for two major categories: retail stores and all other outlets. In both cases, the taxable sales do not reflect the gross sales of the establishment. Only sales subject to sales tax or use tax are included. Taxable Sales - 1991 To 1995 City of Temecula In thousands 1992 1993 1994 , 1995; $o $~oo,ooo ~oo,ooo $427,207 $521,968 $535,735 $579,179 5644.022 $600,000 $800,000 ~.~Retail Stores E3AII Other Outlets~ From 1991 to 1995, taxable sales across Temecula increased nearly 51% from a reported $427 million in 1991 to more than $644 million by 1995. //~ From 1991-95, -~ taxable sales for the City of Temecula increased 1995 Taxable Sales (In Thousands) City of Temecula Retail Stores $ 495,803 All Qther Outlets 148,219 Total $ 644,022 J19 Taxable Sales Permits The number of taxable sales permits issued by the California State Board of Equalization provides a convenient way to benchmark the growth of businesses in a city. In 1995, the number of taxable sales permits for all outlets across the City of Temecula totaled 1,712, an increase of 30% fi'om a 1991 total of 1,315 permits. 1995 Taxable Sales Permits City of Temecula Retail Stores 616 All Other Outlets 1,096 Total 1,712 From 1991-95, the number of businesses with taxable sales permits in the City of Temecula increased 30% Taxable Sales Permits - 1991 To 1995 City of Temecula 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Number of permits 0 5OO 1,315 I1,368 1,492 I 1 ,OOO 1,500 !~Retail Stores gall Other Outlets~ 1,602 I1,712 2,000 20 I PPENDIX Population Estimates Population estimates, which are based on April 1, 1990 Census of Population and Housing data, were obtained from the California State Department of Finance Report E-1. Population across the City of Temecula increased nearly 52%, from 27,600 persons in 1991 to 41,850 as of January 1, 1996. 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Estimated Population - 10 Year Trend City of Temecula Number of persons 27,600 31,350 33,700 36,550 39,300 I~ 41 850 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 Estimated Population 1985 To 1995 CityofTemecu~ 1991 27,600 1992 31,350 1993 33,700 1994 36,550 1995 39,300 1996 41,850 Pe~entchange 1991-1995 51.6% 50,0~ '~ Prom 1991-96, the population of the City of Temecula increased 52% , 21 MOUNT SAN JACINTO COLLEGE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF TEMECULA WORKFORCE NEEDS and their Relevance to Mt. San Jacinto College's Training Programs Introduction: Analysis of the data provided in the June 1997 Workforce Report prepared by the Resource Group for the City of Temecula uncovers a primary concern for Mt. San Jacinto College: "The clear majority. of businesses in the City of Temecula simply are unaware of any available workforce training programs offered by area colleges, schools, and training agencies [p. 13]." The lack of information on the part of employers clearly indicates a need for MSJC to communicate more effectively the availability of the training programs requested in the report. The remainder of this document will focus on the types of training requested and the accessability of said training. Training Programs and Services (Workforce Report, p. 12) Top Workforce Training Programs and Services of Interest to City Businesses Need: Availability: 1. Computer Software Applications MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) f. g. Using Personal Computers for Business Data Base Management (Microsoft Access) Microcomputer Applications: Spreadsheets (Microsoft Excel) Desktop Publishing (Page Maker, Quark Express) Windows for Business (Choice of Corel's Office Pro 7 or Microsoft Office 97) Introduction to Presentation Software (Microsoft PowerPoint 97) Word Processing (WordPerfect or Word) Intermediate Business for Windows (Word, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint) Introduction to the Internet and the World Wide Web In addition to the classes and software packages listed above, MSJC has a new Multi- Media Certificate program that provides training in software such as Adobe's Photoshop, Premier, and Illustrator as well as Microsoft's Softimage. Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) All the software training listed above can be offered through this delivery system. Additional needs can be met through Community Education even though the applications are not being taught in the credit program. These classes are open to the public and cannot be customized. Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) go This delivery system offers the most flexibility to the business community. All the courses listed under credit offerings are available as well as any other application packages desired by the client. Courses are offered on the client's site or at one of MSJC's campuses. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Computer Networking/Programming Availability: 1. MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) Introduction to Computers and Data Processing (includes elementary programming in BASIC) Introduction to Programming: BASIC Introduction to Programming: C Introduction to Programming: VISUAL BASIC PASCAL Programming: I & II Systems Analysis and Design Cost: $13 per unit 2 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Accounting/Finance Availability: 1. MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) ao Financial Accounting--Principles of Accounting I Managerial Accounting--Principles of Accounting II Beginning Computer Accounting Macro and Micro Economics Financial Statements for a Small Business Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) go Accounting/Budgeting for Small Business Survival Finance Accounting for Non-Accountants The Basics of Business Bookkeeping and Taxes Understanding Business Finance Other topics as requested... Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) ao We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. 3 Need: Availability: 1. Customer Relations/Services/Communication MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) Communication in the Organization Fundamentals of Oral Communication Advanced Oral Communication Interpersonal Communication Assertive Communication Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) Customer Service: Your Valuable Business Asset Managing and Working Effectively with Others Communication and Listening Skills Effective Communications World Class Quality and Excellence in Manufacturing and Service Other titles as requested... Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Availability: 1. Sales/Marketing/Advertising MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) Principles of Salesmanship Principles of Marketing International Marketing Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) 4 ao Marketing Tactics Understanding Sales and Marketing Sales Training Marketing a Small Business Other topics as requested .... Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) go We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Availability: 1. Leadership/Supervision/Management MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) a. Human Relations for Supervisors Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) Do Go Effective Supervision Certificate Series i. Legal Issues: Hiring and Interviewing Strategies ii. Commitment Process for Performance Excellence iii. Positive Discipline Strategies iv. Legal Issues: Performance Appraisals and Terminations v. Legal Issues: Sexual Harassment & Hostile Work Environments vi. World Class Quality and Excellence in Manufacturing and Service Key Supervisory Skills Certificate Program i. Understanding Your Role as a Supervisor ii. Effective Listening Skills iii. Conflict Management iv. Action Planning and Goal Setting v. Coaching to Improve Performance vi. Time Management Management Skills for Managers Effective Team Leadership Certificate Program i. Team Building Concepts and Strategies ii. Communication and Listening Skills iii. Delegation Techniques and Strategies iv. Productivity Motivation Other topics as requested .... Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Availability: 1. Business Administration MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) a. MSJC provides a Business Administration Certificate and a new Public Administration Certificate. Courses available upon request. Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) a. Any variation needed of the course work required for the credit certificate programs. Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) a. We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Office Skills Cost: MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) ao We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Availability: 1. Small Business/Entrepreneurship MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) Introduction to Business Small Business Entrepreneurship Planning for a Small Business Marketing and Managing a Small Business Financial Statements for a Small Business Introduction to International Business Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) Introduction to Small Business Management and Ownership How to Really Start your own Business The Strategy of Business Success Everything You Should Have Learned about Business but Never Did Writing your Business Plan Writing your Marketing Plan Other topics as requested .... Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Availability: 1. MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) a. MSJC has an Office Administration Certificate program. available upon request. Cost: $13 per unit 2. Courses MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) a. Any variation needed of the course work required for the credit certificate programs. Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) a. We can provide any training requested from the credit or community education options or simply developed on the individual needs of an organization. Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development if necessary. Need: Availability: 1. Employee Health/Safety/Wellness MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) ao Fundamentals of Healthful Living Family Nutrition Industrial Safety Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) go Acupressure, Tai Chi, Yoga (adult education) Pain and Stress Control Techniques Mace Certification and Defense Awareness Rape and Assault Prevention Stress Intervention with Reflexology Other topics as requested... Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 7 Need: Availability: 1. Basic Skills MSJC's Credit Program (college credit is awarded) a. Remedial Reading, Writing, and Math Classes b. English as a Second Language Cost: $13 per unit 2. MSJC's Community Education Program (not-for-credit) a. None Cost: Varies according to the content of the class. 3. MSJC's Customized Training for Business and Industry (credit or not-for-credit) a. Vocational English as a Second Language b. English as a Second Language (also offered as adult education classes) c. Vocational Basic Skills Development (Reading, Writing, and Math) Cost: Standard fees are $100/per hour and can include ancillary costs for curriculum development, assessment testing, and testing in the content areas if necessary. In addition to the credit, not-for-credit, and customized training options listed above, plans for the development ofnoncredit short term vocational classes are underway and can be developed specifically for community needs. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CALL .... DeLoise King Dean, Business and Economic Development MSJC, Lake Elsinore Center 289 San Jacinto River Road Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Phone: (909) 471-1442, ext. 202 Email: dking~msjc.cc.ca.us Pager: (909) 308~0753 Fax: (909) 654-3743 9 CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of August 26, 1997, between the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency, a municipal corporation ("Agency") and The Resource Group ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on August 26, 1997 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than March 18, 1998, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICE. Consultant shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. This amount shall not exceed Fifteen thousand seven hundred thirty dollars ($15,730.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed ten thousand dollars ($15,730.00) Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council. c. Consultant will submit invoices for services performed in accordance with Exhibit A. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSUI, TANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 8. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self- insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 0) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. f. Verification of Coverage Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shah not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 10. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 11. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: City Manager To Consultant: Esteban Soriano The Resource Group 5015 Canyon Crest Drive, Suite 107 Riverside, CA 92507 12. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Esteban Soriano shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Esteban Soriano may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Esteban Soriano from Consultant' s employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the city shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the dose of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 13. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 14. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 16. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have mused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA By Ronald E. Bradley City Manager Attest: June S. Greek City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney CONSULTANT SCOPE OF WORK PROPOSAL Labor Force Capabilities and Commute Survey 1 Initial Scope of Work Proposal The Resource Group Area Labor Force Capabilities and Commute Survey For The City of Temecula Overview. The Resource Group (TRG) proposes to undertake an area labor force capabilities and commute survey for the City of Temecula. The survey will be designed to: (1) assess the capabilities, specialties, and capabilities of the area's workforce, (2) identify the nature of jobs and professions now held by area's workforce, (3) identify the percentage of local/area residents who commute certain distances to their work, (4) note distance and commute times of area residents, and (5) learn from commuter residents the degree to which they would have some flexibility in their work and salary schedules in order to obtain similar positions more locally in order to forego their commute. These data will be useful to the City in several ways. First, they will help develop a profile of the professions, competencies, and capabilities extant in the City. Second, they will help identify the gross percentages of local residents who commute away from the City each day to work. Third, the study will help the City to better understand the flexibility local citizens would be willing to entertain to land local jobs. All of these and related data will be useful to the City for business attraction, business retention, City/regional marketing, and social service activities. TRG will work with the City to: (1) develop and refine a 2-4 minute census instrument, (2) administer that instrument to a sampling of working residents in the survey area, (3) prepare an appropriate final report, and (4) provide the City with one comprehensive debriefing. TRG is prepared to begin the project approximately July 10, 1997. Subject to the work schedules of the City and/or other project partners, a 90-day project calendar is proposed. TRG understands that it is the preference of the City that the initial survey area be identified as the boundaries of the City of Temecula and the City of Muraleta, to be known as the Temecula/Murrieta subject area. It is further understood that the City would entertain a successively larger subject area and such a discussion is presented herein. TRG proposes an essentially close-ended instrument regarding commute times, commute distances, general types of occupational positions and categories, and types and ranges of salary/benefit accommodations that would be considered in exchange for more local employment. Open-ended portions will capture specific competencies and issues. TRG proposes completing approximately 500 surveys in the subject area, with approximately 250 completed among City of Temecula residents and 250 among City of Muftieta residents. The initial budget is projected to be $14,300. This amount translates to $28.60 per completed survey among 500 surveys and includes customary costs associated with survey construction, duplication, fielding, analysis, and report production. The Approach of The Resource Group. The Resource Group will undertake the following activities: 1. Meet with the designated City project team as required in order to identify the research interests of City department stakeholders. Labor Force Capabilities and Commute Survey 2 Work with the project team to create and finalize a survey instrument, envisioned as a 2-4 minute survey, palmadly close-ended, with some open-ended response opportunities to capture specific competencies, occupational proficiencies, commuter issues, and the like. We have budgeted up to three on-site meetings and 8 service hours. Work with the City team to identify any subject area neighborhoods, demographic pockets, or specific residential areas that should receive specific focus. Pdnt sufficient copies of all census lead letters, instruments, outbound envelopes, and postage-paid return envelopes, as well as all ancillary survey materials. Complete surveys among approximately 500 wage earner residents in the subject area using any mix of fielding methodologies including: Door-to-door contact in target areas, intercept interviews at strategically located public and retail facilities, direct mail distribution, and telephone surveying. The specific mix and fielding strategies utilized will be determined by TRG. While combining these methodologies adds a few more days to the project and several percentage points more costs, the combined approach yields a much more robust and reliable (defensible) data base. Timing. The Resource Group can accommodate the launching of this effort beginning July 10, 1997. Subject to the summer schedules of City staff, we propose a 90-day project schedule and anticipate final deliverables by October 10, 1997. The City has asked requested a prospectus discussion regarding enlarging the subject area to include successively larger "geographic dngs" adjacent the Temecula/Murdeta area. Should the City wish to pursue expansion of the subject area and to pursue other sponsors and participants, this will have the effect of lengthening the time frame for deliverables by the amount of time it takes to secure additional sponsors. We suggest some flexibility in the production and deliverables schedule should this occur and declare to the City that we will work to complete the study in the shortest amount of time possible if the scope is expanded to include additional geographic areas at the preference of the City. Budget. Our initial fee proposal is $14,300 to complete approximately 500 2-4 minute surveys among resident wage earners in the Temecula/Murrieta subject area. This fee includes all normal costs associated with: · Project consultation, design, and finalization (budgeted at 6 hours max) · Survey finalization (budgeted at 8 hours over 3 sessions max) · Fielding via a mix of the above described methods (450-500 respondents) · Inputting and analysis of original data · Production of final report deliverable · 10 copies of final report · 1 camera ready hard and electronic report narrative, if requested · Total of 3 hours debriefing across up to 2 separate meetings/dates The project fee amount will be paid as follows: $10,000 $4,300 Upon project initiation and contract signing Upon submission of final report deliverables Labor Force Capabilities and Commute Survey 3 The terms of TRG are Net 15 for initiation fee and Net 30 for all other payments. All payments should be made to: The Resource Group 5015 Canyon Crest Ddve, Ste. 107 Riverside, CA 92507 Our Fed EIN: 33-0234453 Our State Certified Small Business Number: 342666 Our State Certified MBE Number: 23254 Expanding the Subject Area. The present subject area is the city areas of Temecula and Muraleta. Recognizing that wage eamer residents in adjacent, contiguous area to Temecula are part of the regional economy and indeed may prefer to work more locally, the City may consider the following expansion options: 5-Mile Expansion Ring From Temecula/Murrieta Subject Area: · Would include Wildomar and unincorporated areas adjacent Temecula/Murrieta. · Target completing 100 additional surveys from wage earners in this specific area. · Additional costs $3,900. · Total completed surveys would equal: 500 + 100 = 600. · Total project costs would equal: $14,300 + $3,900 = $18,200. · Cost per completed survey: $30.33 each. Do no recommend expanding only to 10 mile ring. Primarily unincorporated area. 15-Mile Expansion Ring From Temecula/Murrieta Subject Area: · Would additionally include Lake Elsinore, Sedco Hills, Canyon Lakes, Sun City, Quail Valley, Winchester, other unincorporated areas in addition to those above. Target completing 200 additional surveys from wage eamers in this specific area. · Total completed surveys would equal: 500 + 100 + 200 = 800. · Additional costs $7,700. · Total project costs: $14,300 + $3,900 + $7,700 = $25,900. · Cost per completed survey: $32.38 each. 20-Mile Expansion Ring From Temecula/Murrieta Subject Area: Would additionally include Perds, Good Hope, Romoland, Hemet, southern pertion of San Jacinto, other unincorporated areas in addition to those above. · Target completing 200 additional surveys from wage earners in this specific area. Total completed surveys would equal: 500 + 100 + 200 + 200 = 1,000. · Additional costs $8,700. · Total project costs: $14,300 + $3,900 + $7,700 + $8,700 - $34,600. · Cost per completed survey: $34.60 each. Bud_~et/Proiect Notes: Expanding the geographic focus of the survey necessarily increases the per unit costs. The amount of unincorporated areas, distances between population centers, continual resampling to ensure response rates, and related factors all combine to produce some minor increases in the costs associated with Labor Force Capabilities and Commute Survey completing one survey. With an increased geographic focus, we assume there will be additional partners. Thus, we have built in one additional debrief and up to 25 sets of final reports. If an expansion option is preferred, then the billing basis will change to as follows: 6O% 25% 15% Upon project initiation and contract signing Upon completion of all fielding Upon delivery of all final reports Because the City (and perhaps other sponsors) have some flexibility in determining the content and length of the survey instrument, it is understood that these two factors always influence response rates. The larger, longer, and more complex the instrument, the less number of individuals will be willing to participate. This increases fielding time and expenses. In order to contain costs within the projected budget, the City (and other sponsors) agree that the stated completion goals are approximations and that there may be variability of +/- 15% in the final number of actual completed surveys (should the length and complexity of the instrument require such flexibility). Understandings. The timeline indicated assumes that The Resource Group will have immediate and continuous access City of Temecula (and other sponsor) decision makers. The firm is prepared at all times to provide immediate service and response. Delays created by internal administrative protocols or response timing by the Agency, etc., will be added to the projected time frame. Any surveys and analytic programs that belong to the firm and are modified for this project, or that are created by the firm for this project, will be the copyrighted property of The Resource Group and the client is extended a one-time use license for this project. Thus, The Resource Group retains the dghts to all survey forms and formats created by it for use in this project. All raw and final data, all completed surveys, and all analysis, narrative, and other information generated by the assessment will be the property of the client, The City of Temecula. Thus, the City of Temecula retains the dghts to all of the odginal data produced by this effort. The client is made aware that The Resource Group is a Califomia certified small business and the provisions of California Govemment Code, Section 926.15 apply. In short, this code section indicates that a certified small business enterprise may implement a legislatively-approved and automatic penalty of 0.25 percent of the amount due per day from the required payment data for all outstanding invoices not paid by due date. This condition will be in effect. Signatures. / For the City of Temecuta: EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED & PAYMENT SCHEDULE APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Membe,r~.~~ Mary Jane McLarney, Redevelopment Director ' ~,~ '~. August 26, 1997 Monthly Departmental Report Attached for your information is the monthly report for July for the Redevelopment Department, This report covers housing, redevelopment and economic development, CITY OF TEMECULA MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Executive Director/Agency Members Mary Jane McLamey, Redevelopment Director August 26, 1997 Monthly Redevelopment Activity Report for July 1997 Prepared by: John Meyer, Housing and Redevelopment Manager HOUSING First Time Homebuyers Program · Fourteen families have been assisted and five remaining applications are pending for FY 97- 98. All $400,000 has been funded or reserved. Residential Improvement Programs · Our residential improvement program has 8 loans completed and 15 in process. Rancho Creek Apartments A Grand Re-Opening was held on August 18, 1997. The improvements include paint, new window covetings, a new tot lot, new perimeter fencing and new irrigation. The landscaping is currently being installed. Temecula O.N.E. The Temecula O.N.E. continues to work with the Pujol Street Community Enhancement Council (CEC). The Council has met several times and is working to identify issues and to find solutions in an effort to take ownership of their neighborhood revitalization. The Temecula O.N.E. video was submitted to the League of California Cities Helen Putnam Award for Excellence in August. North Pujol Redevelopment Project Staff is currently developing a work program to rehabilitate the existing 3 8 apartment units and develop 12 new units on the vacant acre of land, currently owned by the Agency. Staff has met with several developers who have shown interest in partnering with the Agency. OLD TOWN Old Town Streetscape Improvement Projects The Consultant has begun the design development phase of the project. The consultant and the Old Town Task Force is re-evaluating the boardwalk material and installation design. After the design development stages are completed (September/October), they will begin working on the construction drawings. Underground Feasibility Study Staff is reviewing the draft final report. Facade Improvement Non-Conforming Sign Program Staff' has received two new facade improvement application and has met with several other interested property and business owners. The In-Lieu Parking Fee Ordinance Planning Commission recommended approval of the in-lieu fee Ordinance revised parking calculation in Old town and a parking incentive program at its August 18th meeting. MEMORANDUM TO: Executive Director/Agency Members FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Redevelopment Director DATE: August 20, 1997 SUBJECT: Marketing Activities Report Economic Development and Tourism Update Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator The Marketing Committee meets bi-monthly. The next marketing meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, September 17, 1997 and a full marketing activities report including our partner's reports will be produced at that time. In the meantime, below is a brief summary of the marketing activities of the City that have transpired over the last month. MEDIA OUTREACH Monthly Calendar of Events and press releases continue to go out to the media. During the last few weeks we have produced articles which have appeared in the Temecula Area Report section of the Business Press and special articles under the names of Mayor Birdsall and City Manager, Ron Bradley for a special supplement to the Rancho News. TOURISM The marketing committee has formed a Super Bowl sub-committee and is strategically planning ways to attract Super Bowl attendees to visit Temecula as part of day trips from the San Diego area. Part of this plan is sponsoring "FAM" tours (familiarization tours) for destination management planners from the San Diego area. They will be visiting Temecula, specifically the wineries and Old Town, and experiencing first-hand the many amenities we offer as a tourism destination. The destination planners will then recommend Temecula to the many tourists attending the Super Bowl festivities. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The Temecula Redevelopment Agency was notified by 3CMA (City-County Communications & Marketing Association) that we received 4 SAVVY awards. There were 328 entries submitted from jurisdictions across the United States. The awards program salutes innovative and effective city/county professional through its annual SA VVYAwards Program. R:\FORMS\MEMO 8/21/97 cad Temecula was given the following awards: Gold Award Silver Award Silver Award Bronze Award Temecula Economic Development Strategic Plan Temecula Tourism Brochure Temecula CD ROM Temecula Redevelopment Video The SAVVY awards serve as a source of inspiration and insight into creative approaches that work. The awards recognize how local government professional are responding to the challenges of local government with creative tools and processes which bridge the gap between residents and government. This is Temecula's opportunity to share with our peers from across the country what we have done to develop our community's competitive edge during these challenging times. The awards will be presented at the SAVVY Awards Luncheon in the Sheraton Tacoma Hotel in Tacoma WA on Friday, September 12, 1997. The Real Estate Outlook Newsletter was sent out to commercial brokers, developers andlenders informing them of the real estate activity in Temecula. Featured in this edition were Zevo Golf, our CD ROM, the Fast Track program, speculative buildings in Temecula and business expansions and relocation. Mary Jane has been selected by the Inland Empire Economic Partnership to represent the organization and the region at the International Development Research Council Conference. Temecula is plannng different ways to reach the attendees with infomation before, during and after the conference. We have obtained a copy of the IDRC membership and have developed a database of this information which will be used to mail out copies of our Real Estate Newsletter accompanied by a personalized note from Mary Jane. We will follow-up with a letter highlighting the tourism climate along with our tourism brochure inviting them to come up for a side trip to Temecula while in San Diego. Our Right Fit direct mail program had a good response. We currently have 12 golfers signed up to play golf. We are in the process of mailing out the next group of mailers to selected Orange and Los Angeles county businesses. R:\FORMS\MEMO 8/21/97 cad ITEM 12 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager August 26, 1997 Administrative Fee for Processing Development Impact Fee Reductions Applications for Public Facilities PREPARED BY: Allie Kuhns, Senior Management Analyst~_z~ RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA IMPLEMENTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR PROCESSING APPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REDUCTIONS BACKGROUND: On May 26, 1997, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 97-09 and Resolution No 97-45, which established and implemented public facilities development impact fees (DIF) for development in the City of Temecula. This Ordinance and Resolution were revised by subsequent documents which were presented at the August 12, 1997 Council meeting. As part of the City's DIF program, developers are entitled to submit an application to receive a reduction in, or credit against, the DIF amount calculated for the proposed development. Processing of this application to determine if such a reduction/"credit" is warranted requires analysis by various City departments. Consequently, an administrative fee is deemed appropriate to cover the staff time which will be required in processing the applications. At this point, Staff is estimating that it will take the following Staff time at the actual weighted costs shown to process an application for DIF reduction: POSITION HOURS RATE TOTAL COST City Attorney 2 Community Development Director 1 Principal Engineer 2 30.00 $ 260.00 53.22 53.22 44.51 89.02 POSITION HOURS RATE TOTAL COST Senior Planner 4 37.00 148.00 Assistant Engineer 4 31.74 126.96 TOTAL COST: $ 677.20 Since the new DIF program with the new fee structure only became effective on July 26th, Staff has not had an opportunity to process enough applications to determine an exact number of hours or cost for processing the applications. Additionally, David M. Griffith & Associates (DMG) is currently conducting a "User Fee Study," which will ultimately determine the City's cost to process the DIF "credit" applications. Based on this information, Staff recommends that upon submission of an application for a reduction in DIF, developers pay a deposit of $650 per application, with the balance of the actual costs to be paid when the application process is completed. This deposit will be eliminated and an exact fee will be implemented when the User Fee Study is completed, and a definite cost can be allocated to this process. FISCAL IMPACT: It is Staff's intent that the proposed application fee will cover the cost to process applications for reduction in the DIF required to be paid by developers for particular projects. ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 97- RESOLUTION NO. 9% A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA IMPLEMENTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR PROCESSING APPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REDUCTIONS WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has established and implemented a Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (DIF) Program; and, WHEREAS, under the City's DIF Program, developers are afforded the opportunity to submit an application for a reduction in the DIF required for development; and, WHEREAS, there is a cost to the City associated with processing the application for a reduction in the DIF required for development; and, WHEREAS, Staff has estimated that the total cost for the City to process an application for reduction in DIF is approximately $650 in Staff time; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Temecula City Council hereby approves an administrative fee consisting of a deposit of $650 to be paid upon submission of an application for a reduction in public facilities development impact fees, and the balance of the actual costs to process the application to be paid upon completion of the process. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of August, 1997. ATTEST: Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor June S. Greek, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] ITEM 13 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance August 26, 1997 Community Service Funding Program Adho¢ Committee PREPARED BY: Linda Norton, Administrative Secretary~ RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1) Review and approve the Community Service Funding (CSFunding) Program application changes for FY 1997-98; and 2) Appoint two Council members to serve on the CSFunding Program Adhoc Committee which will review and approve applicants to that program. DISCUSSION: Each year the City solicits applications for funding requests from community based non-profit organizations. Prior to making Community Service Funding Program applications available this year, City staff reviewed the program policy in an effort to clarify the funding requirements. On July 14, the revised application was forwarded to the Finance Committee, comprised of Jeff Stone and Karel Lindemans, for review and input. The Committee suggested a limit of $5,000 per grant award to allow as many organizations as possible to participate in the City's program. This proposed funding maximum of $5,000 has been incorporated into the CSFunding eligibility, and other minor changes are indicated on the attached "redlined" application packet. Also, at the request of Councilmember Roberts, Staff reviewed the video tape of the September 24, 1996 Council Meeting when the 1996-97 CSFunding grant requests were considered. At that meeting, Councilmember Stone stressed that the grant money was not intended to be perpetual and that local organizations need to become self-sufficient. Councilmember Roberts did express a concern about beginning the 1997-98 CSFunding year with $83,750 instead of $100,000, as the Temecula Valley In-Line Hockey Association (TVlHA) was advanced $16,250 from the 1997-98 program year. Councilmember Roberts directed Staff to try to find an alternate funding source, such as a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), for the TVIHA. Staff met with the Riverside County Economic Development Agency to discuss CDBG funding for this program, however, the TVlHA did not meet the strict requirements of their program. R: [NOR TONI IA GENDA Sl CSFADHO C.A GN 08/19/97 However, in the 1997-98 budget year the Council allocated funding for the Temecula Valley Arts Council and Temecula Valley Playhouse on separate line items thereby expanding the amount available to other non-profit organizations. Community Service Funding Program applications will be made available to the public as soon as these changes are approved. Completed applications will be due 30 days after the release of the applications and will be reviewed by the appointed adhoo committee soon thereafter. Staff is now requesting that the City Council select two members of the Council to participate in the one-meeting review of these applications. The committee will be dissolved upon completion of the review process. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Attachment Draft (redlined copy) 1997-98 Community Service Funding Program Application CITY OF TEMECULA ii~!111i~:.~1!]~i..~:~ 1997-98 Community Services Funding Program Policy The City of Temecula, in its Fiscal Year ii~.!.'11..~i..9..'11.6..'~i:~ii:~ 1997-98 budget, has allocated funds for community service programs within the :~...'..!~:,i"~'~11~:'::~..i~ii":./~i City of Temecula. Purpose To establish a process and evaluation criteria for funding requests received by the City from community based organizations (CBO's) during the application period and throughout the year. General Policy The City receives requests throughout the year for financial assistance from various organizations which provide a variety of services within the community. It is the City's policy to channel such requests through an annual review, thereby ensuring that all requests are evaluated equitably and consistently; to enter into agreements for specific measurable services; and, to ensure that recipients are held accountable for providing the agreed upon services within the appropriate time frame. Funding Philosophy Requests for funding received from CBO's will be considered annually. Due to limited resources, not all requests "~'~...e"i..:'~'i~i~?'V~......'~i~.i~i can be funded. Therefore, it is not the City Council's intention to fund each CBO request received; but rather, to evaluate each proposal and, based on available funds, provide money and other forms of financial assistance to those organizations which most effectively serve the needs and improve the well-being of the residents of Temecula. Special consideration will be given to proposals which replace or enhance services the City is responsible for providing. The City Council encourages a goal of self-sufficiency for all local CBO's. The City Council supports providing grant money to established organizations that are effective in raising funds and volunteer services within ~"~i~.~111~i:~;~iii~'~i~"~':ii'"'~. "e~1111:~111"~':'~' ~:~;;~.~.:...r.~......~:~i.~/.~...~..~.~`..~i~.!! ~?~..o.~i;;~;;;~;;;;~;~;~;d;;~;~;d;;;~:~;~;(;~[;~:~;s:~;;;;;t;~ the community, but discourages an over-reliance on City financial assistance to maintain such programs on an on-going basis. Therefore, all CBO's requesting funding from the City should continue efforts to develop stable private funding sources. A: t$6CSFI CSF969 ?. A PP 8/20/97 Community Services Funding Program/Policy (Continued) Page 2 FLIGIBILITY Applications are accepted from tax exempt, nonprofit organizations and individuals for the funding of projects which occur during the fiscal year, funding. Services should benefit the City of Temecula. Maximum award of $5,000 available. A written report should be presented to the City Council thirty 130) days after the completion of the project. In the case of an extended project, interim reports may be required. Proper documentation to substantiate the funds received by the City should be provided, as soon as they are expended prior to June 30, 1998. Failure to provide proper documentation may jeordardize any future funding. DFADLINES July ::!21:2!!717:?:i1!71.~9111(~ 98, 1997 - Applications available from the City of Temecula. August :.2:~!:ii:.;!::i:~::i~i~111(~: 30, 1997 - Deadline for submittal of application for funding period. Award recipients will be announced in ii.i~i:i~11~11'~i'11~...~i~ ""/:~....."... '~ November 1997. CRITERIA In making its recommendations to the City Council for funding, the Community Services Funding Adhoc Committee will consider the following criteria: A:t96CSF[CSF969 ?.A?P Does the organization provide Community service excellence? What is the size and make-up of the community service organization? What is the public and critic reaction to the group? Does the organization have a high quality of fiscal management? Will the organization have longevity in the City of Temecula? Has the organization been granted non-profit status? 8/2 0/9 7 Community g. h. Services Funding Program/Policy (Continued) Page 3 Is there evidence of satisfactory service provided to City's citizens? :~.:~i~ Is the organization free from :id'..i~i~ii:ii~111~i~ discrimination based on race, color, creed, nationality, sex, marital status, disability, religion, or political affiliation? i~ii~'~ii~i~::.~:'.~ Does the organization ::~i::~:i':6:.'~!::I:~'::~i~i~ require attendance or participation in any political, religious or social activity? ~i~ii~'~i~i.5:.::':~:~ Can the organization provide financial statements 1prepared if(using an appropriate method of accounting) to demonstrate sound financial management? ::.~i~ Can the organization provide a budget for the fiscal year of request demonstrating cost-effectiveness? ?[~!~ Does the organization provide a high level of access to services offered? Does the organization possess ongoing program evaluation tools? A:I96CSF~CSF$697. APP 8/20/97 CITY OF TEMECULA ;11~;i.i~ii.~i~:~i~ii~ 1997-98 COMMUNITY SERVICES FUNDING PROGRAM APPLICATION (Please Print or Type) Amount Requested: $ Project Name: Project Starting Date: Project Ending Date: (Maximum allowable $5.000) ORGANIZATION'S BACKGROUND: Name of Organization: Mailing address: Telephone: Number of paid staff Geographic area(s) served Year Founded Number of volunteers Is this organization incorporated in California as a non-profit organization7 Yes No Effective Date: If "yes": Date of incorporation as a non-profit Federal identification number State identification number *Include a copy of your statement of non-profit status from the State of California If "no": Name of sponsoring organization Federal identification number State identification number This application has been authorized by the organization's: Executive Committee Board of Directors Members-at-large A: [96CSFt CSF969 ?.APP 8/20/97 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Based on your organization's last fiscal year) Page 2 Balance Sheet as of Asset Cash and Investments Receivables (detail) Liabilities & Investments Current payables $ Notes Payable Inventory Fixed Assets Other Assets Total Assets Fund Balance Total Liability Fund Balance Income Statement for the Year Ended Income Expenses Fundraising $ Salaries Foundation grants $ Operating expenses United Way t~ Community services Government Funds $ Amount sent to national/parent organization Other sources $ Other expenses Please note with an asterisk (*) any amounts that require additional explanation, and comment on these items. In addition, please attach the organization's most recent treasurer's report, financial statements and footnotes. (It does not require a CPA's audit, but please submit if available.) A:[96CSFICSF9697. APP 8/20/97 Your Organization's Mission: Page 3 Briefly describe the goals and objectives of your organization. in general, and the major community services it provides. Include discussion regarding the specific ways your organization meets the City's criteria listed on page 2, 11:196CSF~CSF9697. APP 8/20/97 Project(s) Requesting Funding Page 4 How will your organization use any funding awarded? Give the project's objectives, number of persons served, area where services are provided, and number of volunteers involved. Be specific. Note any equipment or services that the award money would purchase and why it is needed. Include a detailed budget and a schedule of significant activities related to this project. Attach a maximum of one double-spaced typewritten page of information if you need to expand your answer beyond this space. (Please type or print legibly.) 11:196CSF~CSF969?.A?P 8/20/97 Project(s) Requesting Funding Page 5 We hereby certify the information contained in this application is true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Preparer: NAME AND TITLE (Please Print or Type) AND President or Authorized Officer: NAME AND TITLE (Please Print or Type) (Organization Name) (Mailing Address of Organization) (Telephone) (Date) ~'~Mail ......Completed Application to: City of Temecula Finance Department Community Services Funding Program P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Or Deliver in Person to: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula. CA 92590 A:[96CSF[CSF9697. APP 8/20/97 ITEM 14 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance August 26, 1997 Arts Council of Temecula Valley Community Service Funding Request RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review and consider the Arts Council of Temecula Valley funding request for their community service programs. DISCUSSION: The Arts Council of Temecula Valley is a not-for-profit organization established in 1989 for the purpose of promoting: 2. 3. 4. 5. Growth of visual and performing arts in the community, Individual arts and arts organizations, Networking for coordination and sharing of resources, Construction of facilities for the performing arts, and Publicity of arts and cultural activities in Temecula Valley. This organization is comprised of more than 300 volunteers who are dedicated to providing quality arts programs in the Temecula Valley. The Arts Council meets at least twice yearly with representatives from 26 art organizations in the Temecula Valley to determine how they can provide better service to those organizations. The Arts Council meets with an outside group of representative citizens in Temecula to conduct strategic planning sessions and to track progress in meeting previously established goals. In the past the City has funded the Arts Council with the following amounts: Fiscal Year Ending Grant Amount 1992 $30,000 1993 20,000 1994 12,000 1995 15,000 1996 15,000 1997 12,500 In prior years, the Arts Council has used City's funds primarily for the Concert on the Green and the Arts Festival of Temecula Valley. R: [N 0 R TON L I,~ G END,4 S I CS F.4 C TV 1. WPD 0814/9 7 The Arts Council has submitted a 1997-98 funding request for 838,000 for various programs which are detailed in the attached application and are outlined below: 2. 3. 4. Concert on the Green - 812,000 Temecula Valley Arts Festival - 810,000 Preparation of Temecula Community Cultural Plan - 810,000 Grants to other arts organizations (to be matched by Arts Council) - 86,000 The issues relating to the formation of an Arts Commission and the development of a Cultural Plan will be brought back to council within the next 60 days per previous council direction. The Arts Council has proposed to prepare a cultural plan using volunteers from the community at an estimated cost of $10,000. If the City proceeds with a study for the development of a Cultural Plan, the Arts Council request for 810,000 would not be necessary. However, in 1994, the City of Long Beach had a cultural plan developed at a cost of 890,000. Accordingly, because Temecula is a smaller city, it is estimated that such a study could cost the City approximately $70,000 to 890,000 in today's dollars. FISCAL IMPACT: $15,000 has been appropriated in the 1997-98 Community Support budget for the Arts Council funding. An additional appropriation from General Fund Reserves will be required for any funding approved beyond the 815,000 budgeted amount. Attachment: Application R: tNOR TONL IA GENDA S I CSFA C TV. A GN BUDGET FUNDING REQUEST TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA CITY OF T~2~jLA JUL 2 4 1997 Oe:'Am E THE ARTS COUNCIL OF TEMECULA VALLEY respectfully requests funding, as a budget line item, from the City of Temecula, in the amount of: $38,000 for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1997, in order to provide services to the City, as outlined below. Our budget request for $38,000 is for the following purposes: · Concert on the Green - $12,000 · Temecula Valley Arts Festival - $10,000 · Preparation of Temecula Community Cultural Plan - $10,000 · Grants to other arts organizations (to be matched by Arts Council) - $6,000 At the September 24, 1996 City Council meeting, Council member Roberts raised the issue of Community Service Funding and stated that organizations such as the Arts Council should have a separate budget line item. On January 26, 1997, members of the Arts Council met with the Assistant City Manager and presented a written request for a budget line item in the amount of $38,000. At the March 18, 1997 Coundl meeting, the Council unanimously approved a motion to direct staff to create a budget line item for the Arts Council of Temecula Valley. At the time of presentation of the 1997-98 Budget to the City Council, there was a line item included in the Budget in the amount of $296,000 for Community Development. We were informed at that time that this figure included $15,000 for the Arts Council. On further inquiry, we were informed by the Assistant City Manager that this figure was simply a "place holder" for the Arts Council, and the actual amount of funding would be determined at a later date by the City Council. The City Manager specifically stated in his presentation to the City Council that the budget contained a "place holder" for the Arts Council. Further details of this request are provided in the format requested by the City on the attached pages. Thank you for your consideration. Jerrold Novotney, President The Arts Council of Temecula Valley CITY OF TEMECULA 1997-98 BUDGET FUNDING REQUEST Amount Requested: $38,000 Project Name: Please see cover sheet Project Starting Date: July 1, 1997 Project Ending Date: June 30, 1998 ORGANIZATION'S BACKGROUND: Name of Organization: The Arts Council of Temecula Valley Mailing address: P.O. Box 2337, Temecula, CA 92593 Physical office address: 27500 Jefferson Ave., Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: (909) 695-ARTS Year Founded: 1989 Number of paid staff: None Number of Volunteers: Approximately 300 Geographic area(s) served: City of Temecula and the Temecula Valley Is this organization incorporated in Califomia as a non-profit organization? Yes If 'yes": If "no": Date of incorporation as a non-profit: August 1, 1989 Federal identification number. 33-0364524 State identification number: 2465903 *Include a copy of your statement of non-profit status from the State of Califomia Name of sponsoring organization: Not applicable Federal identification number: Not applicable State identification number: Not applicable This application has been authorized by the organization's: Executive Committee: Yes Board of Directors: Yes Members at large: Not applicable FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Based on your organization's last fiscal year) Balance sheet as of December 31, 1996 Assets Cash and Investments $50,347.67 Receivables (detail) none Inventory none Fixed Assets 1,425.27 Other Assets none Total Assets $51,772.54 Liabilities and Investments Current payables none Notes Payable none Fund Balance $51,772.54 Total Liability & Fund Balance $51,772.54 Income Statement for the Year Ended December 31, 1996 Income Fundraiser receipts Public 8uppo~Contdbutions City of Temecula Grant Admissions/Ticket Sales Other income Total income Expenses $11,350.00 Fundraiser expenses $ 6,773.44 $t5,258.00 Operating Expenses $ 3,369.27 $12,500.00 Community Service $34,523.77 $ 6,340.25 Salaries none $ 1.670.72 Other expenses none $47,118.97 Total expenses $44,666.48 Please note with an astedsk (*) any amounts that require additional explanation, and comment on these items. None required In addition, please attach the organization's most recent treasurer's report, financial statements and footnotes. Reports enclosed Your Organization's Mission: Page 3 Briefly describe the goals and objectives of your organization and the major community services it provides. Include discussion regarding the specific ways your organization meets the City's criteria listed on page 2. Purposes of the Arts Council are to: · Stimulate the growth of visual and performing arts in the community · Promote and facilitate arts education · Assist individual artists and arts organizations · Create a network for coordination and sharing of resources · To encourage construction of facilities for the performing arts · To publicize arts and cultural activities in the Temecula Valley Criteria: ao Does the organization provide Community service excellence? By conservative count, more than 10,000 people will have attended activities sponsored in whole or in part by the Arts Council in 1997. A current list of 1997 Calendar of Activities is included with this proposal. We anticipate that approximately $18,000 will be received in voluntary donations from individuals and organizations. "Excellence" is a subjective term, but the numbers speak for themselves. What is the size and makeup of the community service organization? There are t9 members on the Board of Trustees and at least 300 volunteers who contribute to the activities. The Arts Council of Temecula Valley is an entirely volunteer organization and does not employ any paid staff members. Go What is the public and critic reaction to the group? Please see "a", above. At last count, news print in column-inches devoted to Arts Council activities for a period of one year exceeded the length of a football field. Comments have ranged from favorable to exuberant. We are unaware of any negative press. Does the organization have a high quality of fiscal management? Budgeting and accounting has been performed, since inception, by members of a CPA staff, although the format has not been presented with reports per AICPA criteria. The financial figures, presented on page 2 of this request, provide evidence of the quality of fiscal management. Will the organization have longevity in the City of Temecula? The Arts Council of Temecula Valley was incorporated in 1989, before the City was formed. We have been designated by the City Council as the lead arts organization for the City. Does the organization have proper authorized non-profit status? The Arts Council of Temecula Valley has been designated a 501 (c)(3) Charitable non-profit organization by the IRS and a 23701d tax-exempt organization by the State of California. Is there evidence of satisfactory service provided to City's citizens? See items a. and c. above. ho Is the organization free from discrimination based on race, color, creed, nationality, sex, marital status, disability, religion or political affiliation? Yes Does the organization require attendance or participation in any political, religious or social activity? No Can the organization provide financial statements (prepared using an appropriate method of accounting) to demonstrate sound financial management? Yes. Statements have been provided to the City for past years. A statement is enclosed for the current period from January 1 to June 30, 1997. ko Can the organization provide a budget for the fiscal year of request, demonstrating cost effectiveness? Yes. This budget was presented to the Assistant City Manager in January, with our original request for $38,000. A copy is enclosed. Does the organization provide a high level of access to the services offered? Yes. As indicated in question a., approximately 10,000 persons will attend this year. Does the organization possess ongoing program evaluation tools? Each year the President prepares a wdtten statement of goals at the beginning of the year and an evaluation at the end of the year. Chair persons of events each year conduct written self-evaluations, which are reviewed by the Board of Trustees. The Arts Council meets at least twice yearly with representatives of 26 art organizations in the Temecula Valley to determine how we can provide better service to them. The Council meets with an outside group of representative citizens in Temecula to conduct strategic planning sessions and to track progress in meeting previously established goals. Projects Requesting Funding Page 4 How will your organization use any funding awarded? Give the projects objectives, number of persons served, area where services are provided, and number of volunteers involved. Be specific. Note any equipment or services that the award money would purchase and why it is needed. Include a detailed budget and a schedule of significant activities related to this project. Attach a maximum of one double spaced typewritten page of information if you need to expand your answer beyond this space. Concert on the Green - $12,000 Ever since its inception, the Concert on the Green, on the lawn at the Embassy Suites has been the most popular cultural activity held in Temecula. For the past three years, attendance has exceeded 2000 persons. Our contract with the Riverside Philharmonic will be approximately $10,000. Additional costs will cover tent and sanitation rentals, sound and advertising. Depending on decisions to be made by the City, we may have additional costs for traffic control and parking. We have no income from this event, although we are seeking additional sponsors. ~ ~ f.~ ~ - Temecula Valley Arts Festival - $10,000 The Temecula Valley Arts Festival will soon become one of the more respected cultural activities in Southern California. This is no longer just a production of the Arts Council, but rather, it is produced by many different organizations in the Temecula Valley. ~ ~ f.~ ~ '~' included nine separate events produced by nine organizations that are receiving support from the Arts Council. These included Fine Arts Network, Temecula Vintage Singers, Joya Dance Ensemble, Hedtage Duo, Temecula Valley Art League, Wolf Valley, Community Music Center, Temecula Valley Film Council and the CRC Foundation. The Arts Council received no income from this event, other than from sponsors, since all ticket sales were passed on to the participating organizations. Not including the thousands who attended Taste of the Valley, we averaged over 300 persons attending each event. The net cost of this event to the Arts Council was approximately $10,000, (less than our budget of $11,000) but substantially more than this was realized by the participating organizations. Our investment had a multiplying effect. Temecula Community Cultural Plan - $10,000 Most communities who have interest in the Arts have a Community Cultural Plan. This is evidenced by the fact that neither the California Arts Foundation nor most private foundations will consider providing grants to lead arts organizations such as the Arts Council unless their community has a cultural plan. A cultural plan will provide a positive economic effect as more cultural and entertainment dollars are kept at home in Temecula, and as more business moves to Temecula because of the perceived quality of life generated by cultural activities. If the City were to develop their own plan it would cost between $25,000 and $50,000. We intend, using volunteers, including City staff member John Meyer (acting as a private citizen) to develop a drall plan at no cost. We need the City's financial backing to obtain community input and approval of the plan. Grants to other arts organizations - $6,000 As part of its mission to assist artists and art organizations in the Temecula Valley, the Arts Council has organized an Arts Advisory Board consisting of representatives of different arts organizations. 26 different organizations have participated. Some of these groups are badly in need of funds to continue their activities. The Arts Council is requesting $6,000 in funds from the City, which we will match in order to provide $12,000 in funding for these groups. We believe this will relieve the City of some funding requests from the Community Services Funding Program. We intend to utilize a similar format to this one in analyzing individual funding requests. Project(s) Requesting Funding Page 5 We hereby certify the information contained in this application is true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Preparer: AND President or Authorized Officer. James A. Meyler, EA, Treasurer Dr. Jerrold Novotney, President Arts Council of Temecula Valley P.O. Box 2337 Temecula, CA 92593 Telephone - (909) 695-ARTS FAX - (909) 695-9438 Email - temarts~.pe.net Web - www.apsm.com/arts July 20, 1997 1997 CALENDAR OF ACTIVITIES Scholarship Grants to Music Students Valentine Concert by UC Irvine Chamber Choir/Murrieta Valley High Chamber Choir Chamber Music Series Arts In the Country '97/Arts Festival Scholarship Grant/Student at Idyllwild Arts Summer Program Summer Arts Instimte/Temecula Valley High School Childrens Art Walk/Tiles Summer Park Concert Series/Sam Hicks Park Mayor's Ball Friends of the Arts Reception Concert-on-the-Green Idyllwild Concert Madrigal Dinner City Council Music Series Rotating Art through City Hall Art Classes Art Events Calendar Art in Public Places Feb 15th Last Sat of Month (Jan. - June) May 30th - June 8th July 6th - July 19th July 7th - 17th July 12th July 13th, Aug. 10th, Sept. 14th August 16th August 25th September 21 st November 12th December 7th 1st & 3rd Tuesday changed quarterly Chapparal High School, Temecula Valley High School, CRC 07/07/97 ARTS COUNCIL OF TEMECULA Balance Sheet As of June 30, 1997 ASSETS Current Assets Checking/Savings Checking-lst Pacific CD's-First Pacific 15 Month CD-due 9-4-98 CID - Due 9-24-97 CID - due 9-24-97 Total CD's-First Pacific Jun 30, '97 9,335.51 14,508.27 8,639.65 8,639.65 31,787.57 Total Checking/Savings 41,123.08 Total Current Assets Fixed Assets Art Objects Furniture & Equipment Total Fixed Assets 41,123.08 902.42 2,305.87 3,208.29 TOTALASSETS LIABILITIES & EQUITY Equity Retained Earnings Net Income Total Equity 44,331.37 51,772.54 -7,441.17 44,331.37 TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY 44,331.37 Page 1 07~07~97 ARTS COUNCIL OF TEMECULA Profit and Loss January through June 1997 Income Admissions/Ticket Sales Contribution Income Interest Income-Checking Interest Income-Savings Miscellaneous Income Poster/Picture Sales Total Income Expense Advertising/Printing Bank/Finance Charges Dues and Subscriptions Equipment Rental Food/Dinner Costs Grants to Arts Insurance Maintenance Supplies/Office Expense Performers/Services/Judge Postage Arts Festival Posters Printing and Reproduction Prizes/Awards Professional Fees Facility/Equipment Rent Repairs Security Supplies and Decorations Taxes Technician Expense Telephone Total Expense Jan-Jun'97 3,894.00 1 O, 332. O0 77.11 903.90 9.00 190.00 15,406.01 2,516.97 46.40 75.00 300.00 172.50 5,140.37 1,612.90 62.00 577.81 1,714.00 1,273.26 1,929.80 3,803.39 -75.00 500.00 1,080.86 55.00 760.00 745.37 46.00 70.00 440.55 22,847.18 Net Income -7,441.17 Page 1 ARTS COUNCIL Arts Council of Temecula Valley, Inc. - P.O.Box 2337, Temecula, CA 92593 - (909) 695-ARTS Ms. Mary Jane McLarney, Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 January 26,1997 Dear M. J., At the September 24 City Council meeting, Council member Roberts raised the issue of Community Service Funding. He stated that the City should reevaluate the ground rules for allocation of funding. Shortly thereafter, in separate meetings with then-Mayor Lindemans and Council member Stone, I was told that they favored a line item allocation of grants to the Arts Council as the City's lead arts organization, rather than the present system. Council member Stone again repeated this statement at a recent meeting with the Arts Council Board of Trustees. The purpose of this letter is to request an allocation of $38,000 for the Arts Council of Temecula Valley for the City's fiscal year beginning July 1, 1997. We are enclosing a copy of the Arts Council's proposed budget. As detailed in the notes on page 2 of the budget, the intent of this request is to provide $12,000 for the Concert on the Green, $10,000 for the Arts Festival, $6,000 for other arts organizations and $10,000 to start the mechanism for a cultural plan for the Temecula Valley. You will note from the budget that we receive no income except from the City to offset approximately $12,000 expenses for C0n.c.ert on the Green. We anticipate little income from admission sales for the Arts. F'. estival,' because we want to assist other arts organizations by allowing them to sell tickets and retain the receipts for their individual events. We had planned to include an amount for the Playhouse, but they have told us they would prefer to work directly with the City. We would match the $6,000 grant for other arts organizations with another $6,000.'. from our own funds, to provide $12,000 for funding of some 26 arts organizations we are now working with in this community. We believe it is important to develop a community cultural plan for the Temecula Valley. We intend to do much of the work ourselves, but we need financial assistance to obtain a needs assessment in order to validate such a plan. Thank you for your assistance. We will be pleased to discuss this request with you at your convenience. Sincerely, Jerrold Novotney, President ~ o o ~ 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 1.0 I.~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 O~l O~ 0 w- 0 0 0 -- O~ O~ 000 0 0 000 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 ~.1 ~1' ~0 ~-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 000 0 0 0 O0 000 0 000 0 000 0 0 0 O~ 00~ ~ ~0 ~ 000 0 0 ~ ~ ~0~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 00000 000 00000 000 00000 000 000~ ,,,oo 000000 000000 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00000000 000000000000 00000~000000 ~0~0000~0000 ~0~ ~000~ ~0~~0~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO ~ (~1 U~ w~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ tO 0 0 tO 0~1 tO LO w-- O~ ~- 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 14) .v-- w- w-- eO eO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ~o_~n~- ARTS COUNCIL OF TEMECULA July 15, 1997 BOARD OF TRUSTEES VALLEY Robert and Theresa Kirkpatrick Work 676-6664 Ext 388 Home 694-1125 30250 Santiago Road Temecula, CA 92592 Members 1/97 Albert and Grace Ball Home 676-2159 31836 Corte Mendoza Temecula, CA 92592 Members 1/96 John and Theresa Bell Home 677-2454 37527 Vineyard Knoll Dr. Murrieta, CA 92562 Members 4/96 Angela Morris-Myers 699-5279 Fax 693-2745 42377 Via Azalea Temecula, CA 92590 ....... Secretary - Member 1996 Thomas and Maryann Edwards Home 699-2332 32094 Corte Carmona Temecula, CA 92592 Members 5/95 Ms. Jo Anne Flowers Work 694-9866 Fax 694-6198 27940 Diaz Rd Suite B Temecula, CA 92590 Member 1994 Randy and Diane Holland 693-1979 Temecula Art Gallery 42031 Main St Temecula, CA. 92590 Vice President - Members 1/96 Eve Craig Home 699-9872 42960 Calle Reva Temecula CA. 92592 Members 1992 James and Dorothy Meyler Home676-6069 Work699-1040 Fax 699-1226 29930 Santiago Rd. Temecula, CA 92592 Treasurer- Member 1989 Paul and Helen Miller Home 698-1666 39517 Cedarwood Dr. Murrieta, CA 92563 Members 1994 Jo Moulton Home 699-8681 Council 699-6267 41391 Avenida de la Riena Temeeula, CA 92592 Member 1992 Jerrold and Patricia Novotney Home 694-0222 Work 694-5203 37433 Avenida Chapala Temecula, CA 92592 President- Members 1992 Ms. Karen Parrott Home 677-7278 Pager 1-800-993-4535 40480 Cardgan Road Murrieta, CA 92562 Member 8/96 Clarence and Doris Royer Home 699-8317 30932 Corte de los Santo Temecula, CA. 92592 Members 1994 Carol Jones Home 676-1235 Work 693-1280 Fax 693-4058 44065 Highlander Dr. Temecula, CA. 92592 Member 1997 Joe and Janet Tosches Home 698-2587 23919 Corte Emerado Murrieta Ca. 92562 Members 1994 Bruce Singer Home 677-6407 Fax 693-0554 28845 Calle Alta Murrieta, CA 92563 Member 3/1997 Richard and Barbara Keen Home 698-1577 40169 Corte Peralta Murrieta, CA 92562 Members 3/1997 Zev and Vilma Buffinan Home 677-1177 40576 Via Herradura Murrieta, CA 92562 Board Consultants Bob and Johann Biro Home 676-3344 31953 Calle Espinoza Temecula, CA 92592 Board Consultants [- ITEM 15 APPROVAl, DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance August 26, 1997 Temecula Valley Playhouse Community Service Funding Request RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider a $15,000 funding request from the Temecula Valley Playhouse for their community service programs. DISCUSSION: The Temecula Valley Playhouse is a not-for-profit organization established in 1983. Since that time the Playhouse has provided a high quality community theater by using numerous volunteers and community donations. This organization provides important, valuable services to all age groups in our community. Educational Services: Since 1990 the Playhouse has provided community service hours to local high school students assisting them in fulfilling their graduation requirements. Individual Improvement: Both young and old individuals improve themselves by participating in Playhouse productions while learning important academic and social skills such as: teamwork, communication, accountability, public speaking, respect, commitment and patience. These skills lead to improved self-esteem and confidence which in turn helps improve the quality of the community as individual citizens grow in a positive, proactive environment. Cultural Amenity: The Playhouse is a community theater in the Temecula Valley area that is for all ages, regardless of sex, race, or religion. The Playhouse provides a community service that offers inexpensive fun, live entertainment, presented by family members, friends and neighbors of residents of the City of Temecula. In the future, the Temecula Valley Playhouse plans to: become self sufficient; implement a marketing program to reach surrounding communities; introduce scholarship funds for the Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore school districts; obtain corporate sponsors and members to improve the short term revenue and volunteer support base. R: [NOR TONL 1.4 GEND.4 S[ CSFTVP..4 GN 0810419 7 The City of Temecula has supported the Playhouse annually through the City's Community Service Funding Program. Below is a schedule of the prior funding allocated to the Playhouse: Fiscal Year Ending Grant Amount 1992 $10,000 1993 10,000 1994 8,500 1995 15,000 1996 15,000 1997 12,500 In prior years, the Playhouse has used its funding for the replacement of sound equipment, replacement of seating, cleaning the air ducts and heating system, repair of lighting equipment, and operating expenses of the facility. The Playhouse is requesting $15,000 for FY 1997-98 for the purpose of assisting the organization with its annual operating costs associated with theater productions. During the coming year, the Playhouse anticipates six to eight theatrical shows and two to four one-act plays. The Playhouse utilizes more than 150 volunteers during the year. The Playhouse annual budgeted operating costs exceed $44,000, however; the Playhouse is requesting a grant award of $15,000 as already budgeted by Council. FISCAL IMPACT: fund this request. $15,000 is included in the FY 1997-98 Community Support budget to Attachment: Application R: ~NOR TONL b4 GENDA SI CSFTVP.~tGN 08/04/97 CITY OF TEMECULA JUL 2 1 1997 FINANCE DEPARTMENT APPLICA T/ON FOR COMMUNITY SER VICES FUNDING PROGRAM SUBMITTED B Y TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE CITY OF TEMECULA 1997-98 COMMUNITY SERVICES FUNDING PROGRAM APPLICATION (Please Print or Type) Amount Requested: $ 15,000 Project Name: TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE Project Starting Date: JULY 1997 Project Ending Date: CONT[NUOUS ORGANIZATION'S BACKGROUND: Name of Organization: TEHECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE Mailing address: P0 BOX Telephone: 909-676-0775 Number of paid staff none Geographic area(s) served 74 Year Founded 1982 100 - Number of volunteers TEHECULA VALLEY 150 Is this organization incorporated in California as a non-profit organization? XX Yes XX No Effective Date: JUNE 10, 1983 If "yes": Date of incorporation as a non-profit JUNE 10, 1983 33-0008806 Federal identification number State identification number 1144097 *Include a copy of your statement of non-profit status from the State of California. If "no": Name of sponsoring organization Federal identification number State identification number This application has been authorized by the organization's: Executive Committee Board of Directors xx Members-at-large R:iNORTONLICSFi9798APp. WPD 7/14/97 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Based on your organization's last fiscal year) *Please see attached Balance Sheet and P& L statenent. Balance Sheet as ot Asset Liabilities & Investments Cash and Investments Receivables (detail) Current payables $ Notes Payable Inventory Fixed Assets Other Assets Total Assets Fund Balance Total Liability & $ Fund Balance $ Page 2 Income Statement for the Year Ended Income Fxl;)enses Fundraising $ Salaries $ Foundation grants $ Operating expenses $ United Way $ Community services $ Government Funds $ Amount sent to national/parent organization $ Other sources $ Other expenses $ Please note with an asterisk (*) any amounts that require additional explanation, and comment on these items. In addition, please attach the organization's most recent treasurer's report, financial statements and footnotes. (It does not require a CPA's audit, but please submit if available.) R: INORTONLI CSF~9798~APP. WPD 7/14/97 TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE BALANCE SHEET .JUNE 30, 1997 ASSETS Current Assets CheckingIS avings Checking Checking-Misc. Total Checking/Savings Total Current Assets Fixed Assets Equipment Tenant Improvements Depreciation Ori9inal Cost Total Fixed Assets TOTALASSETS 1,999.04 2.99 2,002.03 2,fi02.03 27,627.81 60,052.18 (14,636.04) 87,679.99 __ 7_5_,045.98_ LIABILITIES & EQUITY Liabilities Current Liabilities Other Current Liabilities Bob & Jeanie Burns Total Current Liabilities Equity Opening Balance Equity Net Income Total Equity 15,950,d0 15,g50.00 67,043.16 (7,947.18) 59,095.98 Total Liabilities & Equity 75,045.98 TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT JUNE 30, 1997 INCOME Contributions Donations Fundraisers Grants Misc. Program Fees Ticket Sales EXPENSES Advertising Cast Gifts Costumes Dues/Subscriptions Fundraisers Insurance Licenses/Permits Misc. Music Office Supplies Opening Night Exp Postage And Delivery Rent Royalties Scripts Sets/Props Refreshments Telephone Utilites Depreciation Other Expenses 4,500.00 2,852.00 15,745.00 12,500.00. ld.21 100.00 21,891 57,599.01 483.14 73.27 1,088.93 70.00 14,025.46 711.12 14.00 349.35 2,265.00 74.09 633.30 569.51 18,999.93 9,564.12 481.94 972.02 389.01 812.53 3,582.54 8,768 .O4 1 ,§18.89_ 65,546.19 Net Income (7,947.18) Your Organization's Mission: Page 3 Briefly describe the goals and objectives of your organization in general, and the major community services it provides. Include discussion regarding the specific ways your organization meets the City's criteria listed on page 2. * Please see attached "Mission Statement", exhibit 'A'. * In addition to this Mission Statement, it is important to note several areas in which Temecula Valley Playhouse benefits our community: °Since 1990, TVP HAS PROVIDED COUNTLESS COMMUNITY SERVICE HOURS TO THE LOCAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ASSISTING THEM IN FULFILLING THEIR GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS. °TVP HAS PROVIDED THE TFEATRE FACILITY FOR THE PRDUCTION OF "NUTCRACKER, TF~ MUSICAL" WHICH HAS TF~ O~JECTIVE OF INCLUDING DISABLED CHILDREN ~ OPPORTUNITY TO PERFORM. (please see exhibit 'B') °AS INOIVIDUALS, BOTH YOUNG ANO OLD I~ROVE ~SELVES BY PARTICIPATING IN TVP PRODUCTIONS BY LEARNING I~F~RTANT SOCIAL ANO ACADEMIC SKILLS SUCH AS: T~RK, COMqUNICATION, ACCOUNTABILITY, PUBLIC-SPEAKING, RESPECT, COM~Ill~NT AND PATIENCE. THESE SKILLS LEAD TO IMPROVED SELF ESTEEM AND CONFIDENCE WHICH IN TURN F~LPS I~ROVE THE QUALITY OF OUR COMqUNITY AS OUR INOIVIDUAL CITIZENS GROW IN A POSITIVE, PRO-ACTIVE ENVIRON~--NT. °TVP IS TF~ ONLY CCMqUNITY THEATRE IN TF~ ~CULA VALLEY THAT IS FOR ALL AGES, REGARDLESS OF SEX, RACE OR RELIGION WHICH SUPPORTS THE SURROUNOING CCM~JNITIES OF ~ENIFEE, SUN CITY, MURRIETA, QUAIL VALLEY, LA CRESTA, WI~, ELSINORE, ANO RAI~)W. oAS A Iv~VBER OF ~ INL/~k~ E~V~IRE TFEATRE LEAGUE, OUR COMqUNITY THEATER HAS RECEIVED NOTED RECOGNITION VIA NLH_~]US NCMINATIONS ~ REWARDS FOR OUR PERFO~SqS ~ P~ODUCTIONS. THESE AWARDS HAVE ELEVATED OUR PRESTIGE AMDNG COMV~NITIES WHICH SUPF~ORTS ~ ARTS. oWE PROVIDE A COMqUNITY SERVICE THAT BENEFITS OUR COMqUNITY BY OFFERING AN INEXPENSIVE EVENING OF FUN, LIVE EI~TERTAINVENT, PRESENTED COLLECTIVELY BY OUR FAMILY ~ERS, FRIENOS, ANO NEI(~F~ORS. R: tNOR TONLICSF'19798,4 PP. WPD 7/14/97 EXHIBIT "A" Mission Statement Temecula Valley Playhouse The Temecula Valley Playhouse is the place to be, not just a place to visit. The TVP is dedicated to the community as a non-profit, non-denominational cultural amenity by helping the individual, young and old, develop the mind, the body and the spirit. We will, through hard work and a common commitment to excellence, join these individuals together to create, motivate, educate and inspire beyond what any individual believes possible of themselves. The Temecula Valley Playhouse has continued to provide high quality community theater year after year even as the community continues to expand and additional volunteers are added to the program. TVP has added several people to the board of Directors who specialize in Management, Marketing, Advertising and Accounting with a passion for theater. The accounting methods within the Playhouse have been upgraded allowing our board to have a more active role in controlling costs. Concurrently, the Marketing, Advertising and Promotional efforts have been "stepped up" to create and implement effective strategies and activities vital to the growth of the Playhouse. 3. TVP was granted a non-profit status on July 10, 1983. 4. TVP does not discriminate based on race, color, creed, nationality, sex, marital status, disability, religion or political affiliation. 5. TVP does not require anyone to participate in any political, religious or social activity. 6. The number of volunteers and the continued support by the Citizens and Merchants indicate a high level of support for the Playhouse. 7. & 8. Attached Financial Statement for 1996-1997 and the budget for 1997-1998. o TVP through the use of public access or cable TV, radio, newspapers, mailers and flyers, encourage everyone to attend each run of a show, subject to seating capacity of 160 per show. 10. The TVP Board of Directors, which is very involved with each show, evaluates every show on what was done right and what could be improved. Evidence of this can be seen by the quality of talented performers the Playhouse continues to attract. -mE( EXHIBIT 'B' The Temecula Valley Playhouse (TVP) has provided community theatre with an increase of quality and excellence each year as the community grows and additional volunteers and talent are added to the program. The TVP is made up of many volunteers which varies depending on the show and its requirements. We presently have a mailing list of interested patrons, at their request for show information, of several thousand. We have received a very high positive response to our programs from both the public and show critics. ~ are recipients of several awards fr~rn the Inland E~ire 7heatre League. -I'VP has added several people to the Board of Directors who specialize in Management and Accounting with a talent for theatre. The accounting methods within the Playhouse has been upgraded allowing our board to have a more active role in controlling costs. The TVP has been in Temecula since 1982 and has plans of being in operation for at least another 14 years. F. 'I'VP was granted a non-profit status July 10, 1983. The number of volunteers and the continued support by the Citizens and Merchants indicate a high level of support for the Playhouse. TVP does not discriminate based on race, color, creed, nationality, sex, marital status, disability, religion or political affiliation. TVP does not require anyone to participate in any political, religious or social activity. J&K. Attached financial statement TVP through the use of public access or cable TV, radio, newspapers, mailers and flyers, encourage everyone to attend each run of a show, subject to seating capacity of 160 per show. The 'I'VP Board of Directors, which is very involved with each show, evaluates every show on what was done right and what could be improved. I believe this is evident by quality of talent the Playhouse is attracting in the performers. Project(s) Requesting Funding Page 4 How will your organization use any funding awarded? Give the project's objectives, number of persons served, area where services are provided, and number of volunteers involved. Be specific. Note any equipment or services that the award money would purchase and why it is needed. Include a detailed budget and a schedule of significant activities related to this project. Attach a maximum of one double-spaced typewritten page of information if you need to expand your answer beyond this space. **PLEASE SEE A1-FACHED PAGES I, I I, II I, IV R:~NORTONLICSFI9798.APP. WPD 7/~4/97 III The Temecula Valley Playhouse is requesting Community Service Funds to continue our program designed to interest, prepare, and involve increased numbers of the Community in theatre projects. We expect to utilize the funds to subsidize our expenses listed as follows: (The following are projected expenses for 7/97 - 7/98, based upon last year's actual expenses of targeted areas.) Insurance Phone & Utilities Royalties, music, & scripts Printing costs Postage & Advertising Chamber of Commerce Fundraising Packet (see Exhibit 'C') Rent $2,900.00 4,000.00 7,000.00 2,400.00 3,000.00 75.00 1,500.00 24,000.00 Total $44,875.00 **We wish to express our thanks for the Community Services Funding which we have received in the past. it has been a vital element to our survival as a community theatre. Likewise, we appreciate the time and efforts that the City Council has extended to aid us in our endeavors. Your continued recognition of our value to the community is greatly appreciated. IV EXHIBIT 'C' Temecula Valley Playhouse Project(s) Requesting Funding July 9th, 1997 The Temecula Valley Playhouse is requesting funds for the following projects: Fund Raising- The ultimate goal of fund raising is to create a "financial platform" in which the playhouse can offer programs at no cost to the community. Unfortunately, initial costs are incurred in any effective fund raising effort. This is the reason we have listed this primary activity in the request for funding. 1. Presentation Package -- A focus to improving the effectiveness and scope of fund raising activities is a priority as the playhouse plans to grow and expand its services to the community. It all begins with a quality, professional presentation, explaining the programs, the community benefits as well as the benefactor benefits. Objective: To create and produce a "presentation package" that properly positions the playhouse to corporations and individuals for solicitation of their financial support. Materials Needed Ouantity Playhouse Logo I Presentation Folder 100 5,000each Playhouse Stationary & Envelopes Pictures of Theatrical Events 100 Est. Cost $ $250 - includes creative, production and camera- ready artwork. $150 - includes creative, production, printing, 100 folders $1000 - includes production, printing, material-- linen stock, envelopes $100 - developing Additional fund raising events will include, but not be limited to: A. Theatrical shows - 6-8 for the season at costs of $3,000-$7,000 per show. (includes pre-production royalties, sets, advertising/promotion, costumes, theater operational expenses) Includes musicals, seasonal drama's and comedies, youth productions. B. One-Act Plays - 2-4 per season at costs of $500-$1,000 per show. (includes pre-production royalties, sets, advertising/promotion, costumes, theater operational expenses) Project(s) Requesting Funding Page 5 We hereby certify the information contained in this application is true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Preparer: NAME AND'TITLE (Please Print or Type) ~/~ (Signature) ~ND../ President or Authorized Officer: PATTI DP~-N, PRF_5[D~T NAME AND TITLE (Please Print or Type) (Signature) TEPECULA VALLEY PLAYHOUSE (Organization Name) 26111 YI~EZ RD. B-5 TEFECLILA, CA 92590 (Mailing Address of Organization) 676-0775 (Telephone) JULY 18, 1997 (Date) Mail Completed Application to: City of Temecula Finance Department Community Services Funding Program P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Or Deliver in Person to: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 R: [NOR TONL ~ CSF[9798,A PP. WPD 7/14/97 ITEM 16 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: A P PR 0 V~l~t CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN(~/E CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhilt, Community August 26, 1997 Western Riverside County Agreement Development Director Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Planning Prepared By: Sated Naaseh, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING AGREEMENT BACKGROUND On June 19, 1997 the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) Board of Directors approved the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Planning Agreement (MSHCP Agreement), refer to Attachment 2. The MSHCP Agreement is the product of a ten month negotiation process involving a broad range of local interest groups and affected State and Federal agencies. By endorsing this Agreement, the City Council sets the stage for the preparation of Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP will ultimately assist projects within the City of Temecula, to comply with the Endangered Species Act under a comprehensive plan rather than on a project by project bases. DISCUSSION The RCHCA has prepared a summary of the MSHCP Agreement which is included as Attachment 3. The following provides the most important issues discussed in this summary: The MSHCP's conservation and management measures will constitute the only required mitigation for projects under the State and Federal laws for the covered species. Local funding responsibility must be equitably apportioned among new and existing development. A two year time line is intended for the development and approval of the MSHCP and its environmental documents. The MSHCP will rely to the maximum extent practicable on voluntary incentive programs to encourage private property owners to conserve species and habitats on their lands. P:\NAASEHS\MSHCPA.CC 8/18/97 sn 1 The MSHCP will not include Study Areas and other means of regulating land use on private property for habitat or species protection purposes. 6. The MSHCP will advocate acquiring property only from willing sellers. The MSHCP will focus on conservation and management of habitat as the primary method of ensuring the persistence of species in the MSHCP area. o Ensuring that the MSHCP provides authorization for take of species resulting from agricultural practices, and offers incentives to farmers to enhance habitat on agricultural lands. Public infrastructure facilities may be operated and maintained as necessary without delay or additional mitigation for impacts to species covered by the MSHCP. FISCAL IMPACT None Attachments: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Planning Agreement- Page 3 Summary of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Planning Agreement- Page 4 P:h'qAASEI-IS\MSHCPA.CC 8/18/97 sn 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING AGREEMENT P:XN'AASEHS\MSHCPA.CC 8/18/97 sn 3 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING AGREEMENT APPROVED BY THE RCHCA BOARD OF DIRECTORS ON JUNE 19, 1997 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING AGREEMENT This Agreement ("Planning Agreement") is made and entered into this day of by and among the United States Department of the Interior ("Interior"), the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ("Service"), the United States Bureau of Land Management ("BLM"), the Califomia Resources Agency ("Agency") and the California Department of Fish and Game ("Department"), the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency ("RCHCA"), the County of Riverside, California, and the Cities of Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Perris, Riverside, and Temecula (collectively, the "Member Agencies"). 1. RECITALS 1.1 RCHCA The RCHCA is a Joint Powers Authority created pursuant to the provisions of Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California relating to the joint exercise of powers common to public agencies. The RCHCA was created by and among the County of Riverside and the Cities of Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Perris, Riverside, and Temecula to plan for, acquire, administer, operate and maintain land and facilities for ecosystem conservation and habitat reserves and to implement habitat conservation plans for plants and animals which are either candidates for, or listed as, Threatened or Endangered pursuant to the terms of the federal Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., ("FESA"), and the California Endangered Species Act, California Fish and Game Code Section 2050, et. seq. ("CESA"). 1.2 SERVICE The Service is the agency of the United States Department of the Interior authorized and empowered by Congress to enforce the terms of FESA, and to enter into agreements with states, local governments, and other entities in order to conserve ecosystems of this country and the flora and fauna contained therein. 1.3 BLM The BLM is an agency of the United States Department of the Interior authorized and empowered by Congress to manage over 17 million acres of land owned by the United States within the State of California. Included among its responsibilities as a manager of federal lands is the duty to conserve and protect the biological and natural resource values located upon those lands, including animal and plant species and the habitats which support them. 1.4 DEPARTMENT The Department is the agency of the State of California authorized and empowered to enforce the terms of CESA, to act as trustee for the flora and fauna of this state on behalf of its residents, and to enter into agreements with the federal and local governments and other entities for habitat conservation purposes under the terms of CESA and the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act. 1.5 NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLANNING ACT The Legislature of the State of California announced its intention to promote the proactive protection of wildlife and flora and their habitats by the enactment of the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act. California Fish and Game Code~ Section 2800, et seq. ("NCCP Act"). Pursuant to the NCCP Act, local, state and federal agencies are encouraged to prepare and implement Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCP's) to provide comprehensive management and conservation of multiple species and their habitats in one plan, rather than become involved in the preparation of many individual plans for specific species as those species become in danger of extinction and become listed pursuant to either FESA or CESA. 1.5.1 COMPATIBILITY WITH FESA AND CESA The NCCP Act provides that NCCP's shall be compatible with FESA and CESA, and thus may serve as the basis for incidental take permits pursuant to Section 10(a) of FESA and management authorization pursuant to Sections 2081 of CESA and Section 2835 of the NCCP Act. Furthermore, the NCCP Act provides that after the approval of a NCCP, the Department may authorize the taking of any species identified therein for whose benefit habitat is conserved and managed. 1.5.2 ENDORSEMENT OF NCCP ACT Interior, the Agency, the Service and the Department each have announced that they enthusiastically endorse the provisions of the NCCP Act and have encouraged the RCHCA and its members to adopt the NCCP process as a means of proactively protecting species and their habitats. 1.5.3 CONCURRENCE WITH GOALS OF THE NCCP ACT The RCHCA and its members concur with the goals of the NCCP Act and have determined that it may be the proper vehicle for the RCHCA to provide appropriate protection for the range of biological resources within its jurisdiction while at the same time safeguarding the economic, social, health, safety and property rights of its residents and property owners. 1.5.4 NO INTERIM ENROLLMENT IN NCCP PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF MSHCP The Planning Agreement constitutes the agreement to prepare a Natural Community Conservation Plan pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 2810. The execution of this Planning Agreement does not constitute enrollment in the NCCP program for the purposes of using the federal Endangered Species Act 4(d) Rule for take of coastal California gnatcatchers during the plan preparation nor require the use of the Process Guidelines. However, the parties acknowledge that the Conservation Guidelines will be used for reserve design; provided, however, that in no event shall any habitat use limitation set forth in the Process Guidelines be mandated for use in the standards adopted for reserve design. The parties further agree that the RCHCA shall not provide reimbursement to the Department for its participation in the planning phase of the MSHCP as provided in Section 2810 of the NCCP Act. 1.6 PREVIOUS CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS Parties to this Agreement have previously entered into interagency conservation agreements which support the goals and purposes stated herein. Federal and state agency participants in this Agreement are signatories to the 1991 Agreement on Biological Diversity which provides a framework for collaborative conservation planning on a regional scale. The RCHCA, Service, BLM, and Department are signatories to the 1994 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Interagency Cooperation and the Development of a Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan within Riverside County. That 1994 agreement called for the parties to work together following approval of the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan to prepare a multiple species habitat conservation plan for RCHCA member agencies. 1.7 EXISTING HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANS 1.7.1 SKR HCP The RCHCA has prepared and is implementing the terms of the Long Term Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat ("SKR HCP") and has been issued an incidental take permit pursuant to Section 10(a) of FESA and a Management Authorization by the Department pursuant to Section 2081 of CESA. The SKR HCP established a regional system of reserves comprising more than 41,000 acres which will be managed in perpetuity for the benefit of $KR and other resident species. 1.7.2 SOUTHWESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN In partnership with the Metropolitan Water District ("MWD"), the RCHCA is participating in the implementation of the Southwestern Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Under that plan and the SKR HCP a reserve of 13,158 acres owned by the RCHCA, MWD, and other public agencies will be managed in perpetuity for the benefit of multiple species and habitats within the plan area. 1.7.3 LAKE MATHEWS MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/NATURAL COMMUNITIES CONSERVATION PLAN In partnership with the MWD, the RCHCA is participating in the implementation of the Lake Mathews Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan. Under that plan a reserve of 11,243 acres owned by the RCHCA, MWD, and other public agencies will be managed in perpetuity for the benefit of multiple species and habitats within the plan area. 1.8 DEPARTURE FROM SPECIES BY SPECIES PLANNING APPROACH Development of the SKR HCP, which required six years to complete and featured significant controversy, has provided all parties with valuable experience which can be applied to make a western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ("MSHCP") a successful conservation effort. Among the lessons learned during the SKR HCP process was that pursuing habitat conservation planning on a species by species basis is costly and inefficient. All parties assume that the development of a successful MSHCP should be a less expensive and more effective method of complying with the species impact mitigation requirements of FESA, CESA, the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") and the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") than a project-by- project approach. The parties also agree that a successful MSHCP can be better for both habitat conservation and economic development than a project-by-project approach. 1.9 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLANNING AGREEMENT The RCHCA has invited local, state and federal agencies as well as interested stake holders, specific interest groups, and the public at large to participate in the process of developing a Planning Agreement which will set forth the principles upon which a MSHCP will be developed. The following agencies, organizations, and groups have been active participants in discussions leading to the development of this Planning Agreement: United States Fish and Wildlife Service; United States Bureau of Land Management; United States Forest Service (Cleveland National Forest); United States Forest Service (San Bernardino National Forest); California Department of Fish and Game; California Department of Parks and Recreation; Building Industry Association; Endangered Habitats League; Riverside County Farm Bureau; Sierra Club; Spirit of the Sage Council; Riverside County Property Owners' Association; Metropolitan Water District; Southern California Edison; Save Our Forests and Ranch Lands; March Joint Powers Authority; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Waste Resources Management District; and the San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society. The RCHCA and the foregoing participants have been involved in the development of this document. 2. PURPOSES OF THE MSHCP PLANNING AGREEMENT The purposes of this Planning Agreement are to: 2.1 Establish a cooperative process among the RCHCA, federal and state resource agencies, and affected stakeholders for the development of a successful MSHCP for western Riverside County; 2.2 Define the basic intentions, principles, and processes to be utilized by the parties and participants during the preparation of the MSHCP; 2.3 Define roles, responsibilities, standards, schedules, and necessary elements of the MSHCP; 2.4 Affirm the intention of the parties to educate the public in the habitat conservation process in the development of the MSHCP; 2.5 Assure public notice of and participation in the development and implementation of the MSHCP; 2.6 Establish basic funding principles for the MSHCP based upon an equitable apportionment among local, state, and federal participants. 3. GOALS AND PRINCIPLES OF THE MSHCP The parties agree that the western Riverside County MSHCP will be guided by the following goals and principles: 3.1 Prior to commencement of the MSHCP and the development of both conservation measures and assurances to land owners and users, there must be general agreement regarding the scope, cost, sources of funding, time required for completion, and other important principles concerning the plan; 3.2 In comparison to the option of mitigating for species and habitat impacts on a project-by-project basis, the MSHCP must be more equitable and efficient, and less expensive and less time consuming; 3.3 3,4, The MSHCP must produce more biologically effective habitat and species conservation than the project-by-project alternative; The MSHCP must be a comprehensive plan which: 3.4.1 Promotes the biological viability and recovery of western Riverside County ecosystems and habitats, and species dependent thereupon, toward a goal of reducing the need to list additional species in the future; 3.4.2 Provides a comprehensive means to coordinate, standardize, streamline, and ensure closure regarding mitigation requirements of FESA, CESA, NEPA, CEQA, the California Native Plant Protection Act, ("CNPPA") and other applicable laws and regulations relating to biological and natural resources within the plan area. 3.4.3 Assures property owners, local governments, and other affected parties that conservation measures undertaken for species and wildlife habitat adequately covered by the MSHCP will satisfy mitigation requirements of FESA, CESA, NEPA, CEQA, and CNPPA concerning impacts to those covered species and habitats; 3.4.4 Establishes and emphasizes the use of incentives to encourage property owners to voluntarily conserve habitat and species within the plan area as an alternative to regulatory mandates; 3.5 3.6 3.4.5 Facilitates economic growth and prosperity so that it occurs in a manner which is consistent with the conservation of biological resources within the plan area; 3.4.6 Provides the basis for issuance of incidental take permits and management authorizations for listed species adequately covered by the MSHCP by the Service and the Department, respectively; 3.4.7 Provides a process for issuance of incidental take permits and management authorizations for additional species within the plan area which are adequately covered by the MSHCP and may be listed in the future; 3.4.8 Establishes consistent mitigation standards for MSHCP covered species for potential application by the Service under Section 7 of FESA. Expenses for the preparation and implementation of the MSHCP must be equitably distrib,~ted not only among local, state, and federal participants, but in addition, the local share must be distributed among both new development and general contribution. Federal and state contributions shall be made as provided in the implementation agreements for the MSHCP; The MSHCP development and approval process must be expedited and completed within a reasonable period of time, taking into consideration the complexity of the issues involved. All parties agree to use their best efforts to ensure that the MSHCP and its environmental documents are completed 10 and approved, if all legal requirements are met, within two years following the identification of species and habitats to be covered by the plan; 3.7 The recovery of species presently listed as Threatened or Endangered under CESA and/or FESA which are found within the plan area will be promoted through MSHCP conservation actions, taking into account factors relating to the range of each species; 3.8 Decisions by all parties must be made in timely fashion and in compliance with agreed upon time parameters; 3.9 In order to obtain public support for the conservation and economic benefits which the parties and participants seek from the MSHCP, public input and participation must be actively encouraged. 4. TERM OF MSHCP, PERMITS AND MANAGEMENT AUTHORIZATION The MSHCP, including the conservation, protection, management, and recovery measures provided for thereunder, and any incidental take permits and management authorizations resulting therefrom, will have an effective period of no less than 75 years. While the overall conservation benefit of the MSHCP and the conservation and management of lands set aside under the MSHCP shall be perpetual, other conservation measures of varying durations, if appropriate, may be customized under the MSHCP. 5. GEOGRAPHIC AREA COVERED BY THE MSHCP The area covered by the MSHCP shall be all of those portions of Riverside County, California located: 11 5.1 Between the northem and southern boundaries of Riverside County west of the crest of the Peninsular and San Bernardino mountain ranges, generally to coincide with the westerly boundary of the Coachella Valley multiple species habitat conservation planning effort as may be agreed upon by the RCHCA and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, and; 5.2 Within local political jurisdictions which choose to participate in its development and implementation. 6. SPECIES AND HABITATS COVERED BY THE MSHCP 6.1 ALL SPECIES AND HABITATS The intention of the parties is to develop and implement a MSHCP for western Riverside County which will: 6.1.1 Provide for the effective conservation, protection, management, and promote the recovery of, habitats and plant and animal species located within the boundaries of the plan area, whether currently listed or unlisted, in accordance with the provisions of FESA, CESA, the NCCP Act, and other applicable laws, taking into consideration appropriate economic and political constraints as permitted by those laws; _ 6.1.2 Focus upon the conservation, protection, management, and recovery of habitats as the means of ensuring that the MSHCP and any incidental takings which occur as a result of permits and management authorizations issued pursuant thereto, shall not appreciably reduce 12 the likelihood of the survival and recovery in the wild of species covered by the MSHCP; 6.1.3 Establish a process for making additions to the list of covered species, i.e., those species for which the MSHCP provides an adequate basis for issuance of incidental take authorizations under FESA, CES^, and the NCCP Act. In evaluating the conservation measures needed to add an uncovered species to the covered species list, the USFWS and CDFG will first consider the conservation of species provided by the MSHCP, and if additional measures are needed, those agencies will work with the RCHCA to expeditiously identify the most cost-effective method to implement the measures needed to add the species to the covered species list; 6.1.4 Establish a process for achieving compliance with NEPA and CEQA when new species or habitats are added to the list of those covered and conserved by the MSHCP; 6.1.5 Define procedures for issuance of incidental take permits, management authorizations, and/or pre-listing agreements, as required or allowed by FESA, CESA, and the NCCP Act when additional species are to be covered by the MSHCP. 6.2 INITIAL FOCUS Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties understand and agree that, as more particularly set forth in Exhibit A hereof, the initial focus of the MSHCP planning process 13 will be the identification of species and habitats to be initially covered by the MSHCP, and a determination by the Service and the Department of the likely requirements necessary to provide for the conservation, protection, and management of those species and haititats and promotion of their recovery. 7. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MSHCP 7.1 RCHCA The RCHCA and, where appropriate or required, its member agencies will: 7.1.1 Facilitate the preparation of the MSHCP through a participatory process which will ensure ample opportunity for public comment in compliance with all applicable laws including, without limitation, the Brown Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act; 7.1.2 Expand the membership of its Advisory Committee as appropriate to include a balance of all responsible entities and individuals in the MSHCP area who have a stake in the eventual effects of the plan, consistent with membership criteria to be developed by the Advisory Committee and approved by the RCHCA Board of Directors; 7.1.3 Provide adequate meeting times and facilities for activities of the Advisory Committee which are necessary to prepare the MSHCP; 7.1.4 Prepare the MSHCP based upon consideration of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee; 7.1.5 Appoint an independent Scientific Advisory Committee ("SAC") whose membership will include qualified biologists and conservation experts. 14 7.1.6 7.1.7 7.1.8 7.1.9 The role of the SAC shall be to assist in the MSHCP planning process, to provide recommendations based upon the best scientific information available to the Advisory Committee and the RCHCA concerning scientific aspects of the MSHCP, and to identify additional data and information which should be gathered in the future in order to assure effective implementation of adaptive management and conservation measures throughout the term of the MSHCP; Serve as lead agency for purposes of CEQA and coordinate the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") with the Service, which shall act as lead agency for preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement ("ELS") pursuant to the provisions of NEPA; Apply for permits and authorizations to allow the take of covered species in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations;. Draft anti circulate the Draft MSHCP Implementation Agreement in coordination with the Service and the Department prior to the final approval of the MSHCP; As more particularly set forth in Section 10.13 herein, establish a voluntary early review and coordination process among the Service, the Department and project proponents in participating RCHCA jurisdictions. 15 7.2 FEDERAL AND STATE LAND MANAGERS Participating federal and State land managers will: 7.2.1 Coordinate their own existing and anticipated conservation planning efforts with the MSHCP, consistent with the laws and regulations governing those agencies; 7.2.2 Actively advise and assist the Advisory Committee; 7.2.3 Provide such data, information, and documents in their possession or available to them, and provide such services as they shall determine appropriate and advisable; 7.2.4 Assist in the development of conservation, protection, management, and recovery measures to be included within the MSHCP in order to ensure its effectiveness; 7.2.5 Participate as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the joint EIS/EIR for the MSHCP. 7.3 SERVICE AND i3EPARTMENT The Service and the Department will: 7.3.1 Provide in-kind support to the RCHCA necessary to prepare the MSHCP which shall include, but not be limited to, compilation and evaluation of existing biological data, collection of new biological data, Geographic Information System ("GIS") services, and coordination with the SAC and the Advisory Committee; 16 7.3.2 Provide such data, information, and documents in their possession or available to them, and provide such services as they shall determine appropriate and advisable, to assist in the development of conservation, protection, management, and recovery measures to be included within the MSHCP in order to ensure its effectiveness; 7.3.3 In timely fashion, review and submit specific re-wording recommendations and comments upon all work products prepared and submitted by the RCHCA during the MSHCP process; 7.3.4 Actively advise and assist the Advisory Committee; 7.3.5 Cooperate in obtaining federal and state financial grants and budgetary appropriations to provide funds to assist in financing the preparation of the MSHCP; 7.3.6 The Service will act as lead agency for purposes of NEPA and will coordinate the preparation of an ElS with the RCHCA, which will act as lead agency for preparation of an EIR pursuant to the provisions of CEQA; 7.3.7 Implementation of federal and state commitments in this Planning Agreement will be subject to the availability of appropriated funds. 7,4 MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Members of the Advisory Committee will: 7.4.1 Actively and consistently attend meetings concerning development of the MSHCP; 17 7.4.2 Seek not only to identify issues and problems, but also to present proposed solutions to those issues and problems consistent with applicable law and realistic and feasible financial and political constraints; 7.4.3 Be willing to listen and compromise on individual issues with the purpose of developing a MSHCP which meets the overall goals as stated herein. 8. TIMETABLE FOR PREPARATION OF THE MSHCP All feasible efforts will be undertaken by the Parties to ensure that the MSHCP is completed by the RCHCA and approved, if all legal requirements are met, by the Service and the Department as expeditiously as possible. With the recognition that the ultimate schedule for completion of the plan cannot be determined in advance, a target date of two years will be used. All Parties agree to work cooperatively to develop a proposed timetable for MSHCP preparation and approval activities during the first six months following the execution of this Planning Agreement. 9. BIOLOGICAL DATA STANDARDS FOR THE MSHCP 9.1 USE OF BEST INFORMATION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE The parties agree that the MSHCP will be prepared based on the best currently available scientific and commercial information. Measures to fill data gaps and collect additional scientific data will be included in the implementation measures contained within the MSHCP. 18 9.2 AMOUNT, TYPE AND METHOD OF BIOLOGICAL DATA COLLECTION Standards for the amount, type, and method of collection of biological data necessary for inclusion in the implementation program for the MSHCP will be identified and agreed upon by the Service, the Department, and the RCHCA as part of the MSHCP. 10. BASIC PLANNING CONCEPTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MSHCP Based upon previous habitat conservation planning experiences, revenue limitations, and sentiments expressed by western Riverside County citizens and property owners, the parties agree that the following planning concepts will be incorporated into the MSHCP: 10.1 ECOSYSTEMS AND HABITATS The MSHCP will employ a strategy focusing on conservation of ecosystems and habitats as the means of ensuring the conservation of species in the plan area. 10.2 CORE RESERVES AND VIABLE HABITAT LINKAGES The MSHCP will, through its processes, establish Core Reserves located throughout the Plan Area, as well as Viable Habitat Linkages between the Core Reserves and between the Core Rese.,-ves and adjacent wildlands, where such Viable Habitat Linkages are necessary and feasible. 10.3 IDENTIFICATION PROCESS FOR CORE RESERVES AND VIABLE HABITAT LINKAGES The identification, establishment, and potential expansion of Core Reserves and Viable Habitat Linkages for the MSHCP will occur through a process described in Exhibit A of this Planning Agreement. 19 10.4 LIMITATIONS ON THE REGULATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY The MSHCP will not incorporate Study Areas, development moratoria, or any other means of regulating private property for habitat or species protection purposes beyond that required by law. 10.5 USE OF INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE VOLUNTARY CONSERVATION OF HABITAT AND SPECIES ON PRIVATE PROPERTIES Consistent with the provisions of FESA and CESA, the MSHCP will rely to the maximum extent practicable on the use of voluntary incentive based programs in order to encourage private property owners to conserve habitats and species on their lands. 10.6 BUFFERS MSHCP Core Reserves and Viable Habitat Linkages will be designed to include core habitat and buffer areas within their boundaries. Such boundaries will be designed in a fashion which ensures that reserves and linkages include habitat necessary to mitigate for edge effect impacts. 10.7 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS FROM WILLING SELLERS ONLY Any private property whose acquisition is necessary for the MSHCP will be purchased only from willing sellers. 10.8 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER USES The Core Reserve and Viable Habitat Linkage system established by the MSHCP may integrate wildlife habitat areas, parks, trails, and open space located in participating jurisdictions, as appropriate. 20 10.9 AGRICULTURAL USES The MSHCP will be developed to automatically extend incidental take permits to ongoing agricultural operations, subject to the requirements of law and on such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by the Service, the Department, the RCHCA, and the Member Agencies. Take of species covered by the MSHCP resulting from bona fide agricultural operations will be mitigated through measures set forth in the plan. Conversion of new lands into agricultural uses should be mitigated through the plan in a fair, equitable, and economically viable manner, subject to the requirements of law and on such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by the Service, the Department, the RCHCA, and the Member Agencies. 10.10 STANDARDIZED COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES Implementation of the MSHCP will be simple and efficient, and will employ standardized compliance procedures. 10.11 PUBLIC ACCESS Public access to MSHCP Core Reserves and Viable Habitat Linkages will be permitted for activities compatible with conservation values and goals set forth in the MSHCP and which are acceptable to the agency or entity having jurisdiction over such Core Reserves or Viable Habitat Linkages. 10.12 EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE The MSHCP will ensure that operation and maintenance of existing infrastructure improvements within the plan area (including, but not limited to, public roads and rights-of- way, flood control facilities, landfills, gas, electric and other public utility facilities providing services essential to the health, safety, and welfare of the public), as well as planned 21 infrastructure improvements as identified in adopted master plans of participating agencies and existing on the date of this Agreement, will not require any further mitigation for impacts to covered species beyond that provided by implementation of the MSHCP, or as provided in existing interagency agreements. Similar provisions will be made in the MSHCP to permit responsible agencies to respond to emergency situations within the plan area without requirements to perform biological surveys prior to taking action. 10.13 VOLUNTARY PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS In order to permit property owners, local jurisdictions, and regulatory agencies to identify the effects of interim projects (i.e., those projects occurring prior to MSHCP approval) which might preclude important conservation planning options, a voiuntary, cooperative process, integrated into the early stages of project review, will be cooperatively developed and instituted by participating RCHCA jurisdictions, the Service and the Department. 11, COMPONENTS OF THE MSHCP In addition to such other elements as required by law or as the Parties shall determine, the MSHCP shall include the following components: 11.1 Identification of any and all existing conserved areas and Viable Habitat Linkages; 11.2 Standards and criteria for new and expanded Core Reserves and Viable Habitat Linkages; 11.3 Adaptive management principles which among other items, provide for a review of the status of habitat and species throughout the plan area on an ongoing basis; 22 11.4 Measurable criteria for assessing biological objectives for each covered species and habitat; 11.5 Measurable criteria for assessing progress toward Core Reserve and Viable Habitat Linkages assembly; 11.6 Incidental take provisions based upon such assurances by local participating jurisdictions as may be required by law, that the obligations undertaken by them with respect to the conservation, protection, management, and recovery measures set forth in the MSHCP will be accomplished; 11.7 Implementation measures to be accomplished after adoption of the MSHCP which will include: 11.7.1 Acquisition of additional Core Reserves, additions to Core Reserves and Viable Habitat Linkages as may be necessary and feasible; 11.7.2 Refinement of adaptive management principles; 11.7.3 Habitat and species monitoring procedures; 11.7.4 Collection of additional data necessary for the MSHCP. 12. FUNDING PRINCIPLES NECESSARY TO ASSURE MSHCP DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 12.1 EQUITABLE APPORTIONMENT Funding for development and implementation of the MSHCP will be equitably apportioned among federal, state, and local sources. The local share of MSHCP financing will be equitably shared by new development and general public contribution after taking into consideration mitigation which may be required of new developments pursuant to requirements of CEQA and other applicable laws. 23 12.2 STATE AND FEDERAL SHARES Consistent with commitments made to other MSHCP planning efforts occurring in southern California, federal and state agencies will use their best efforts to secure hon- local funding for lands which must be acquired under the MSHCP, and will assume financial responsibility for biological management and monitoring of lands under their control which are incorporated into the MSHCP Core Reserve and Viable Habitat Linkage System. Commitments for local, state, and federal financial contributions to the MSHCP will be defined in the plan and its implementing agreements with the Service and the Department prior to their approval by the RCHCA. 12.3 ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT The Parties agree that the ability to acquire and manage the Core Reserve and Viable Habitat Linkage system included in the MSHCP will be dependent upon local, state, and federal funding, as well as the successful implementation of voluntary incentive programs for property owners and other creative and innovative conservation programs established by the MSHCP. 12.4 ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES The RCHCA will actively seek funding from federal, state, local, and private sources to assist in the development and implementation of the MSHCP. 12.5 NON-WASTING ENDOWMENT Among other financial arrangements investigated by the RCHCA to provide the assurances required by law for the MSHCP, it will consider the establishment of non- wasting endowments, in present day values, that provide funding necessary to implement, manage and monitor the measures set forth in the plan. 24 13. ASSURANCES 13.1 NO SURPRISES It is the intention of the Parties that the MSHCP implementing agreements with the Service and the Department will include all assurances contained in the "No Surprises" policy as it appears in the November 1996 Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook published by the Service. 13.2 NO ADDITIONAL MITIGATION As long as the terms of an approved MSHCP are being fully implemented, the Service and the Department agree that they will not seek additional mitigation involving additional land or funds for impacts to covered species under the FESA, CESA, NEPA, CEQA, CNPPA, or in any other regulatory or permitting process. 13.3 ASSURANCES IN DOCUMENTS In order to ensure that MSHCP assurances are formal, reliable, and legally binding, such provisions will be included in MSHCP implementation agreements. 13.4 RECOVERY PLANS The Service will develop Recovery Plans for all listed species covered by the MSHCP, where appropriate, and agrees to involve the RCHCA in the development of such plans to the maximum extent permitted by law. 13.5 SPECIES PROPOSED FOR LISTING If any species covered by the MSHCP are proposed for listing under the FESA or CESA during the preparation or after the approval of the MSHCP, the Service and the Department will, at the earliest possible date, and in addition to such notices as may be required by law, specifically notify the RCHCA of the pendency of the proposed listing. 25 During their deliberations concerning proposed listings the Service and the Department will evaluate the MSHCP to determine the extent to which its conservation actions can assure species persistence and therefore reduce or eliminate the legal requirement that the species be listed. 13.6 NO SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION The MSHCP implementation agreement will provide that failure of federal and/or State agencies to fulfill their obligations thereunder will not result in additional costs to permittees, but may require reevaluation of other permit parameters and assurances. The Parties agree that they shall jointly and cooperatively pursue such reevaluation prior to the commencement of any action to suspend or revoke any such permit or management authorization. Furthermore, it is the intention of the Parties that the MSHCP and its implementation agreements will be developed to provide that the failure of federal and/or State agencies to fulfill their obligations thereunder, in itself, will not result in the revocation of incidental and management take permits or agreements. However, in the event that suspension or revocation is intended as a result of the failure of any State or federal agency to fulfill its commitment to implement the MSHCP, contemporaneously with any notice of intention to commence the process to suspend or revoke any such permit or management authorization, the Regional Director of the Service, the Director of the Department of Fish and Game, and the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the RCHCA, shall, by joint letter, notify each Party as well as the State and federal legislators representing the plan area or any part of it, of the intended suspension or revocation and that such suspension or revocation is being caused by the absence of appropriate 26 resources being made available to the relevant State and/or federal agencies to allow them to fulfill their obligations to the MSHCP. 14. MSHCP ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION 14.1 CEQA AND NEPA The Parties will cooperate and seek the cooperation of the U.S. Forest Service, the BLM, and appropriate state agencies in the preparation and processing of all MSHCP environmental documents pursuant to requirements of NEPA and CEQA. Joint NEPNCEQA documents will be prepared whenever practical. 15. AMENDMENTS TO MSHCP PLANNING AGREEMENT The MSHCP Planning Agreement may be amended at any time subject to Written concurrence by all parties. 27 THIS AGREEMENT HAS BEEN EXECUTED ON THE DAY SET BY EACH SIGNATURE ATTACHED HERETO AND SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE ON THE DAY AND YEAR FIRST ABOVE WRITTEN. DATE: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BY: DATE: UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BY: DATE: UNITED STATES BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BY: DATE: CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY BY: DATE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME BY: DATE: RIVERSIDE COUNTY CONSERVATION AGENCY BY: HABITAT DATE: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY: DATE: CITY OF CORONA BY: DATE: CITY OF HEMET BY: DATE: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE BY: DATE: CITY OF MORENO VALLEY BY: DATE: CITY OF MURRIETA BY: DATE: CITY OF PERRIS BY: DATE: CITY OF RIVERSIDE BY: DATE: CITY OF TEMECULA BY: 29 ITEM 17 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council June S. Greek, City Clerk/Director of Support Services August 26, 1996 Designation of Voting Delegate for California League of Cities Annual Conference RECOMMENDATION: Designate a voting representative and an alternate. BACKGROUND: Each year at the League Annual Conference the member cities are asked to designate the voting delegate and alternate. Every member city is entitled to one vote in matters affecting municipal or League policy. The business meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 14, 1997 at the Moscone Convention Center. If it is not possible for a member of the City Council to be present, the Council may designate a city official who is attending the conference. I have attached the memorandum from the League President which further elaborates on the voting procedures. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum from Ronald Bates, League President swj R:~agenda.rpt\L0CCvote 1 League of Californi,a Cities :llll / !!111&l 1400 K STREET. SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 (916) 658-8200 California Cities Work Together July 18, 1997 To: From: Re: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Ronald Bates, League President, Mayor Pro Tem, Los Alamitos Designation of Voting Delegate for League Annual Conference This year's League Annual Conference is scheduled for Sunday, October 12 through Tuesday, October 14, 1997 in San Francisco. One very important aspect of the Annual Conference is the annual Business Meeting when the membership takes action on conference resolutions. Annual Conference resolutions guide cities and the League in our efforts to improve the quality, responsiveness and vitality of local government in California. It is important that all cities be represented at the Business Meeting on Tuesday, October 14, at 9:30 a.m. at the Moscone Convention Center. To expedite the conduct of business at this important policy-making meeting, each city council should designate a voting representative and an alternate who will be present at the Business Meeting. League bylaws provide that each city is entitled to one vote in matters affecting municipal or League policy. A voting card will bc given to the city official designated by the city council on the enclosed "Voting Delegate Form." If the mayor or a member of the city council is in attendance at the Annual Conference, it is expected that one of these officials will be designated as the voting delegate. However, if the city council will not have a registered delegate at the Annual Conference but will bc represented by other city officials, one of these officials should be designated the voting delegate or alternate. Please complete and return the enclosed "Voting Delegate Form" to the Sacramento office of the League at the earliest possible time (no later than Friday, September 26, 1997), so that proper records may be established for the Annual Conference. The voting delegate may pick up the city's voting card at the Annual Conference registration area. The voting procedures to be followed at this Annual Conference are printed on the reverse side of this memo. Your help in returning the attached "Voting Delegate Form" as soon as possible is appreciated. If you have any questions, please call Lorraine Okabe at 916/658-8236. CITY: LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 1997 ANNUAL CONFERENCE VOTING DELEGATE FORM 1. VOTING DELEGATE: (NAME) (TITLE) 2. VOTING ALTERNATE: (NAME) (TITLE) ATTEST: (NAME) (TITLE Please Complete and Return To: League of California Cities Attn: Lorraine Okabe 1400 K Street Sacramento, CA 95814 FAX: 916/658-8240 No Later Than Friday, September 26. 1997 lo L 5policy\acres\votedel .Itr DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS APPROVAl, CITY ATTORNEY ]~. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE_ CITY MANAGER _~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City~(/uncil Gary Thornhill, Comh~unity Development Director August 26, 1997 Monthly Report RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File Discussion: The following is a summary of the Community Development Department's Planning Division caseload and project activity for the month of July 1997: Caseload Activity: The Department received 29 applications for administrative cases and 5 applications for public hearing cases for the month of June. The following are the public hearing cases: · Conditional Use Permit 1 · Certificate of Compliance 1 · General Plan Amendment 1 · Parcel Map 1 · Development Plan- with CEQA 1 Total 5 Attachments: List of Projects with Detail - page 2 Revenue Status Report - page R:'qvlONTHLY.RPTx1997~JUNE.WPD 8/18/97 vgw 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 LIST OF PROJECTS BY CASE NUMBER R:LMONTHLY.RPT~ 1997XJLINE.W'PD 8/18/97 vgw 2 omr~ ATTACHMENT NO. 2 REVENUE STATUS REPORT R:~VIONTHLY. RPT~1997LlLrNE.WPD 8/18/97 vgw 3 REVPRIN2 08/04/97 001 161 ACCOUNT # 4101 4102 4103 4104 4105 4106 4107 4108 4109 4110 4112 4113 ~114 4115 4116 4117 4118 4119 4120 4121 4122 4123 4124 4125 4126 4127 4128 4129 4130 4131 4135 4136 4139 4140 4170 4171 4190 4200 4206 4369 4370 07:13:21 GENERAL FUND PLANNING DESCRIPTION AMENDED FINAL MAP APPEALS CERT. OF LAND DIV. COMPLIANCE EXTENSION OF TIME SINGLE FAMILY TRACTS MULTI-FAMILY TRACTS PARCEL MAPS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT MINOR CHANGE PARCEL MERGER (2-4 LOTS) REVERSION TO ACREAGE (5+LOTS) MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SECOND UNIT PERMITS CHANGE OF ZONE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONSISTENCY CHECKS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PLOT PLAN PUBLIC USE PERMIT REVISED PERMIT SETBACK ADJUSTMENT SPECIFIC PLAN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE TEMORARY OUTDOOR EVENT TEMPORARY USE PERMIT VARIANCE ZONING INFORMATION LETTER CEQA (INITIAL STUDIES) CEQA ENVIROMENT IMPACT REPORT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARCEL MAP/WAIVER MERGER CONDO TRACT MAP REVERSION TO ACREAGE K-RAT STUDY FEES HOME OCCUPATIONS DEVLPMNT PLAN-ADMINISTRATIVE IN HOUSE PLAN CHECKS ANNEXATION FEES LAND DIV UNIT MAP LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK CITY OF TEMECULA REVENUE STATUS REPORT JULY 1997 ADJUSTED ESTIMATE .00 .00 .00 5,900.00 24,700.00 .00 30,500.00 16,800.00 700.00 2,900.00 ,00 13,500.00 .00 3,600.00 31~100.00 16~300.00 5,600.00 111,900.00 .00 .00 200.00 .00 .00 .00 5,200.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 13,700.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 4,500.00 7,400.00 .00 .00 500.00 .00 JULY REVENUE .00 325.00 200.00 .00 .00 .00 664.00 460.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 3,777.00 .00 o00 4,519.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 555.00 15.00 .00 .00 .00 1,733.15 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 870.00 .00 .00 4,472.04 1997-98 REVENUE .00 325.00 200.00 .00 .00 .00 664.00 460.00 .00 .00 o00 .00 .00 .00 3,777.00 .00 .00 4,519.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 555.00 15.00 .00 .00 .00 1,733.15 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 870.00 .00 .00 4,472.04 BALANCE .00 325.00- 200.00- 5,900.00 24,700.00 .00 29,836.00 16,340.00 700.00 2,900.00 .00 13,500.00 .00 3,600.00 27,323.00 16,300.00 5,600.00 107,381.00 .00 .00 200.00 .00 555.00- 15.00- 5,200.00 .00 .00 1,733.15- o00 13,700.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .~0 4,500.00 7,400.00 870.00- .00 500.00 4,472.04- PAGE 1 % COL 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 o".o 0.0 0.0 0.0 PLANNING 295,000.00 17,590.19 17,590.19 277,409.81 6.0 Ongoing Projects: · Sign Ordinance: The Planning Commission continued this item to the August 18, 1997 meeting. Southside Specific Plan: Urban Design Studios has started the preliminary work for the preparation of the specific plan. A community meeting has been scheduled for September 10, 1997. R:LMONTHLY.RPT~ 1997~JLrNE.WPD 8/18/97 vgw 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager ,'~ Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer August 26, 1997 Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for July, 1997. r:\agdrpt\moactrpt/ajp CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report JULY 1997 Submitted by: Joseph Kicak Prepared by: Don Spagnolo Date: August 26, 1997 I. WORK UNDER CONSTRUCTION: 1.1-15/Winchester Road Interchange Modifications: During this period, the contractor installed overside drains along the northbound auxiliary lane, chain link fencing adjacent to Palm Plaza, and portions of the irrigation system. The contractor will now be installing plants, trees, and shrubs throughout the project site. The project is scheduled for completion in September. 2. FY95-96 Pavement Management System: The contractor has submitted all of the required contract documents and this project is scheduled to be accepted by the City Council at the August 26 meeting. This project included pavement reconstruction and overlays on Rancho Vista Road, Solana Way, and La Serena Way. 3.6th Street Parking Lot: The public parking and restroom facilities including the landscaping have been completed. The wooden railing for the handicap ramp and the stair cases along the frontage of the Transportation Depot will be scheduled for construction within the next several weeks. 4. Traffic Signal at SR-79S and Bedford Court: A preconstruction meeting was held on July 23, however the contractor is working with Caltrans to determine Caltrans' traffic signal equipment testing facility location. Testing was performed at District 8 headquarters in San Bernardino. Recent changes at Caltrans have eliminated the testing facilities, which must now be sent to Sacramento for testing. This could delay the project start and completion for several weeks. The project is expected to be completed late December. 5. City Wide Intelligent Traffic Management System (ITMS): A preconstruction meeting was held on August 6 for installation of additional conduits, interconnect cable, new controllers, and cabinets to support the new management system which will be controlled by a central computer system. This project will interconnect all of the traffic signals within the city. The streets most effected by the project include Rancho California Road, Winchester Road, Ynez Road, Jefferson Avenue/Front Street, and Margarita Road. The project is expected to be completed the first week of November. R:~J~I OACTRPT\CI P\9 7'~A U G .MAR sea Monthly Activity Report August 26, 1997 Page 2 II. BID 1. ADA Improvement Project The City Council has approved solicitation of bids for construction of this project. The project was put out to bid August 7 with the bid opening scheduled for September 4. The project consists of the construction of sidewalk access and playground surface improvements to Veterans Park, John Magee Park, and Calle Aragon Park and well as ADA improvements to Rancho Vista fields at the Rancho California Sports Park. III. WORK IN DESIGN: 1.1-15/Rancho California Road InterchanEe Modifications: Caltrans (District 8) approved and signed the roadway plans on August 7. This was the final approval necessary prior to bidding the project. The project is scheduled to be out to public bid starting the last week in August with bid opening at the end of September. Also, GTE has awarded a contract to Arizona Pipeline for the proposed phone line relocafion work. The project is currently under construction and GTE has indicated the work will be completed in mid- November. This project includes widening the Rancho California Road Bridge and provides a new northbound loop entrance ramp. 2.1-15/Overland Drive Over Crossin~ Improvements: The consultant will resubmit roadway plans to Caltrans (District 8) for final approval of the roadway and electrical portions of the project during the third week of August. The structural plans have already been approved and signed by Caltrans, Division of Structures. SCE is also working on the design for the relocafion of the existing 115, 33, & 12 KVA overhead power linesl These lines are scheduled to be relocated with the construction of the proposed Overland Drive Over Crossing Improvements. The transmission and distribution sections of SCE are currently finalizing their alignment and the City will be preparing the legal descriptions and plats for the SCE easements and right-of-entry documents for the maintenance of poles and wires. 3. MarEarita Community Park: A lighting system for the two ballfields located in the adjacent school district property has been added to the project. Once the lighting plans have been reviewed by the School District, the project will be advertised for bid. The project includes picnic areas, a tot lot area, restrooms, and open turf areas as well as widening Margarita Road adjacent to the park to its ultimate width. Development of the two ball fields and the installation of two lighted tennis courts and one lighted hockey facility will be bid as alternate items. 4. FY96-97 Pavement ManaEement System: The consultant is scheduled to submit the first plan check for City review by August 25. This project will provide street rehabilitation of Jefferson Avenue from the northerly City limits to Rancho California Road. This project will also include the installation of street lighting along the entire length of the project. R:\MOACTRPT\CIP\97~AUG.MAR sea Monthly ,4 ctivity Report ,4ugust 26, 1997 Page $ 5. Pavement Management System Up-Date: The consultant has evaluated the physical condition of each road segment including cracks, potholes and pavement trenching. This information will be used to rank each street and determine the method and cost of any repairs. The consultant is also compiling all of the cost data to determine the best 5-year maintenance program for the City. This project will review and update the existing Pavement Management System computer program which will include new streets which were added to the City's maintained system, preparing a new 5-year street maintenance program, and updating the computer generated City map. 6. Winchester Road & Ynez Road Street WideninE: The consultant is in the process of designing the proposed improvements and is also in the process of performing the field survey for the proposed street improvements. The scope of work includes the street widening improvements on the south side of Winchester Road between Ynez Road and Margarita Road, and the improvements on the east side of Ynez Road between Winchester Road and Overland Drive. 7. Overland Drive Street Improvements & MarEarita Road Street WideninE: The consultant has prepared the base sheet plans for the design of the proposed improvements on both sides of Margarita Road between Winchester Road and Overland Drive, and the new improvements on Overland Drive between Ynez Road and Margarita Road. Also the utility companies have been notified to address potential conflicts or new facilities which may be proposed. 8. Winchester Creek Park This project consists of a 4.5 acre neighborhood park with various improvements including restrooms, basketball courts, volleyball courts, play equipment, polygon shelters with picnic tables, concrete walkways, and a parldng lot. The architect is presently responding to second plan check comments from staff. The project is anticipated to bid late August. 9. Flashing Beacons at Various I,ocation~ The consultant is in the process of designing the proposed improvements and is expected to submit first plan check during the first week in September. This project consists of installing flashing beacons that warn of children in the immediate area at 10 different school sites throughout the City. 10. Cosmic Drive and AEena Street - Street Sidewalk Project #6 The project consists of 2,600 lineal feet of sidewalk along the west side of Cosmic Drive from Rancho California Road to Agena Street and 2,300 lineal feet of sidewalk along the south side of Agena Street from Santa Cecilia Drive to Southern Cross Road. Design work was started in early July. However, the street-side locations for each sidewalk are presently being reevaluated as a response to a number of inquiries received from the local residents. Once the ultimate locations are determined, final design work will be completed. R:\M OACTRPT\CIP~9T~AUG.MAR sea Monthly Activity Report August 26. 1997 Page 4 11. Margarita Road Sidewalk (Rancho Vista to Pauba) A contract was awarded at the August 12, City Council meeting for consultant services to prepare plans and specifications to provide a sidewalk on the west side of Margarita Road from Rancho Vista to Pauba. The consultant will also be responsible for providing minor roadway improvements and parking lot improvements adjacent to the existing baseball fields. 12.1-15/Winchester Southbound Off-rantp Widenin~ Request for proposals were prepared and four responses were received on July 30. The proposals have been evaluated and a contract is scheduled to be awarded at the September 9, City Council meeting. R:\M OACTRPT\CIP\97~,AUG.M AR sea LAND DEVELOPMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT SPECIAL PROJECTS JULY 1997 Submitted by: Joseph Kicak~ Prepared by: Ronald J. Parks Date: August 14, 1997 1. PW95-07 - Phase I Western Bypass Corridor: The limits of grading activity associated with the acquired property (12,000 S.F.) for construction of the Western Bypass Corridor/State Route 79 South (WBC/SR79S) and Front Street intersection and relocation of the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) pump station have been revised. Construction and Slope easments have been prepared and are being sent to Margarita Canyon Associates for signature. The draft deeds and easement documents to EMWD have been submitted to that agency for review and approval. We are also in the process of preparing the necessary easement documents for the Texaco Station for access and parking provision within the remaining portion of the acquired property. At the request of the county, we are getting proposals to evaluate the proposed roadway overexcavated materials for potential hazardeous waste. 2. PW95-08 - First Street Extension: The project is on hold at this time. Property aquisition is still pending. The City Attorney's Office is analyzing and will be preparing the required terms of negotiation for the property acquisitions. 3. PW95-26 - 6th Street Parking Project; The public parking and restroom facilities including the landscaping have been completed. The wooden railing for the handicap ramp and the stair cases along the frontage of the Transportation Depot will be scheduled for construction within the next several weeks. PW96-05 - Project Study Report {PSR) And Project Report {PR) For Ultimate Interchange Improvements at Interstate 15/State Route 79 South (I-15/SR79S): The Consultant is in the process of updating the PSR in concurrence with the analyses on projected vehicular levels of service conducted by other entities. The PSR will then be submitted to Caltrans for review. R:~PARKSR\1997~EPORTWIOACTRPT,JLY 5. The Regional Mall Project: The project's development application was appealed. The Applicant's consultants and City Staff prepared the analyses in response to the appeal. The latter was presented before the City Council for resolution. Project Rough Grading Plans have been reviewed by staff and are ready to permit pending payment of fees. Contracts for City consultants to design the perimeter improvements have been signed and design is underway. The Mall engineer is designing the onsite storm drain system and the cost of the City portion will be reimbersed in accordance with the Development Agreement. 6. Solana Apartments: Grading plans have been reviewed and the developer, A.G. Spanos Co., is ready to obtain grading permits. Improvement Plans for Margarita Road are in plan check. We are preparing a reimbersment agreement for the developer to construct the westside of Margarita Road as a part af this project and the city would pay their fair share through this agreement. We need to obtain R/W from Eli Lily Co. And are in the process of obtaining appraisals. R:~PARKS R\1997~REPORTkMOACTRPT.JLY U.I TO: FROM: DATE: BJECT: MEMORANDUM Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent August 1, 1997 Monthly Activity Report - July, 1997 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in- house personnel for the month of July, 1997: I. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 19 B. Total signs installed 115 C. Total signs repaired 0 TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 56 III. POTHOLES A. Total square feet of potholes repaired 93 IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 2 V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 46,396 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations 14 B. Total S.F. 934 VII. STENCILING A. 268 New and repainted legends B. 350 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping i R:~M AINTAJN ~M O ACTRPT~97~J ULY.RPT me Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 28 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 20 service order requests for the month of June, 1997. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 58 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of July, 1997 was $69,477.02 compared to $4,946.50 for the month of June, 1997. Account No. 5402 Account No. 5401 Account No. 999-5402 $60,929.02 $ 8,548.00 $ -0- CC: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects Ron Parks, Principal Engineer - Land Development All Moghadam, Associate Enginer - Traffic/Capital Projects R:~ AI NTAIN ~M OACTRPT\EI7 ~J ULY ,RPT me CONTRACTOR'. Date: 7-10-97 # 5402 STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of July, 1997 BECKFR FNGINEERING 43957 Northgate Repair Sink Hole in Street and Under Sidewalk Date: 7-15-97 # 5402 Southeast Corner Margarita and Solana Way Total S.F. Total A.C. TOTAL COST Repairs to Shoulder Redefine Flow Lines 250 6 Tons 2,736.00 Date: 7-17-97 # 5401 CONTRACTOR: Date:July, 1997 #5402 Mira Loma Channel PACIFIC STRIPING Citywide Striping Program TOTAL COST $ 2,263.00 Installed Grates on Inlet Side of Culvert TOTAL COST $ 8,548.00 Repainted 872,194 L.F. of Street Striping Date: TOTAL COST $55,930.02 TOTAL S.F. TOTAL A.C. TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT #5402 TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT #5401 TOTAL COST 250 6 TONS $60,929.02 $ 8,548.00 R:~4 AJ NTAIN'~I O ACTRPT~97 ~J ULY .RPT me DATE 07-03 -97 07-03 -97 07-03-97 07-03-97 07-05-97 07-07-97 07-08-97 07-09-97 07-15-97 07-16-97 07-16-97 07-17-97 07-28-97 07-31-97 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATI'ON T.V.H.S. SIGN CALLE RIO VISTA ~ RANCHO VISTA RANCHO VISTA ~ SO. CROSS COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER MARGARITA RD. ~ AVENIDA BARCA SOLANA WAY ~ CALLE ARAN DA MARGARITA RD. ~ SONOMA RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. ~ FRONT CORTE CANTARS ~ CALLE ARAGON MIRA LOMA ~ LAKE VILLAGE CHANNEL CORTE CANTARS ~ CALLA ARAGON 41566 AVENIDA DE LA REINA RANCHO VISTA ~ CALLE SANTA ANA WABASH ~ HWY 70 SOUTH WORK COMPLETED REMOVED 2 REMOVED 15 REMOVED 50 REMOVED 1 REMOVED 16 REMOVED 4 REMOVED 10 REMOVED 3 REMOVED 24 REMOVED 384 REMOVED 360 REMOVED 4 REMOVED 1 REMOVED 60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED TOTAL LOCATIONS 934 14 R:~MNTAIN~WKC MPLTD\GRAFFITIX97kFOLY. KPT DATE RECEIV. ED 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-02-97 07-07-97 07-07-97 07-08-97 07-08-97 07-09-97 07-10-97 07-11-97 07-11-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-15-97 07-15-97 07-16-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-22-97 07-24-97 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATION REQUEST 30140 LA PRIMAVERA 26680 YNEZ ROAD 40409 CALLE MEDUSA 3RD STREET ~ FRONT 43445 CORTE BARBESTE 29800 MIRA LOMA DRIVE 43405 CORTE BARBESTE 40061 AMBERLY CIRCLE RANCHO VISTA ~ LOMA PORTOLA 42028 ROANOAKE STREET RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. ~ YNEZ 30641 DEL REY ROAD 30214 CAPRICE COURT 27260 ]EFFERSON 32180 CORTE CARMONA 31143 CAMINO DEL ESTE 39835 CANTKELL 29631 STONEWOOD 45584 OLYMPIC WAY 41496 BIG SAGE COURT 30378 SENELA COURT KAHWEA ROAD 31220 KAHWEA ROAD 30311 VERONDA PLACE 31830 CORTE MENDOZA TREE TRIMMING BROKEN PIPE ANTS IN YARD TRAFFIC CONTROL FOR E.M.W.D. PICK-UP CONES BROKEN SPRINKLERS CONE PICK-UP TRASH CONCERN LOOSE MANHOLE COVER PAINT SPILL RAISED SIDEWALK WEED ABATEMENT POTHOLES CATCH BASIN CLEANING DEBRIS PICK-UP TREE TRIMMING S.N.S. DEBRIS PICK-UP TREE TRIMMING TREE TRIMMING TREE TRIMMING FENCE DAMAGED FENCING DOWN TREE TRIMMING SLOPE MAINTENANCE DATE WORK COMPLETED 07-02-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-01-97 07-08-97 07-02-97 07-07-97 07-08-97 07-08-97 07-08-97 07-09-97 07-10-97 07-11-97 07-11-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-15-97 07-15-97 07-16-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-18-97 07-22-97 07-24-97 1 R:~TAI~WKCMPLTI~SORb~7LIULY.RPT DATE RECEIVED 07-24-97 07-25-97 07-28-97 LOCATION FRONT STREET ~ DEL RIO 44860 CORTE ANTIGUA 39310 GREENWOOD LANE REQUEST GLASS SPILL TREE REMOVAL POTHOLE DATE WORK COMPiLETED 07-24-97 07-25 -97 07-28-97 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 28 2 R:~J~MNTAl~WKCMPLTI)k,.~OK,~97~JULY.RpT CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS I DATE 07-01-97 07-02-97 07-07-97 07-08-97 07-08-97 07-09-97 07-09-97 07-11-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-14-97 07-15-97 07-15-97 07-15-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-17-97 07-18-97 07-18-97 07-18-97 07-18-97 07-22-97 MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATION CALLE HALCON EAST OF ELINDA CORTE CABRAL ~ CALLE REDONDELA RANCHO VISTA ~ MIRA LOMA SOLANA WAY ~ ABC SCHOOL VIA NORTE SOUTH OF PASEO SERENO OSCARS BUTTERFIELD STAGE NORTH OF PAUBA SANTIAGO BETWEEN YNEZ & "C" STREET TEMECULA LANE ~ CANTERFIELD DRIVE PAUBA ROAD ~ FIRE STATION #84 RED RIVER CIRCLE ~ YUKON ROAD COPPER BEACH LANE ~ YUKON ROAD LA SERENA ~ WALCOTT WALCOTT ~ CALLE CHAPOS YNEZ 100 FEET SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA CALLE GIROSAL WEST OF WALCOTT NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ~ NICOLAS PREECE LANE ~ YNEZ ROAD MIRA LOMA EAST OF CALLE VIOLETA YNEZ ROAD ~ VALLEJO AVENUE LEIGH LANE ~ CALLE KATEKINE LEIGH LANE ~ WALCOTT FIRE STATION #84 MARGARITA ROAD SOUTH OFPAUBA NICOLAS WEST OF CALLE MEDUSDA PAUBA ROAD CALLE DE VELARDO ~ PESCADO WORK COMPLETED INSTALLED INSTALLED REPLACED INSTALLED INSTALLED INSTALLED REPLACED INSTALLED REPLACED INSTALLED REPLACED REPLACED REPLACED REPLACED REPLACED INSTALLED REPLACED REPLACED INSTALLED REPLACED INSTALLED REPLACED INSTALLED INSTALLED REPLACED INSTALLED INSTALLED W-53 W-53 R-260 "T.C." W-63 2 W-80, 2 R-2 "45" R-18-2 W-17 "T.C." 6 K-26 1 "P" MARKER W-31, 2 "N" MARKER 38 CARSONITES R-1 "FADED" R-2 "25" "GRAFFITI" W-31 2 "N" MARKERS 11" "N" MARKER "T.C." 1 CARSONITE 34 CARSONITES W54A "T.C." R-1 "FADED" W-65 W-45 "T.C." W-53 2 "N" MARKERS "T.C." 3 R-26 & 2 "SPECIALTIES" R-63, W- 11 CARSONITE "DAMAGED" 2 "FIRE TRUCKS" SIGNS W-53 I~LMAINTAIbl~WKCMPLTD~ [Glq ~97~JULY.RaWF 'DATE 07-23-97 07-24-97 07-29-97 07-29-97 07-31-97 LOCATION SANTIAGO EAST OF FRONT SANTIAGO ~ NORTHGATE AVENUE CALLE MEDUSA SOUTH OF NICOLAS ROAD LA SERENA ~ CALLE MEDUSA RANCHO VISTA ~ MEADOWS PARKWAY WORK COMPLETED INSTALLED 4 R-81 REPLACED R-2 "25" "MISSING" INSTALLED R-20-B, R-2 "35" INSTALLED R-2 "35" INSTALLED 4 W-63, 4" W-65 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 115 R:~qTAIN'~KCMP LTI~SIGNSk9TJULY.RFr DATE 07- I 1-97 07-16-97 07-22-97 07-22-97 07-23 -97 07-23 -97 07-24-97 07-30-97 07-31-97 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT OF WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATION SANTIAGO BETWEEN YNEZ & "C" STREET 45584 OLYMPIC WAY PAUBA ROAD WEST OF LA PRIMAVERA YNEZ ROAD NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD MARGARITA NORTH OF WINCHESTER MIRA LOMA ~ RANCHO VISTA RANCHO VISTA EAST OF YNEZ AVENIDA DE MISSIONS ~ HWY 79 SOUTH RANCHO VISTA ROAD ~ MEADOWS WORK COMPLETED TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 17 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 9 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 9 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 8 P~O.W. TREES TRIMMED 6 R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 56 R:'uMAINTAII~WKCM PL'rD~TREESk97'o'ULY.RPT I DATE 07-07-97 07-07-97 07-08-97 07-09-97 07-14-97 07-15-97 07-16-97 07-17-97 07-21-97 07-29-97 07-30-97 07-31-97 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATION SANTIAGO ROAD WEST OF YNEZ ROAD PAUBA ROAD (~ MEADOWS PARKWAY SOLANA WAY (~ PRESCHOOL RANCO CALIF. ROAD EAST OF YNEZ ROAD CITY WIDE CITY WIDE MARGARITA ROAD ~, HWY 79 SOUTH CITY WIDE LA SERENA (~ MEADOWS PARKWAY AREA #2 AREA #2 RANCHO VISTA ~_~ MEADOWS PARKWAY I INSTALLED INSTALLED INSTALLED INSTALLED REPAINTED REPAINTED INSTALLED REPAINTED INSTALLED REPAINTED REPAINTED INSTALLED WORK COMPLETED 5 LEGENDS 2 LEGENDS 3 LEGENDS 2 LEGENDS 150 L.F. RED CURB 60 BIKE LANE LEGENDS 54 BIKE LANE LEGENDS 2 ARROWS 35 BIKE LANE LEGENDS 200' RED CURB 46 LEGENDS 42 LEGENDS 17 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS L.F. OR NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING 268 350 R:~.INTAIN~WKCMPLTD~I'RIPING~7~IULY.RPT I DATE 07-01-97 07-21-97 07-22-97 07-22-97 07-23 -97 07-24-97 07-30-97 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATION' RIVERTON EAST OF CALLE GIRASOL DIAZ ROAD ~ WINCHESTER ROAD YNEZ ROAD NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD MARGARITA ROAD NORTH OF WINCHESTER MARGARITA ROAD NORTH OF WINCHESTER MARGARITA ROAD NORTH OF WINCHESTER AVENIDA DE MISSIONS ~ HWY 70 SOUTH WORK COMPLETED I ABATED 500 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 1,082 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 1,000 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 300 S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 27,225 S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 5,649 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS ABATED 10,640 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS TOTAL S.F. R-O-W WEEDS ABATED 46,396 R:~,AINTAiNX.WKCMPLTI~WEE D Sk97WOLY. RPT DATE 07-02-97 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF JULY, 1997 LOCATION 39510 JUNE COURT TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED CLEANED & CHECKED WORK COMPLETED 2 CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS CATCH BASINS K:~V~'NTAI~WKC MPLTD\CATCHBAS~ 7~/ULY.RFF .~Z ~o On 0-~ o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ILl -- Q 0 -- U.I ~J ILl ~<~o~