Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout060920 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 (951) 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 REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA JUNE 9, 2020 - 7:00 PM IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Order N 29 20, dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID 19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N 29 20, the public may only view the meeting on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber. Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this Council meeting, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the City Clerk. Email comments must be submitted to the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Email comments on matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls the item for Public Comments. Email comments on agenda items must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor closes public comments on the agenda item. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would otherwise govern speaker comments at the Council meeting. Electronic comments on agenda items for this Council meeting may only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted. Reading of Public Comments: The City Clerk shall read all email comments, provided that the reading shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Council may provide, consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. The email comments submitted shall become part of the record of the Council meeting. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor James Stewart INVOCATION: TBD FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart Page 1 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the City Council on items that appear on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. For all Public Hearing or Business items on the agenda, each speaker is limited to five minutes. For this meeting, public comments may be submitted and read into the record pursuant to the important notice provided at the top of this agenda. 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 minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR 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. Waive Reading of Standard Ordinances and Resolutions Recommendation Attachments That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all standard ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda except as specifically required by the Government Code. Agenda Report 2. Approve Action Minutes of May 21 and May 26, 2020 Recommendation: That the City Council approve the action minutes of May 21 and May 26, 2020. Attachments: Action Minutes - 5/21/20 Action Minutes - 5/26/20 3. Approve List of Demands Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Attachments: Agenda Report RPsnlntinn List of Demands Page 2 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 4. 5. 6. Adopt Ordinance 2020-06 Amending Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone of the Temecula Municipal Code Long Range Project No. LR20-0279) (Second Reading) Recommendation: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO.2020-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3) Attachments: Agenda Report (lydinnnoP Adopt Resolution Reaffirming and Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency Related to the COVID-19 Virus Pandemic Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REAFFIRMING AND PROCLAIMING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO THE COVID-19 VIRUS PANDEMIC AND ISSUING CERTAIN ORDERS FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY AFFAIRS DURING THE LOCAL EMERGENCY Attachments: Agenda Report Resolution Adopt Resolutions Regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the following resolutions regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE Page 3 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE AT ANY MUNICIPAL ELECTION Attachments: Agenda Report Resolution - Calling Election Resolution - Consolidating Election Resolution - Candidate Statements Resolution - Tie Procedures 7. Receive and File the 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report (GPAPR). Attachments: Agenda Report 2019 General Plan Annual Report 2019 Housing Annual Report Summary April 28, 2020 Staff Report Page 4 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND/OR THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Page 5 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING CALL TO ORDER: President Zak Schwank ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Board of Directors on items that appear on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. For all Public Hearing or Business items on the agenda, each speaker is limited to five minutes. For this meeting, public comments may be submitted and read into the record pursuant to the important notice provided at the top of this agenda. CSD CONSENT CALENDAR 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 Temecula Community Services District request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 8. Approve Action Minutes of MU 26, 2020 Recommendation Attachments That the Board of Directors approve the action minutes of May 26, 2020. Action Minutes CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTOR REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District will be held on Tuesday, June 23, 2020, at 5:30 p.m., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., at the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Page 6 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - NONE TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY - NONE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY - NONE RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL / COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT JOINT PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before or during a public hearing in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) in the manner prescribed in the important notice at the top of this agenda. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 9. Approve Update to the 2017-22 Citizen Participation Plan and Substantial Amendment to the 2019-20 Community Development Block Grant Annual Action Plan Recommendation: That the City Council adopt resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN SETTING THE CITY'S POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROGRAM (CDBG) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING, ANNUAL ACTION PLANS, ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS, SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS, AND DISASTER RECOVERY AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE 2019-20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ANNUAL ACTION PLAN Attachments: Agenda Report Resolution - Citizen Participation Plan Exhibit A - Citizen Participation Plan Resolution - Substantial Amendment Exhibit A - Substantial Amendment Notice of Public Hearing Page 7 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 10. Approve Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program - (CIP) and Adopt Fiscal Year 2020-21 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency (SARDA Recommendation That the City Council/Board of Directors adopt the following resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-25 AND ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 RESOLUTION NO. CSD A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER RESOLUTION NO. SARDA A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2021-25, ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21, ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER Page 8 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 Attachments: Agenda Report Exhibit A - Summary of Budget Adjustments Exhibit A - CIP Budget Adjustments Transmittal Message Resolution - Cites Resolution - TCSD AOB Resolution - Cites Resolution - SARDA Resolution - Schedule of Authorized Positions Attachment - Salary Schedule Attachment - Schedule of Authorized Positions Resolution - Appropriations Limit Resolution Attachment - GANN Limit BUSINESS 11. Provide General Direction to Staff on a Proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail Program in (lld Tn-,vn Recommendation: That the City Council provide general direction to staff on whether to proceed with a proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail Program in Old Town. Attachments: Agenda Report COMMISSION REPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT Page 9 City Council Agenda June 9, 2020 ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on Tuesday, June 23, 2020, at 5:30 p.m., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., at the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The full agenda packet (including staff reports, public closed session information, and any supplemental material available after the original posting of the agenda), distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on the agenda, will be available for public viewing online at temeculaca.gov at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda, please contact the City Clerk's Department at (951) 694 6444. Page 10 Item No. 1 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Waive Reading of Standard Ordinances and Resolutions PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all standard ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda except as specifically required by the Government Code. BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula is a general law city formed under the laws of the State of California. With respect to adoption of ordinances and resolutions, the City adheres to the requirements set forth in the Government Code. Unless otherwise required, the full reading of the text of standard ordinances and resolutions is waived. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: None Item No. 2 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP CONFERENCE CENTER 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MAY 21, 2020 - 9:30 AM IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING This meeting was conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20, dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the meeting online and not in the Council Chamber. Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at the meeting, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Email comments on matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls the item for Public Comments. Email comments on agenda items must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls public comments on the agenda item. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would otherwise govern speaker comments at the Council meeting. Electronic comments on agenda items for the meeting may only be submitted via email. Comments via text and/or social media will not be accepted. Reading of Public Comments: The City Clerk shall read all email comments, provided that the reading shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Council may provide, consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. The email comments submitted shall become part of the record of the Council meeting. CALL TO ORDER at 9:30 AM: Mayor James Stewart FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart PUBLIC COMMENTS The following individuals submitted an electronic comment on agendized item: • Habib Isaac (1) • Lee Rosu (1) BUSINESS Review Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Fiscal Year 2020-21 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency SARDA Recommendation: That the City Council/Board of Directors review and discuss the Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency (SARDA). Workshop with discussion and general direction only; no action taken. ADJOURNMENT At 10:45 AM, the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 9, 2020, at 5:30 PM for Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MAY 26, 2020 - 7:00 PM IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING This meeting was conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Order N 29 20, dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID 19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N 29 20, the public may only view the meeting on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber. Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this Council meeting, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the City Clerk. Email comments must be submitted to the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Email comments on matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor calls the item for Public Comments. Email comments on agenda items must be submitted prior to the time the Mayor closes public comments on the agenda item. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would otherwise govern speaker comments at the Council meeting. Electronic comments on agenda items for this Council meeting may only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted. Reading of Public Comments: The City Clerk shall read all email comments, provided that the reading shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Council may provide, consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. The email comments submitted shall become part of the record of the Council meeting. CALL TO ORDER at 7:00 PM: Mayor James Stewart INVOCATION: Aaron Adams FLAG SALUTE: Mayor James Stewart ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart PUBLIC COMMENTS The following individuals submitted an electronic comment on non-agendized items: • Anonymous • Louis Todd • Tanis June Earle 0 Natalie Morgan The following individuals submitted an electronic comment on agendized items: • Brandon Jantz (20) • Ira Robinson (20) • Bruce and Marjorie Drayton (20) • Ed Dool (20) • Kimberly Savage (20) • Richard Bivin (20) • Kim Daly (20) • Jane Lauhon (20) • Brenda Hamilton (20) • Toni Reyes (20) • Lisa Maloney (20) • Doug Ferrin (20) • Sandra Vaniman (20) • John Guterrez (20) • Kathy Bowman (20) • Charles Colburn (20) • Tori Manning (20) • Rob Crisell (20) • Deborah Noonan (20) • Jennifer Palmer (20) • Jill Erickson (20) • Eileen Rosenow (20) • Lori Bermudez (20) • Rachel Pena (20) CITY COUNCIL REPORTS CONSENT CALENDAR • Kathleen Bowen (20) • Ann and Dennis Johnson (20) • Michael Richards (20) • Chastity Cervantez (20) Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar. Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Edwards, Second by Schwank. The vote reflected unanimous approval. 1. Waive Reading of Standard Ordinances and Resolutions Recommendation: That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all standard ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda except as specifically required by the Government Code. 2. Approve Action Minutes of April 28, May 6 and May 12, 2020 Recommendation: That the City Council approve the action minutes of April 28, May 6 and May 12, 2020. 3. Approve List of Demands Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4. Approve City Treasurer's Report as of March 31, 2020 Recommendation: That the City Council approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of March 31, 2020. 5. Adopt Ordinance 2020-04 Amending Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code Pertaining to the Accessory Dwelling Units (Second Reading) Recommendation: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO.2020-04 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DELETE CERTAIN SUBSECTIONS OF SECTION 17.06.050 PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, ESTABLISHING A NEW CHAPTER 17.23 PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, AMENDING TABLE 17.24.040 REGARDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 6. Adopt Ordinance 2020-05 Amending Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code to Conform with the Density Bonus Ordinance Law Under the California Government Code (Long Range Project Number LR19-1597) (Second Reading) Recommendation: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 2020-05 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE REGULATIONS TO CONFORM WITH DENSITY BONUS LAW (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915) AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 7. Extend Terms of Appointment for Planning Commissioner Lanae Turley-Trejo and Old Town Local Review Board Members Annette Brown and Pew Recommendation: That the City Council extend the terms of appointment for Planning Commissioner Lanae Turley-Trejo and Old Town Local Review Board Members Annette Brown and Peg Moore to October 10, 2020. 8. Set Public Hearing to Approve Solid Waste and Recycling Rates for Commercial Customers for Fiscal Year 2020-21 Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOLID WASTE AND 3 9. 10. 11. 12. RECYCLING RATES FOR COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 Approve Resolution Regarding the Return of Funds to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGARDING THE RETURN OF FUNDS TO THE US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Approve Loan Agreement with Las Haciendas Housing Associates, LP for a 77 Unit Affordable Housing Project Recommendation: That the City Council approve a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE HOUSING SUCCESSOR TO THE FORMER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (AND, WITH RESPECT TO A LOAN OF CITY FEES, ALSO IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE CITY) APPROVING A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH LAS HACIENDAS HOUSING ASSOCIATES, L.P. FOR THE "LAS HACIENDAS" 77 UNIT LOW INCOME AFFORDABLE MULTI -FAMILY (APARTMENT) PROJECT AT 28715 LAS HACIENDAS STREET AND 28772 CALLE CORTEZ, AND THE TAKING OF RELATED ACTIONS, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15182 Approve Resolution to Amend the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE APPLICABLE TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA Approve Tract Maps and Subdivision Improvement and Monumentation Agreements for Sommers Bend and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Related Documents Recommendation: That the City Council: 4 1. Approve Tract Map 37341-11, 37341-12, 37341-13, 37341-14, 37341-15 and 37341-16 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 2. Approve the Subdivision Improvement and Monumentation Agreements with the Developer; 3. Authorize the City Manager to execute the agreements on behalf of the City. RECESS: At 7:25 PM, the City Council recessed and convened as the Temecula Community Services District Meeting and Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. At 7:30 PM, the City Council resumed with the remainder of the City Council Agenda. RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING 17. Approve Amendment to the Old Town Specific Plan to Allow Four -Story Hotels Within the Downtown Core District and to Add Language to the Specific Plan to Clarify the Intended Use of a Minor Exception for Building Height Recommendation: That the City Council adopt resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO.2009071049) RESOLUTION NO. 2020-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO THE OLD TOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-5) (LONG RANGE PROJECT NO. LR20-0209) Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Edwards, Second by Schwank. The vote reflected unanimous approval. 18. Introduce Ordinance to Amend Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone of the Temecula Municipal Code Long Range Project No. LR20-0279) Recommendation: That the City Council introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: 5 ORDINANCE NO. 2020-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3) Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Edwards, Second by Rahn. The vote reflected unanimous approval. 19. Adopt California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Transportation Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)Analysis Guidelines Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020-33 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA") TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ("VMT") ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR PURPOSES OF ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS UNDER CEQA, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR18-1506) Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Schwank, Second by Edwards. The vote reflected unanimous approval. BUSINESS 20. Receive Update to Community Recovery and Reopening Plan and Related Efforts and Provide General Direction Regarding the Same Recommendation: That the City Council receive the update to the Community Recovery and Reopening Plan and related efforts and provide general direction regarding the same. Receive and file only. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS 21. City Council Travel/Conference Report — Receive and file only. 22. Community Development Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only. 23. Fire Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only. 6 24. Police Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only. 25. Public Works Department Monthly Report — Receive and file only. COMMISSION REPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMENT At 8:50 PM, the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 9, 2020, at 5:30 PM for Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Adjourned in memory of Hans Bolowich of CalFire James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] Item No. 3 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Approve the List of Demands PREPARED BY: Jada Shafe, Accounting Technician II RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A BACKGROUND: All claims and demands are reported and summarized for review and approval by the City Council on a routine basis at each City Council meeting. The attached claims represent the paid claims and demands since the last City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: All claims and demands were paid from appropriated funds or authorized resources of the City and have been recorded in accordance with the City's policies and procedures. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. List of Demands RESOLUTION NO.2020- 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 HEREBY RESOLVE 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, has been reviewed by the City Manager's Office and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $4,073,465.16 Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 05/14/2020 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 05/21/2020 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 05/14/2020 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: $ 3,052,261.79 479,732.47 541,470.90 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 6/9/2020 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 4,073,465.16 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 001 GENERAL FUND $ 2,598,249.92 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 764.13 165 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 11,300.11 170 MEASURE A FUND 19,855.00 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 169,108.83 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B STREET LIGHTS 406.63 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REFUSE RECYCLING 591.67 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 1,575.75 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 8,157.21 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND 547,475.77 300 INSURANCE FUND 22,898.34 305 WORKERS' COMPENSATION 1,749.84 320 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 57,907.27 330 CENTRAL SERVICES 6,964.29 340 FACILITIES 18,071.65 472 CFD 01-2 HARVESTONA&B DEBT SERVICE 134.44 473 CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND 134.39 474 AD03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE 134.39 475 CFD03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND 163.44 476 CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 134.39 477 CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT SERVICE FUND 192.66 478 CFD 16-01 RORIPAUGH PHASE II 134.39 501 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 1 SADDLEWOOD 22.29 502 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 2 WINCHESTER CREEK 185.70 503 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 3 RANCHO HIGHLANDS 595.40 504 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 4 THE VINEYARDS 14.09 505 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 5 SIGNET SERIES 186.49 506 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 6 WOODCREST COUNTRY 107.34 507 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 7 RIDGEVIEW 37.63 508 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 8 VILLAGE GROVE 1,884.83 509 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 9 RANCHO SOLANA 42.88 510 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 10 MARTINIQUE 16.94 511 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 11 MEADOWVIEW 12.53 512 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 12 VINTAGE HILLS 1,141.91 513 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 13 PRESLEY DEVELOP. 724.72 514 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 14 MORRISON HOMES 37.65 515 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 15 BARCLAY ESTATES 14.97 516 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 16 TRADEWINDS 285.98 517 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 17 MONTE VISTA 11.35 518 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 18 TEMEKU HILLS 417.09 519 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 19 CHANTEMAR 411.43 520 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 20 CROWNE HILL 1,438.02 521 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 21 VAIL RANCH 1,874.32 522 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 22 SUTTON PLACE 13.29 523 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 23 PHEASENT RUN 133.89 524 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 24 HARVESTON 1,791.34 525 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 25 SERENA HILLS 171.25 526 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 26 GALLERYTRADITION 68.41 527 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 27 AVONDALE 15.41 528 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 28 WOLF CREEK 43,456.31 529 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 29 GALLERY PORTRAIT 68.58 700 CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-GASB45 10,707.71 3,531,994.26 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 001 GENERAL FUND $ 314,062.30 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 661.80 165 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 5,262.32 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 104,524.79 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B STREET LIGHTS 486.88 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D REFUSE RECYCLING 1,135.62 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 543.75 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 2,497.99 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,029.15 305 WORKERS' COMPENSATION 730.53 320 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 35,399.83 330 CENTRAL SERVICES 2,660.77 340 FACILITIES 7,872.91 472 CFD 01-2 HARVESTONA&B DEBT SERVICE 104.39 473 CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND 104.48 474 AD03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE 104.48 475 CFD03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND 129.76 476 CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 104.48 477 CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT SERVICE FUND 155.12 478 CFD 16-01 RORIPAUGH PHASE II 104.48 501 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 1 SADDLEWOOD 0.30 502 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 2 WINCHESTER CREI 11.46 503 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 3 RANCHO HIGHLAN 0.23 504 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 4 THE VINEYARDS 2.29 505 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 5 SIGNET SERIES 11.46 506 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 6 WOODCREST COUP 5.75 507 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 7 RIDGEVIEW 11.46 508 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 8 VILLAGE GROVE 230.69 509 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 9 RANCHO SOLANA 0.70 510 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 10 MARTINIQUE 4.58 511 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 11 MEADOWVIEW 1.15 512 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 12 VINTAGE HILLS 212.82 513 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 13 PRESLEY DEVELC 11.46 514 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 14 MORRISON HOME 3.43 515 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 15 BARCLAY ESTATE 3.00 516 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 16 TRADEWINDS 13.54 517 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 17 MONTE VISTA 0.23 518 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 18 TEMEKU HILLS 50.01 519 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 19 CHANTEMAR 26.84 520 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 20 CROWNE HILL 173.58 521 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 21 VAIL RANCH 218.08 522 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 22 SUTTON PLACE 1.61 523 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 23 PHEASENT RUN 3.21 524 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 24 HARVESTON 132.60 525 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 25 SERENA HILLS 22.24 526 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 26 GALLERYTRADIT] 0.46 527 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 27 AVONDALE 3.21 528 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 28 WOLF CREEK 178.19 529 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 29 GALLERY PORTRJ 1.61 700 CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-GASB45 62,458.88 TOTAL BY FUND: 541,470.90 $ 4,073,465.16 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK Check # Date Vendor Description 8609 4/9/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 012085 ISTOCK INT'L INC. KH IMAGES FOR PROMOTIONAL FLYERS & WEBSI 010046 TV CONVENTION &VISITORS KH REGIST: XENIA HOSPITALITY BUREAU, DBA VISIT TEMECULA AWARDS: TCS VALLEY 020249 LAUND3R.COM LLC KH LAUNDER SVC: SAFETY VEST FOR STAFF 004822 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY KH DIAL RIDE VOUCHERS: SENIOR & DISABL 015354 FACEBOOK.COM KH BOOST: AROUND & ABOUT TEMECULA 000718 NATIONAL RECREATION PARK KH STAFF TRAINING/CERTIFICATION: ASSOC TCSD 002103 CALIF ASSOCIATION PUBLIC KH AWARD SUBMISSION FEE: TCSD INFO, DBA: CAPIO 020195 NATIONAL CHARITY LEAGUE KH REGISTRATION: RECOGNITION MTG 021805 KLEEN-RITE CORP KH PROMOTIONAL ITEMS: ROD RUN 008039 PORTOLA PLAZA HOTEL KH LODGING: PARMA CONF: CARDENAS 015354 FACEBOOK.COM KH BOOST: AROUND & ABOUT TEMECULA 021806 BOSS -PLAY ESCAPE ROOMS KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSION: TCSD 006952 PAYPAL KH VERISIGN PAYFLOW PRO TRANSACTION 002103 CALIF ASSOCIATION PUBLIC KH AWARD SUBMISSION FEE: TCSD INFO, DBA: CAPIO 017443 OPERATING CO.LLC KH RFRSHMNTS: HOSPITALITY: MED.CUISINE, DBA: DAPHNE'S THEATER CALIFORNIA 000718 NATIONAL RECREATION PARK KH TRAINING FOR AQUATICS: DAVIS, ASSOC M. 000718 NATIONAL RECREATION PARK KH TRAINING FOR AQUATICS: POST, ASSOC K. 021199 THE DROP ZONE KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSION 020886 NETFLIX.COM KH MONTHLY CHARGE FOR SVC: CRC TEEN ROOM 000152 CALIF PARKS AND KH ADMIN GENERAL MTG: RECREATION SOC, C P R S RUSSO/WOOTEN 020535 LUNA GRILL KH THEATER HOSPITALITY: TCSD 008794 YARD HOUSE USA INC, YARD KH RFRSHMNTS: CPRS CONF: TCSD HOUSE STAFF 021807 ROUND ONE ENTERTAINMENT KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCUSION: INC, DBA ROUND 1 BOWLING TCSD Amount Paid Check Total 120.00 60.00 35.25 700.00 18.00 314.00 190.00 200.00 3,233.55 672.60 7.00 572.40 194.60 190.00 338.80 270.00 270.00 452.00 8.99 80.00 55.80 567.11 100.00 Page:1 apChkLst O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 2 Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 000152 CALIF PARKS AND KH MEMBERSHIP: LYNTON, L. 145.00 RECREATION SOC, C P R S 021113 DISCOVERY SCIENCE CTR OF KH SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSION: 150.00 OC, DBA DISCOVERY CUBE OF TCSD OC 000152 CALIF PARKS AND KH CONF REGIST: CPRS CONF: 102.50 RECREATION SOC, C P R S LYNTON, L. 010046 TV CONVENTION &VISITORS KH REGIST: XENIA HOSPITALITY 40.00 BUREAU, DBA VISIT TEMECULA AWARDS VALLEY KH FRAUD CHARGES TO BE REVERSED 200.00 9,287.60 8665 4/30/2020 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN ICMA-RC RETIREMENT TRUST 457 13,731.25 13,731.25 303355 PAYMENT 8668 4/30/2020 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT PAYMENT 11,844.54 11,844.54 SOLUTION 8669 4/30/2020 019088 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT NATIONWIDE LOAN REPAYMENT 28.51 28.51 SOLUTION PAYMENT 8738 5/11/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 021453 SACRAMENTO BEE RO SUBSCRIPTION: ONLINE DIGITAL 12.99 12.99 SUBSCRIP 8739 5/11/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 001060 HYATT JS LODGING: CPRS CONF: 3/10-3/12 525.48 001060 HYATT JS PARKING: CPRS CONF: 3/10-3/12 32.00 557.48 8740 5/11/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 002283 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL RG LODGING: DEPUTY EXPOSED 157.07 COVID-19 008337 STAPLES BUSINESS CREDIT RG TONER CARTRIDGE: COVID-19 489.35 020489 GREYHOUND LINES RG HOMELESS REUNIFICATION PRGM 147.99 021813 RUSHORDERTEES.COM RG FACE COVERINGS: HOMELESS: 240.00 1,034.41 COVID-19 8742 5/11/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 021342 RING.COM WW SUBSCRIPTION: OVERLAND 100.00 TRAIL: FIRE 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC WW BUILT-IN PROPANE GRILL: FIRE 32.88 DEPT 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC WW TOOL BOX: FIRE DEPT 1,195.16 001264 COSTCO TEMECULA 491 WW PAPER SHREDDER: FIRE STA 95 97.86 1,425.90 Paget apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 8743 5/11/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 021811 BLACKHAWK NETWORK IG SERVICE AWARDS: HR 021809 CREATIVE COSTUMING & IG FACE COVERING: ESSENTIAL DESIGN, INC WORKERS 021810 IMPULSIVE APPAREL INC IG FACE COVERING: ESSENTIAL WORKERS 8745 5/11/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 006714 SHERATON HOTEL MH LODGING: REFUND: TYLER CONNECT 006552 PAINTED EARTH MH EVENT: INFO TECH DEPT 013338 APPLE STORE MH JOINT VENTURE MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 021274 ZOOM.US MH ADDITIONAL MEMBERS: INFO TECH 021274 ZOOM.US MH MONTHLY RENEWAL FEE: INFO TECH 021798 MALWAREBYTES MH ANTIVIRUS -LAPTOPS NOT ON CITY NETWORK 8746 5/14/2020 010349 CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT SUPPORT 8747 5/14/2020 017429 COBRAADVANTAGE INC, DBA FSA REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENT THE ADVANTAGE GROUP 8748 5/14/2020 021301 I C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN ICMA- 401(A) RETIREMENT PLAN 106474 PAYMENT 8749 5/14/2020 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN ICMA-RC RETIREMENT TRUST 457 303355 PAYMENT 8750 5/14/2020 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) STATE TAXES PAYMENT 8751 5/14/2020 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) FEDERAL TAXES PAYMENT 8752 5/14/2020 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT PAYMENT SOLUTION 8753 5/14/2020 019088 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT NATIONWIDE LOAN REPAYMENT SOLUTION PAYMENT 8754 5/14/2020 000389 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT OBRA- PROJECT RETIREMENT SOLUTION PAYMENT 8755 5/14/2020 000245 PERS - HEALTH INSUR PERS HEALTH PAYMENT PREMIUM PERS HEALTH PAYMENT Amount Paid Check Total 55.94 1,000.00 1,107.63 2,163.57 -325.13 399.08 499.00 79.96 786.70 1,543.15 2,982.76 899.07 899.07 19,735.14 19,735.14 1,134.62 1,134.62 14,931.84 14,931.84 27,179.11 27,179.11 90,453.54 90,453.54 13,201.92 13,201.92 28.51 28.51 709.84 709.84 142,443.33 0.00 142,443.33 Page:3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK Check # Date Vendor 8756 5/14/2020 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT) 8757 5/4/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8758 5/4/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8759 5/4/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8760 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8761 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8762 5/4/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8763 5/4/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8764 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8765 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8766 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8767 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8768 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8769 5/8/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8770 5/8/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8771 5/5/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8772 5/8/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total PERS RETIREMENT PAYMENT 108,939.70 108,939.70 APR 2-41-048-2012 30498 TEM PKWY 77.98 77.98 APR 2-35-403-6337 41375 MCCABE CT 393.21 393.21 APR 2-35-664-9053 29119 MARGARITA 296.12 296.12 RD APR 2-41-812-6629 42061 MAIN ST 27.96 27.96 APR 2-35-707-0010 33451 S HWY 79 11.79 11.79 APR 2-30-520-4414 32781 TEM PKWY 925.56 925.56 APR 2-25-393-4681 41951 MORAGA RD 708.29 708.29 APR 2-29-953-8249 46497 WOLF CREEK 13.56 13.56 DR APR 2-29-953-8082 31523 WOLF 14.60 14.60 VALLEY RD APR 2-29-295-3510 32211 WOLF 969.39 969.39 VALLEY RD APR 2-29-223-8607 42035 2ND ST 286.24 286.24 APR 2-39-732-3171 41997 MARGARITA 11.05 11.05 RD APR 2-29-657-2332 45538 REDWOOD 12.21 12.21 RD APR 2-29-953-8447 31738 WOLF 12.06 12.06 VALLEY RD APR 2-00-397-5067 40499 CALLE 935.56 935.56 MEDUSA APR 2-31-404-6020 28771 OLD TOWN 601.13 601.13 FRONT Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK Check # Date Vendor 8773 5/8/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 8774 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8775 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8776 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8777 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8778 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8779 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8780 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8781 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8782 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8783 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8784 5/7/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8785 5/8/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 8786 5/1/2020 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRICT 8787 5/8/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE 8788 5/8/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE 8789 5/8/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total 2-30-220-8749 45850 N WOLF CREEK 379.38 379.38 DR APR 129-535-4236-741000 MAIN ST 1,736.58 1,736.58 APR 129-582-9784-3 43230 BUS PARK 195.57 195.57 DR APR 091-024-9300-5 30875 RANCHO 683.59 683.59 VISTA RD APR 060-293-3315-7 28922 PUJOL ST 69.01 69.01 APR 133-040-7373-0 43210 BUS PARK 18.59 18.59 DR APR 196-025-0344-3 42081 MAIN ST 101.51 101.51 APR 021-725-0775-4 41845 6TH ST 102.25 102.25 APR 181-383-8881-6 28314 MERCEDES 109.77 109.77 ST APR 026-671-2909-8 42051 MAIN ST 88.32 88.32 APR 101-525-0950-0 28816 PUJOL ST 35.75 35.75 APR 028-025-1468-3 41375 MCCABE CT 247.06 247.06 APR 101-525-1560-6 27415 284.64 284.64 ENTERPRISE CIR VARI MAR WATER 3001042 30600 6,992.47 6,992.47 PAUBA RD MAY INTERNET SVCS- 32211 WOLF 191.00 191.00 VALLEY RD MAY INTERNET SVCS- 30755AULD RD 685.54 685.54 MAY INTERNET SVCS- 41000 MAIN ST 3,430.75 3,430.75 Page:5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 8791 5/7/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE MAY INTERNET SVCS- 29119 MARGARITA RD 8792 5/6/2020 014486 VERIZON WIRELESS 3/11-4/10 TASK FORCE TABLETS POLICE 8793 5/7/2020 014486 VERIZON WIRELESS 03/16 - 04/15 CELLULAR/BROADBAN D:CITYW I D 8794 4/9/2020 006887 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 001085 L N CURTIS AND SONS WW RESCUE EQUIPMENT: FIRE 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC WW BUILT-IN PROPANE GRILL: FIRE DEPT 8795 5/14/2020 002412 RICHARDS WATSON AND MAR 2020 LEGAL SERVICES GERSHON CREDIT:MAR 2020 LEGAL SERVICES 201441 5/8/2020 012614 DBX INC REPAIR TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPT: PW-TRAFFIC 201442 5/14/2020 004802 ADLERHORST INTERNATIONAL APR K9 TRAINING: DAYKA/BORIS: LLC POLICE 201443 5/14/2020 019307 ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE TRUCK REPAIRS: TRAFFIC DIV SMOG 201444 5/14/2020 018859 AED SUPERSTORE, TRAINING EQUIPMENT: AQUATICS AEDS.COM, AED, OUTLET, ALLIED MED. PROD. 201445 5/14/2020 003951 ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET 201446 5/14/2020 007282 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES ANTI -FOG SPRAY FOR GOGGLES: INC FIRE BOOKS: LIBRARY MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE SUMMER DAY CAMP SUPPLIES: CRC 201447 5/14/2020 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES PHLEBOTOMY SVCS: TEM SHERIFF AFN 201448 5/14/2020 000747 AMERICAN PLANNING MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: JONES, ERIC ASSOCIATION MBRSHIP RENEWALS:PLNG COMMISSIC MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL:TOMA, SARA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: RABIDOU, BR/ Amount Paid Check Total 348.49 348.49 444.00 444.00 10,335.51 10,335.51 242.29 1,260.20 1,502.49 70,258.11 -1,284.30 68,973.81 24,673.00 24,673.00 350.00 350.00 451.80 451.80 5,427.71 5,427.71 175.09 498.49 673.58 101.55 16.30 -2.69 -10.78 6.12 561.70 672.20 irlo]P4 rlo]P4i.. 470.00 461.00 265.00 265.00 1,461.00 Page.-6 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201449 5/14/2020 018941 AZTEC LANDSCAPING INC APR MAINT SVCS: PARKS/SCHOOLS PW 201450 5/14/2020 017867 CAPITOL ENQUIRY POCKET DIRECTORY OF CA LEGISLATURE: 201451 5/14/2020 018828 CASC ENGINEERING AND, WQMP/PLAN CK - PW18-11 PARK & CONSULTING INC RIDE ENG/GIS SVCS:CATCH BASIN DEVICE Al' 201452 5/14/2020 004462 CDW LLC, DBA CDW COMPUTER LOAN PURCHASES: GOVERNMENT LLC OBMANN, B. 201453 5/14/2020 004462 CDW LLC, DBA CDW MISC SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP:INFO GOVERNMENT LLC TECH 201454 5/14/2020 021601 CEMEX CONSTRUCTION CONCRETE MATERIALS: PW STREET MATERIALS, PACIFIC LLC MAINT 201455 5/14/2020 005410 COLE, TOM REIMB: UNIFORM: CODE ENFORCEMENT 201456 5/14/2020 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH EMPLOYEE CHARITY DONATIONS CHARITIES PAYMENT 201457 5/14/2020 002945 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: VARI PARKS DIST 201458 5/14/2020 011922 CORELOGIC INC, DBA MAR PROP ID SFTWR: CODE CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS ENFORCEMENT APR PROP ID SFTWR: CODE ENFORCEN 201459 5/14/2020 009831 D R HORTON AMERICA'S REFUND: ENG DEPOSIT LD14-2627 BUILDER TRACT MAP 201460 5/14/2020 020648 DG INVESTMENT HOLDINGS 2 PRGS PMT: CITYWIDE SURVEILLANCE INC, CONVERGINT PRJT TECHNOLOGIES 201461 5/14/2020 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL PORTABLE RESTROOM: LASERENA SRVCS WAY PORTABLE RESTROOM: LONG CANYON PORTABLE RESTROOM: RIVERTON PAR PORTABLE RESTROOM: VAIL RANCH PA Amount Paid Check Total 9,550.50 9,550.50 22.34 22.34 1,839.50 10,911.50 12,751.00 643.55 643.55 44.24 44.24 647.77 647.77 136.53 136.53 4.00 4.00 163.13 163.13 471.50 499.00 970.50 50,000.00 50,000.00 85,387.76 85,387.76 185.88 145.88 110.88 165.88 608.52 Page:? apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK Check # Date Vendor (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total 201462 5/14/2020 004192 DOWNS ENERGY FUEL FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: TRAFFIC 160.74 DIV FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: TCSD 229.97 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: STREET MAI 574.84 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: PW CIP 148.65 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: BLDG INSPE 61.64 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: CODE ENFOI 27.25 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: LAND DEV 64.69 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: PARK MAINT 602.08 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES: FIRE DEPT 52.99 201463 5/14/2020 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE INC IRRIGATION REPAIRS: VAR 888.53 PARKS/MEDIANS 201464 5/14/2020 017432 EYEMED VISION CARE VISION PLAN PAYMENT 1,729.07 201465 5/14/2020 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 11/25/19 EXPRESS MAIL SVCS: 137.00 STREET PW 201466 5/14/2020 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 4/27 EXP MAIL SVCS: CIP 20.76 201467 5/14/2020 001511 FIELDMAN ROLAPP AND FINANCIAL ADVISORY SVCS: FINANCE 1,189.78 ASSOCIATES 201468 5/14/2020 021708 FORMENTERA, ANDREW REIMB: CPRS CONF: 3/10-3/13 1,198.23 201469 5/14/2020 002982 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD KRACH, BREE - CASE# 603016103 168.02 201470 5/14/2020 016184 FUN EXPRESS LLC, SUMMER DAY CAMP SUPPLIES: CRC 595.58 SUBSIDIARY OF ORIENTALTR 201471 5/14/2020 012066 GEOCON WEST INC MAR GEOTECH 2,055.00 SVCS: PECH. PKWY, PW 15-14 201472 5/14/2020 021308 GILLIS + PANICHAPAN ARCHITECTURAL SVCS: FIRE STA 84 1,515.00 ARCHITECTS, INC PW19-14 201473 5/14/2020 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS MISC OFC SUPPLIES:STA 92 FIRE 164.87 INC MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PREVENTION FIRE 33.44 MISC OFC SUPPLIES: COVID19 228.27 201474 5/14/2020 014173 GOLDSTAR ASPHALT PAINT & SUPPLIES: CRC 870.00 PRODUCTS, DBA NPG CORPORATION 201475 5/14/2020 003792 GRAINGER UNIFORM SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW 677.25 UNIFORM SUPPLIES: PARKS: PW 345.89 1,922.85 888.53 1,729.07 137.00 20.76 1,189.78 1,198.23 168.02 595.58 2,055.00 1,515.00 426.58 870.00 1,023.14 Page:8 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201476 5/14/2020 021821 GUERRA, ELISEO REFUND: WONDER OF ELVIS 5.1.20 CANCELLED 201477 5/14/2020 012748 HARDY AND HARPER INC ROAD REPAIR: WINCH ESTER/NICOLAS RD SLURRY & STRIPING: WOLF CREEK 201478 5/14/2020 013749 HELIXSTORM INC VEEAM BACKUP OF OFFICE 365 201479 5/14/2020 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC MISC SUPPLIES: CRC 201480 5/14/2020 012883 JACOB'S HOUSE INC EMPLOYEE CHARITY DONATIONS PAYMENT 201481 5/14/2020 012285 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY MISC SUPPLIES: THEATER 201482 5/14/2020 019293 KITTRICH CORPORATION K9 FOOD: TEMECULA POLICE 201483 5/14/2020 001282 KNORR SYSTEMS INC POOL SUPPLIES: VARIOUS FACILITIES PW 201484 5/14/2020 017118 KRACH BREE B, DBA YOUTH COURTAWARDS: TEMECULA TEMECULA TROPHY& DES PD CREDIT -.TAX WITHHOLDING CASE 60301, 201485 5/14/2020 021581 MARINA LANDSCAPE INC RECYCLED WTR CONVERSION PROJ: PW17-29 201486 5/14/2020 021434 MATRIX TELECOM LLC DBA APR 800 SERVICES: CIVIC CENTER LINGO 201488 5/14/2020 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE DENTAL PAYMENT COMPANY 201489 5/14/2020 018314 MICHAEL BAKER MAR DSGN SVC: PARK&RIDE, PW18-11 INTERNATIONAL 201490 5/14/2020 004043 MISSION ELECTRIC SUPPLY ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR INC MISC LED LAMPS: PARKS PW ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR 201491 5/14/2020 004040 MORAMARCO ANTHONY J, ART WORKSHOPS: APR: VIETNAM DBA BIGFOOT GRAPHICS ART WORKSHOP: MAY: CUBA 201492 5/14/2020 004490 MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC CONTROL LINK SVC FEE: PARKS Amount Paid Check Total 76.00 76.00 19,855.00 40,250.00 60,105.00 6,075.00 6,075.00 95.67 95.67 40.00 40.00 320.54 320.54 90.70 90.70 396.57 396.57 672.08 -168.02 504.06 143, 022.50 143, 022.50 65.45 65.45 11,979.50 11,979.50 3,057.00 3,057.00 358.20 2,990.63 95.12 3,443.95 400.00 400.00 800.00 4,950.00 4,950.00 Page9 apChkLst O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 10 Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 201493 5/14/2020 001323 NESTLE WATERS NORTH 4/11-5/10 WTR DLVRY SVC: FOC 123.15 123.15 AMERICA, DBA READYREFRESH 201494 5/14/2020 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:POLICE 321.79 321.79 201495 5/14/2020 005820 PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES PREPAID LEGAL SERVICES PAYMENT 217.25 217.25 INC, DBA LEGALSHIELD 201496 5/14/2020 014379 PROFESSIONAL IMAGE BANNER PROGRAM: CHRIS FALLON 45.00 45.00 ADVERTISING, DBA EXTREME SIGNSGRAPHICS 201497 5/14/2020 012366 PROJECT TOUCH HOMELESS PREV PRGM: MORGAN 1,800.00 1,800.00 201498 5/14/2020 014494 R & R CONTROLS, INC HVAC CTRL SYS UPGRADE: VAR 3,174.00 3,174.00 FACILITIES 201499 5/14/2020 000267 RIVERSIDE CO FIRE FPARC-TM, 233602, JAN-MAR 19-20, Q3 1,900,641.44 1,900,641.44 DEPARTMENT 201500 5/14/2020 021822 SANTOS, JORGE AND RENEE REIMB FENCING:BTRFLD STG, PHIII, 8,695.00 8,695.00 PW15-11 201501 5/14/2020 021620 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC MAR PRGS PMT:STREET LIGHT MAINT 7,094.94 MAR PRGS PMT:STREET LIGHT LED REl 12,060.00 19,154.94 201502 5/14/2020 012652 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, MAY GEN USAGE: 0141,0839,2593,9306 604.89 604.89 TELEPHONE COMPANY 201505 5/14/2020 007762 STANDARD INSURANCE BASIC LIFE INSURANCE PAYMENT 8,956.42 8,956.42 COMPANY 201506 5/14/2020 012723 STANDARD INSURANCE VOLUNTARY SUPP LIFE INSURANCE 1,433.77 1,433.77 COMPANY PAYMENT 201507 5/14/2020 017814 STC TRAFFIC INC MAR TRAF SGNL SYS UPGRADE:HSIP, 11,013.75 11,013.75 PW19-09 201508 5/14/2020 006145 STENO SOLUTIONS APR TRANSCRIPTION SRVCS: TEM 33.03 33.03 TRANSCRIPTION, SRVCS INC SHERIFF 201509 5/14/2020 021820 TAMS, MARY REFUND: TEMEKU HILLS PICNIC 96.00 96.00 RENTAL 201510 5/14/2020 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 UNION MEMBERSHIP DUES PAYMENT 5,103.22 5,103.22 Page:10 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11 05/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201511 5/14/2020 019547 TEMECULA HOTEL PARTNERS, REFUND ENG DEPOSIT LD17-3148 OLD TOWN LLC 201512 5/14/2020 020911 T-MOBILE USA, INC. 2707185 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20 2707196 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20 2707202 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20 2707237 TOWER DUMP 2/23/20 201513 5/14/2020 021739 TRIPLE R SPORTS GROUP REFUND: SOCCER FIELD RENTAL 201514 5/14/2020 021019 US NATIONAL CORP PAINTING SRVCS:THE MERC PAINTING SRVCS:6TH STREET RESTRO, PAINTING SRVCS:CHILDREN'S MUSEUM 201515 5/14/2020 021148 WEX BANK 4/7-5/6 FUEL USE: TEM PD 201516 5/14/2020 021024 YANES BLANCAA, DBA DE FEB LDSCP PLAN CK & INSPECT GANGE CONSULTING SRVCS:PLNG Amount Paid Check Total 22,000.00 22,000.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 200.00 1,543.00 1,543.00 11,341.00 3,956.10 37,567.31 52,864.41 1,178.95 1,178.95 4,512.50 4,512.50 Grand total for UNION BANK: 3,052,261.79 Page:11 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 12 O5/14/2020 12:11:10PM CITY OF TEMECULA 132 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 3,052,261.79 Page:12 apChkLst 05/21/2020 12:06:34PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank: union UNION BANK Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 8790 5/8/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE APR INTERNET SVCS- 41973 6TH ST 685.54 685.54 8796 5/15/2020 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER VARIOUS APR WATER 3004755 41000 21,714.60 21,714.60 DISTRICT MAIN ST 8797 5/11/2020 018858 FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC MAY INTERNET SVCS- THEATRE 150.98 150.98 8798 5/11/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-31-936-3511 46488 PECHANGA 23.06 23.06 PKWY 8799 5/11/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-29-657-2563 42902 91.75 91.75 BUTTERFIELD STG 8800 5/11/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-27-560-0625 32380 552.41 552.41 DEERHOLLOW WAY 8801 5/11/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-40-380-2424 40750 82.14 82.14 BUTTERFIELD STG 8802 5/12/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-10-331-2153 28816 PUJOL ST 510.85 510.85 8803 5/12/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-29-458-7548 32000 RANCHO CAL 167.38 167.38 RD 8804 5/12/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-27-805-3194 42051 MAIN ST 1,700.42 1,700.42 8805 5/12/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-36-531-7916 44205 MAIN ST 70.39 70.39 8806 5/12/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-20-798-3248 42081 MAIN ST 708.72 708.72 8807 5/11/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY APR 098-255-9828-8 29119 MARGARITA 58.18 58.18 RD 8808 5/11/2020 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY APR 117-188-6393-6 32131 S LOOP RD 153.45 153.45 8809 5/15/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-25-350-5119 45602 REDHAWK 15.77 15.77 PKWY 8810 5/15/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-29-479-2981 31454 TEM PKWY 111.85 111.85 8811 5/15/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-31-031-2590 28301 RANCHO CAL 14.07 14.07 Page:1 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 05/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 8812 5/15/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-36-122-7820 31777 DE PORTOLA RD 8813 5/15/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-41-394-3267 46899 REDHAWK PKWY 8814 5/15/2020 000537 SO CALIF EDISON APR 2-28-629-0507 30600 PAUBA RD 8815 5/15/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE MAY INTERNET SVCS- 40820 WINCHESTER RD 8816 5/18/2020 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE MAY INTERNET SVCS- 41000 MAIN ST 8817 5/15/2020 018858 FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC MAY INTERNET SVCS- EOC 201517 5/21/2020 001517 AETNA BEHAVIORAL HEALTH JUN EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PRGM: LLC, DBAAETNA RESOURCES HR 201518 5/21/2020 003552 AFLAC PREMIUM HOLDING, AFLAC ACCIDENT INDEMNITY C/O BNB BANK LOCKBOX PAYMENT 201519 5/21/2020 016450 AIR EXCHANGE INC PLYMOVENT MAIN - STA 73 201520 5/21/2020 021710 ALIVE SOLUTIONS INC STAFF TRAINING: IN-SERVICE LEADER: ONLIN 201521 5/21/2020 003951 ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT ASPHALT SUPPLIES: PW STREET 201522 5/21/2020 007282 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES MISC OFC SUPPLIES: FIRE: BC INC 201523 5/21/2020 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES JUN STAND BY FEE: POLICE AFN 201524 5/21/2020 021670 ANLIND OF TEMECULA INC, MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM TEMECULA HARLEY-DAVIDSON SHERIFF MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SF MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SF MOTORCYCLE REPAIR & MAINT: TEM SF Amount Paid Check Total 12.42 12.42 101.18 101.18 3,429.00 3,429.00 5.30 5.30 1,138.86 1,138.86 148.35 148.35 822.80 822.80 4,009.72 4,009.72 323.46 323.46 300.00 300.00 767.88 767.88 30.79 30.79 1,300.00 1,300.00 852.58 144.90 960.06 569.76 2,527.30 Paget apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK Check # Date Vendor 201525 5/21/2020 013950 AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO 201526 5/21/2020 004623 AQUASOURCE INC 201527 5/21/2020 018101 BARN STAGE COMPANY INC (Continued) Description MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: OTSF & MALL MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: JRC MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: MPSC MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: INFO TI MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: PW MAY DRINKING WTR SYS MAINT: CIVIC C POOL SUPPLIES: VARIOUS FACILITIES REFUND:19/20 SEC DEP CABARET @ THE MERC 201528 5/21/2020 014284 BLAKELYS TRUCK SERVICE, VEHICLE/EQUIP REPAIRS:PW STREET AKA DONALD W BLAKELY MAINT VEHICLE/EQUIP REPAIRS:PW STREET IV 201529 5/21/2020 015834 BOYER WAYNE E, DBA UNIFORMS: MOTORS: POLICE MOTOPORT USA 201530 5/21/2020 000647 CALIF DEPT OF CONSUMER LICENSE RENEWAL: ABAD, NINO AFFAIRS 201531 5/21/2020 004248 CALIF DEPT OF APR FINGERPRINTING SRVCS: TEM JUSTICE-ACCTING SHERIFF 201532 5/21/2020 004462 CDW LLC, DBA CDW RACK ENCLOSURE:CRC PD GOVERNMENT LLC SUBSTATION 201533 5/21/2020 016446 CHRISTIAN STITCHERY INC, STAFF SHIRTS:SUMMER DAY CAMP DBA SO CAL IMPRESSIONS STAFF UNIFORMS: AQUATICS 201534 5/21/2020 017429 COBRAADVANTAGE INC, DBA APR FSA& COBRAADMIN: HR THE ADVANTAGE GROUP APR FSA & COBRAADMIN: HR 201535 5/21/2020 021230 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR DISTR, DBA CALIF ELECTRIC SUPPLY ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR 201536 5/21/2020 004329 COSTCO TEMECULA491 MISC SUPPLIES: HIGH HOPES PRGM MISC SUPPLIES:HUMAN SRVCS PRGM MISC SUPPLIES:HUMAN SRVCS PRGM 201537 5/21/2020 010650 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS: JRC HVAC INC POLE REPLACEMENT: PBSP 201538 5/21/2020 001233 DANS FEED AND SEED INC MISC SUPPLIES: PW STREET MAINT Amount Paid Check Total 56.57 28.28 34.75 28.28 28.28 183.71 1,688.89 500.00 919.03 1,457.94 694.91 115.00 595.00 927.47 117.12 3,585.71 823.00 -240.80 249.96 171.28 286.23 982.21 1,817.53 10.14 13,170.00 2,900.00 13.08 359.87 1,688.89 500.00 2,376.97 694.91 115.00 595.00 927.47 3,702.83 582.20 707.47 2,809.88 16,070.00 13.08 Page:3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 05/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201539 5/21/2020 012600 DAVID EVANS AND APR DSGN SVCS: PW17-29 WTR ASSOCIATES INC CONVERSION FEB ENG SVCS-SANTA GERTRUDIS CRk 201540 5/21/2020 002990 DAVID TURCH AND MAY FEDERAL LOBBYING SVCS: CITY ASSOCIATES MGR 201541 5/21/2020 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL PORTABLE RESTROOM & SINK SRVCS RENTAL:PD 201542 5/21/2020 018098 ELITE CLAIMS MANAGEMENT JUN '20 3RD PARTY CLAIM INC ADMIN:WRKRS COM 201543 5/21/2020 011292 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE APR PREP OF SEIR HARVESTON GPA ASSOC & SPA 201544 5/21/2020 019016 FLEETCREW INC, DBA DIESEL ENGINE FILTER CLEANING: FLEETCREW PW STREET DIESEL ENGINE FILTER CLEANING: PW 201545 5/21/2020 002982 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD KRACH, BREE - CASE# 603016103 201546 5/21/2020 021365 GEORGE HILLS COMPANY INC APR CLAIM ADJUSTER SVCS: HR 201547 5/21/2020 021308 GILLIS + PANICHAPAN ARCHITECTURAL SVCS: CRC PW19-07 ARCHITECTS, INC 201548 5/21/2020 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES: INFO TECH INC ANTI -BACTERIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES:( COVID-19 SUPPLIES: PW COVID-19 SUPPLIES: CITY MGR MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PW MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PW MISC OFC SUPPLIES: PW 201549 5/21/2020 009608 GOLDEN VALLEY MUSIC REFUND: 19/20 SEC DEP CLASSICS @ SOCIETY, DBA CA CHAMBER THE ORCHESTRA 201550 5/21/2020 021246 GREERS CONTRACTING AND, BOARDWALK ENHANCEMENT: CONCRETE INC PW17-16 201551 5/21/2020 001013 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & SALES TAX & RECOVERY SVCS: 2ND ASSOC OTR 201552 5/21/2020 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC COVID-19 SUPPLIES: PW MISC TOOLS: CIVIC CTR: PW Amount Paid Check Total 567.37 971.08 1,538.45 5,500.00 5,500.00 109.95 109.95 1,250.00 1,250.00 5,676.00 5,676.00 459.95 459.95 919.90 10.60 10.60 3,908.00 3,908.00 3,900.00 3,900.00 59.76 59.76 59.76 59.76 114.17 36.33 59.76 449.30 500.00 500.00 56,249.79 56,249.79 14,535.89 14,535.89 324.08 646.80 970.88 Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 05/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201553 5/21/2020 009135 IMPACT MARKETING & DESIGN PROMO ITEMS:VOLUNTEER INC APPRECIATION 201554 5/21/2020 019903 IMS INFRASTRUCTURE MGMT, SIDEWALK MGMNT SVCS:PUBLIC SERVICES LLC WORKS 201555 5/21/2020 006914 INNOVATIVE DOCUMENT APR COPIER MAINT/USAGE/REPAIR: SOLUTIONS CITYWIDE 201556 5/21/2020 013286 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY INC MAY ENTERPRISE 911 SVC: IT 201557 5/21/2020 012285 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY MISC SUPPLIES: CIVIC CTR 201558 5/21/2020 015358 KELLY PAPER COMPANY INC MISC PAPER SUPPLIES: CENTRAL SVCS MISC PAPER SUPPLIES: CENTRAL SVCS MISC PAPER SUPPLIES: CENTRAL SVCS 201559 5/21/2020 017118 KRACH BREE B, DBA CREDIT:TAX WITHHOLDING CASE TEMECULA TROPHY & DES 603016103 NAMEPLATE - STA 95 201560 5/21/2020 014778 LENNAR HOMES REFUND: LD1 5-4493 ARBOR VISTA 201561 5/21/2020 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC EMERGENCY MEDICAL SUPPLIES: MEDIC INFRARED NON -CONTACT THERMOMET 201562 5/21/2020 021826 LOPEZ, MAXIMO REIMB: DMV CLASS B PERMIT FEE 201563 5/21/2020 021370 MARK THOMAS AND COMPANY DSGN & ENVIRO SVCS: CONG INC RELIEF,PW19-02 201564 5/21/2020 019489 MARTIN, CHRISTINA REFUND: YOUTH MUSICAL THEATER "LION 201565 5/21/2020 004043 MISSION ELECTRIC SUPPLY MISC ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: PW INC PARKS ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: PARKS PW 201566 5/21/2020 019019 MUSIC CONNECTION LLC REFUND: 19/20 SEC DEP SPEAKEASY @ THE 201567 5/21/2020 018966 MUSICOLOGY LLC REFUND: MERC RENTAL SECURITY DEPOSIT 201568 5/21/2020 001323 NESTLE WATERS NORTH WTR DLVRY SVC: TVE2 AMERICA, DBA READYREFRESH Amount Paid Check Total 854.38 854.38 20,000.00 20,000.00 3,042.84 3,042.84 300.00 300.00 676.81 676.81 768.70 105.43 152.03 1,026.16 -10.60 42.41 31.81 50,000.00 50,000.00 840.59 2,701.35 3,541.94 82.00 82.00 90,886.31 90,886.31 160.00 160.00 768.21 200.04 968.25 500.00 500.00 250.00 250.00 435.22 435.22 Page:5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201569 5/21/2020 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW CIP CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW STREET CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW STREET CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW CIP CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW CIP 201570 5/21/2020 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:PW PARKS MAINT 201571 5/21/2020 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:BLDG & SAFETY 201572 5/21/2020 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE AND SERVICE CITY VEHICLE MAINT SVCS:FIRE PREV 201573 5/21/2020 010338 POOL & ELECTRICAL VARIOUS SUPPLIES: AQUATIC PRODUCTS INC FACILITIES 201574 5/21/2020 020181 RANCHO COMMUNITY FY19/20 COMMUNITY SERVICE REFORM CHURCH FUNDING 201575 5/21/2020 020429 REMOTE SATELLITE SYSTEMS APR'20 SAT PH AIRTIME/JUN FEE:EOC INT'L 201576 5/21/2020 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL CLEAN-UP WEED ABATEMENT:CITY MANAGEMENT ROW 201577 5/21/2020 001365 RIVERSIDE, COUNTY OF, RENEW PERMIT:TES POOL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPT 201578 5/21/2020 017446 ROSE AGAIN FOUNDATION FY19/20 COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING 201579 5/21/2020 000277 SANDS WORLDWIDE INC SUPPLIES:SKATE PARK REC SUPPLIES:SUMMER DAY CAMP 201580 5/21/2020 004274 SAFE AND SECURE LOCKSMITH SERVICES: SNACK BAR LOCKSMITH SRVC 201581 5/21/2020 021824 SAFEGUARD BY FONTIS TR-100 PROOF OF SERVICE FORMS:POLICE 201582 5/21/2020 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION -TRIBUNE APR PUBLIC NTCS:CITY CLERK/PLNG/PW 201583 5/21/2020 009980 SANBORN GWYNETH A, CO REFUND:19/20 SEC DEP COUNTRY TEMECULA MUSIC ACADEMY LIVE! Amount Paid Check Total 998.80 238.62 138.46 119.31 39.16 1,534.35 159.95 159.95 42.69 42.69 39.16 39.16 555.10 555.10 4,784.00 4,784.00 280.00 280.00 1,774.00 1,774.00 406.00 406.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 192.79 1,279.72 1,472.51 38.06 38.06 261.00 261.00 1,415.59 1,415.59 500.00 500.00 Page6 apChkLst 05/21/2020 12:06:34PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 7 Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 201584 5/21/2020 017699 SARNOWSKI SHAWNA M BUDGET PHOTOS 2020:FINANCE 500.00 500.00 PRESTON 201585 5/21/2020 021825 SELF, BENJAMIN REIMB:RCRD FEES/1ST TIME 75.00 75.00 HOMEBUYER PRGM 201586 5/21/2020 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC REFUND: 19/20 SEC DEP JAZZ @ THE 500.00 500.00 MERC 201587 5/21/2020 013695 SHRED -IT US JV LLC, DBA: APR DOC COLLECTION/SHRED 126.81 126.81 SHRED -IT USA LLC SRVCS:CITY FACS 201588 5/21/2020 009746 SIGNS BY TOMORROW SIGN PSTNG:PARK & RIDE ACCESS, 427.50 PW18-11 SIGN POSTING SRVCS PA19-1524:PLNG 427.50 SIGN POSTING SRVCS 1281/0449:PLNG 314.89 SIGN POSTING SRVCS LR20-0209:PLNG 742.39 1,912.28 201589 5/21/2020 013482 SILVERMAN ENTERPRISES DEPOSIT/SEC SRVCS:RRSP 4TH OF 5,839.00 INC, DBA BAS SECURITY JULY'20 4/27-5/17 SECURITY SRVCS:PUMP TRAC 3,129.00 8,968.00 201590 5/21/2020 000645 SMART AND FINAL INC MISC SUPPLIES:HUMAN SERVICES 716.37 716.37 PRGM 201591 5/21/2020 020545 SOCIAL WORK ACTION GROUP APR HOMELESS OUTREACH 11,332.60 11,332.60 SERVICES 201592 5/21/2020 002503 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY, FY19/20 AQMD FEE:TVE2 137.63 137.63 MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 201593 5/21/2020 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST PEST CONTROL SRVCS:CROWN HILL 94.00 CONTROL INC PARK APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:PBSP 70.00 MAY PEST CONTROL SRVCS:FIRE STN £ 80.00 APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:CITY FACS 1,019.00 APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:DUCK PON 49.00 APR PEST CONTROL SRVCS:SPLASH PA 49.00 MAY PEST CONTROL SRVCS:FIRE STN E 80.00 PEST CONTROL SRVCS:TEM PARK & RI[ 94.00 PEST CONTROL SRVCS:SAINT CROIX 94.00 1,629.00 201594 5/21/2020 002015 STAR WAY SYSTEMS 4/20-27 SOUND SYS REPAIR:OLD 4,415.50 4,415.50 CORPORATION, DBA SO CALIF TOWN SOUND 201595 5/21/2020 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET CARPET CLEANING: CIVIC CENTER 250.00 CLEANING CARPET CLEANING: TCC 125.00 CARPET CLEANING: LIBRARY 500.00 875.00 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201596 5/21/2020 003840 STRONGS PAINTING SAND & REFINISH BENCHES: THEATER 201597 5/21/2020 019714 TAYLOR'S APPLIANCE KITCHEN EQUIPMENT - STA 73 201598 5/21/2020 020985 TEAMWORK PROMOTIONAL, CRIME PREV PROMO SUPPLIES:TEM ADVERTISING INC SHERIFF 201599 5/21/2020 005970 TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYERS REFUND: 19/20 SEASON SEC DEPOSIT 201600 5/21/2020 021418 TEMECULA VALLEY, DANCE REFUND: REHEARSAL ROOM RENTAL CONNECTION SEC 201601 5/21/2020 003941 TEMECULA WINNELSON PLUMBING SUPPLIES: VARIOUS COMPANY PARKS 201602 5/21/2020 016311 TIERCE, NICHOLAS GRAPHIC DESIGN SRVCS: THEATER 201603 5/21/2020 021580 TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS MAY STATE LEGIS. CONSULT/GRANT INC WRITING 201604 5/21/2020 010046 TV CONVENTION &VISITORS MAR'20 BUS. IMPRV DISTRICT BUREAU, DBA VISIT TEMECULA ASMNTS VALLEY 201605 5/21/2020 012549 UPODIUM, AKA JOHN VEHICLE MAINT SUPPLIES: STA 73 FONTEYN VEHICLE MAINT SUPPLIES: STA 73 201606 5/21/2020 020963 UPTOWN TEMECULAAUTO FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:PW SPA LLC PARKS FEB VEHICLE DETAILING SRVCS:BLDG F FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:PW Cl FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:PW Sl FEB-MAR VEH DETAILING SRVCS:TCSD 201607 5/21/2020 014848 VALUTEC CARD SOLUTIONS APR TICKETING SRVCS: THEATER LLC 201608 5/21/2020 001881 WATER SAFETY PRODUCTS SUPPLIES: AQUATICS PRGM INC 201609 5/21/2020 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC SURGICAL MASKS: EOC 201610 5/21/2020 020670 WEBB MUNICIPAL FINANCE ANN'L LEVY ASSESSMENT LLC ANALYSIS:PROP 218 ANN'L LEVY ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS:PR Amount Paid Check Total 750.00 750.00 12,722.66 12,722.66 1,878.03 1,878.03 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 15.91 15.91 3,720.00 3,720.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 52,934.64 52,934.64 157.39 75.07 232.46 16.00 16.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 44.00 111.91 111.91 553.68 553.68 489.38 489.38 2,500.00 2,000.00 4,500.00 Page:8 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 201611 5/21/2020 008668 WES FLOWERS SUNSHINE FUND SUNSHINE FUND 201612 5/21/2020 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 4/1-15 TREE MAINT:VAR. SLOPES 2/28 TREE MAINT:OLD TOWN FRONT STf 201613 5/21/2020 000339 WEST PUBLISHING APR CLEAR SUBSCRIPTION: TEM CORPORATION, SHERIFF DBA:THOMSON REUTERS Amount Paid Check Total 61.43 73.40 1,302.00 509.20 893.00 201614 5/21/2020 000341 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES INC APR TRAF ENG SRVC:RDHWK 4,843.50 PKWY/V. RANCH Grand total for UNION BANK: 134.83 1,811.20 893.00 4,843.50 479,732.47 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 O5/21/2020 12:06:34PM CITY OF TEMECULA 121 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 479,732.47 Page:10 Item No. 4 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance 2020-06 Amending Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone of the Temecula Municipal Code (Long Range Project No. LR20-0279) (Second Reading) PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 2020-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3) BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula is a general law city formed under the laws of the State of California. With respect to adoption of ordinances and resolutions, the City adheres to the requirements set forth in the Government Code. With the exception of urgency ordinances, Government Code Section 36934 requires two readings of standard ordinances more than five days apart. Ordinances must be read in full at the time of introduction or passage unless a motion waiving the reading is adopted by a majority of the City Council present. Ordinance No. 2020-06 was first introduced at the regularly scheduled meeting of May 26, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. 2020-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine, and declare that: A. The Planning Commission considered this Ordinance, including the environmental analysis, on April 22, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, as prescribed by law, at which time the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support of or opposition to this matter. B. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2020-09, recommending approval of the Ordinance by the City Council. C. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the Ordinance, including the environmental analysis, on May 26, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, as prescribed by law, at which time the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter. D. Following the public hearing, the City Council considered the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula in approving the proposed Municipal Code amendment in Long Range Planning Project Number LR20-0279 hereby makes the following findings: A. The State Legislature has declared that the lack of housing, including providing for a variety of housing types for all income levels and special needs groups, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California. B. Government Code Section 65583 requires that the City's Housing Element address governmental constraints to the development of housing, including providing for a variety of housing types for all income levels. The City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the City's 2014-2021 Housing Element on January 28, 2014. The City's Housing Element identified the need to amend the City's Municipal Code to establish an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone to encourage the development of affordable housing in the City. On September 25, 2018, the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone. C. Staff has now determined that the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance should be amended to clarify (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the Pechanga tribe before the Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit, and (2) that affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units, and must be dispersed throughout the development project. These revisions are necessary to not only protect the cultural resources in the area, but also to ensure that affordable housing is actually constructed by project proponents that seek to develop projects using the overlay zone. D. The proposed amendments to the affordable housing overlay zone ordinance are in conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of elements of the General Plan. The Ordinance implements the following policies contained in the City's Housing Element: Policy 1. 1: Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City; 2. Policy 1.2 Encourage residential development that provides a range of housing types in terms of cost, density, and type, and presents the opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by balancing jobs and housing types; 3. Policy 2.1 Promote a variety of housing opportunities that accommodate the needs of all income levels of the population, and provide opportunities to meet Temecula's fair share of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate -income housing; 4. Policy 2.2 Support innovative public, private, and nonprofit efforts in the development of affordable housing, particularly for special needs groups; 5. Policy 3.1 Expedite processing procedures and fees for new construction or rehabilitation of housing; and 6. Policy 5.2: Support efforts to ensure that all income segments of the community have unrestricted access to appropriate housing. Furthermore, the Ordinance implements the following goals and policies contained in the City's General Plan Land Use Element: 7. Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses. 8. Policy 1.6: Encourage flexible zoning techniques in appropriate locations to encourage mixed use development, preserve natural features, achieve innovative site design, achieve a range of transition of densities, provide open space and recreation facilities, and/or provide necessary amenities and facilities. E. The proposed amendments to the Municipal Code are consistent with the General Plan and all applicable provisions contained therein. Residential development approved pursuant to Chapter 17.21 complies with the requirements included in the City's General Plan Housing Element. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the proposed Ordinance: A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. ("CEQA")), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), the proposed Ordinance falls within the scope of the environmental analysis conducted for the City's 2014 — 2021 Housing Element and the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. B. On January 28, 2014, a Negative Declaration was adopted for the approval of the 2014 — 2021 Housing Element, which analyzed the potential impacts and determined that less than significant impacts would result from the adoption of the 2014 — 2021 Housing Element. In 2019, the City adopted the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone which was described in the City's Housing Element. On November 17, 2015, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2013061012) was certified in connection with the approval of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. The Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance applied the affordable housing overlay zone to certain parcels located in the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area. C. The proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance do not increase the number of properties that are located within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, or change the zoning designation of any of the properties within this overlay zone. Instead, the ordinance merely clarifies that (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the Pechanga tribe before the Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit, (2) that affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units, and (3) that the affordable units must be dispersed throughout the development project. As such, the environmental impacts for the Project have been evaluated by the previously adopted Negative Declaration for the Housing Element, and the EIR for the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan, and no further environmental review is necessary. None of the circumstances in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 exist to require any additional environmental review and no further documentation is necessary. D. In addition, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a significant effect on the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Staff is hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption. Section 4. Subsection A of Section 17.21.040 (Compliance with Laws) of Chapter 17.21 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all other provisions of Section 17.21.040 remaining unchanged: 3 "A. The applicant shall enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Tribe, and provide a copy of this agreement to the City before the Director approves the Administrative Review Application. This Agreement shall address the following: Treatment and disposition of cultural resources; 2. The designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Pechanga Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; 3. Project grading and development scheduling; 4. Terms of compensation for the Pechange Tribal monitors; 5. Treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered onsite; 6. Pechanga Tribal monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading in order to evaluate the significance of any potential resources discovered on the property, and to make recommendations as to treatment; 7. The applicant's agreement to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition; and 8. The applicant's agreement that all Pechanga Tribal sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved." Section 5. Subsection D of Section 17.21.060 (Regulations and Development Standards.) of Chapter 17.21 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all other provisions of Section 17.21.060 remaining unchanged: "D. At least 20 percent of the residential units of each building developed pursuant to this Chapter 17.21 shall be reserved for households earning no greater than 80 percent of area median income adjusted for family size appropriate to the unit. The units shall be sold or rented at an affordable housing cost or affordable rent, as those terms are defined in Sections 50052.5 and 50053 of the California Health and Safety Code. If the units are rental units, the affordable units shall be deed -restricted for a period of not less than fifty- five (55) years. If the units are for -sale units, the units shall be sold in accordance with California Government Code Section 65915. For any project that is developed pursuant to this Chapter 17.21, the affordable units must be constructed concurrently with or prior to the construction of any market rate units. In addition, the affordable units must be integrated with the market rate units so that there is a mix of affordable and market rate units, if any, in each building of the development project." Section 6. Sections 4 and 5 of this Ordinance shall not apply to any project that has submitted an application that has been deemed complete by the City prior to April 22, 2020. Section 7. If any section or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, or contravened by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining sections and/or provisions of this Ordinance shall remain valid. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section or provision thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more section(s) or provision(s) may be declared invalid or unconstitutional or contravened via legislation. Section 8. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. Section 9. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2020-06 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of May, 2020, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk Item No. 5 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Reaffirming and Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency Related to the COVID-19 Virus Pandemic PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REAFFIRMING AND PROCLAIMING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO THE COVID-19 VIRUS PANDEMIC AND ISSUING CERTAIN ORDERS FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY AFFAIRS DURING THE LOCAL EMERGENCY BACKGROUND: In December 2019, an outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China, and has spread outside of China, impacting more than 75 countries, including the United States. Since the Center for Disease Control and Prevention first confirmed the existence and potential spread of COVID-19, there has been significant escalation. On March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California proclaimed a state of emergency due to the spread of COVID- 19. On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak to be a pandemic. On March 13, 2020, the President of the United States made an emergency determination under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act in response to COVID-19. On March 16, 2020, the Riverside County Public Health Officer issued an order cancelling and prohibiting all gatherings in which ten or more people are expected to be present, subject to certain limited exceptions. On March 17, 2020, the City Manager of the City of Temecula issued a Declaration of Local Emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic pursuant to Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.56.050. On March 24, 2020 and April 28, 2020, the City Council proclaimed the existence of a local emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Government Code § 8630 and Temecula Municipal Code Chapter 2.56 provide that the City Council of the City of Temecula may proclaim the existence of a local emergency as defined by Government Code § 8558, subdivision (c). COVID-19 has created conditions that are or likely to be beyond the control of local resources and require the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat. The mobilization of local resources, ability to coordinate interagency response, accelerate procurement of vital supplies, use mutual aid, and allow for future reimbursement by the state and federal governments will be critical to successfully responding to COVID-19. The conditions under which the City Council declared its March 24, 2020 and April 28, 2020 local emergency continue to exist. It is therefore recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution reaffirming and proclaiming the existence of a local emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City Council will continue to review this local emergency proclamation every sixty (60) days pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c), and/or sooner as the Council determines (i.e., 30 days, etc.), and will terminate the emergency proclamation when the conditions warrant. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Resolution RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REAFFIRMING AND PROCLAIMING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO THE COVID-19 VIRUS PANDEMIC AND ISSUING CERTAIN ORDERS FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY AFFAIRS DURING THE LOCAL EMERGENCY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. The City Council Finds, determines and declares that: (a) Government Code § 8630 and Temecula Municipal Code Chapter 2.56 provide that the City Council of the City of Temecula may proclaim the existence of a local emergency as defined by Government Code § 8558, subdivision (c). (b) In December 2019, an outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China, and has spread outside of China, impacting countries throughout the world, including the United States. (c) Since the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") confirmed the first possible case of community spread of COVID-19 in the United States on February 26, 2020, there has been a significant and continued escalation of United States domestic cases and deaths from COVID-19. (d) On March 4, 2020, Gavin Newsom, Governor of the State of California, proclaimed a state of emergency to exist in California due to the spread of COVID-19. (e) On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization declared the COVID- 19 outbreak to be a pandemic. (f) On March 13, 2020, President Trump determined that the ongoing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant an emergency determination under section 501(b) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207. (g) Governor Newsom has issued several Executive Orders making certain findings and issuing emergency orders to deal with COVID-19 pandemic. These Executive Orders are listed and updated continuously at https://www. og v.ca.gov/category/executive-orders/. More Executive Orders are expected. (h) The California Department of Public Health reports a significant number of COVID-19 cases and deaths in the state. The number of cases and deaths are reported and updated at hgps://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/cid/dcdc/pages/immunization/ncov20l9.aspx. (i) The Riverside County Public Health Officer has issued numerous Health Orders making certain findings and issuing emergency orders to deal with COVID-19 pandemic, including cancelling and prohibiting all gatherings and requiring all person to wear mask when outside of their homes. The Riverside County Health Officer's Orders are listed and updated continuously at https://www.riveoph.ora/coronavirus. More Health Orders are expected. 0) The Governor's Executive Orders and Riverside County Health Officer's Health Orders to close non -essential businesses and prohibit gatherings has created economic hardship and dislocation for persons and businesses and will reduce tax revenues to the City necessary for providing essential City services. (k) On March 17, 2020, the City Manager of the City of Temecula issued a Declaration of Local Emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic pursuant to Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.56.050. (1) On March 24, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-17 entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency Relating to the Covid-19 Virus Pandemic and Confirming the City Manager's Declaration of Local Emergency on March 17, 2020." On April 28, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-20 entitled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Reaffirming and Proclaiming the Existence of a Local Emergency Relating to the Covid-19 Virus Pandemic and Issuing Certain Orders for the Conduct of City Affairs During the Local Emergency." (m) Due to the expanding list of countries with widespread transmission of COVID-19, increasing travel alerts and warnings for countries experiencing sustained or uncontrolled community transmission issued by the CDC, the escalation of United States domestic cases of and deaths from COVID-19, the identification of COVID-19 cases in California and Riverside County, COVID-19, and the severity and magnitude of the COVID-19 pandemic, has created conditions that are or likely to be beyond the control of local resources and require the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat. (n) The mobilization of local resources, ability to coordinate interagency response, accelerate procurement of vital supplies, use mutual aid, and allow for future reimbursement by the state and federal governments will be critical to successfully responding to COVID-19. (o) The City Council finds that these conditions warrant and necessitate that the City reaffirm and proclaim the existence of a local emergency. Section 2. Proclamation of Local Emergency. Based on the findings set forth above, the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby reaffirms the findings set forth in Resolution Nos. 2020-17 and 2020-20 and further proclaims that a local emergency now exists throughout the City of Temecula. During the existence of said local emergency the following shall be in effect: (a) The local emergency powers, functions, and duties of the City Manager and the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by state law, by ordinances, and resolutions of this City, and by the approved emergency plans of the City of Temecula. N (b) The local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist until its termination is proclaimed by the City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California. (c) The City Council shall review this local emergency proclamation at least every sixty (60) days pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c) and shall terminate the emergency proclamation at the earliest possible date the conditions warrant. (d) The City Manager is authorize to transfer funds from the Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts when necessary under this declaration of an emergency. (e) Pursuant to the provisions of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.56.050 the City Manager is authorized to enter into agreements on behalf of the City necessary under this declaration of an emergency. (f) The City Council determines that for the reasons described in this Resolution, compliance with the bidding requirements of Chapters 3.28 and 3.30 of Temecula Municipal Code is not in the best interest of the City and all such bidding requirements are hereby waived. (g) The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds without regard to the amounts thereof, so long as there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged. (h) The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into all agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency without regard to the amounts thereof, so long as there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged, including without limitation, consultant agreements, agreements for the purchase of goods and services, real property leases and license agreements, public works construction and maintenance agreements, grant agreements, and amendments to real property purchase agreements and exclusive negotiating agreements. (i) The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve documents implementing the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) other than Environmental Impact Reports. 0) The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve notices of completion, accept surety bonds, and release surety bonds, in connection with public works projects. (k) The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to settle personal injury and property damage lawsuits and enter into settlement agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency without regard to the amounts thereof, so long as there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged. 3 (1) The City Manager is authorized to negotiate and implement labor related policies and staffing changes deemed necessary in order to respond to the Local Emergency. (m) The City Manager is authorized to sign checks on behalf of the City, including without limitation, payroll hand checks, and may delegate this authority to the Director of Finance. (n) City Manager is authorized to modify on -street and off-street parking requirements for businesses, including without limitation modifications for food service or other businesses to accommodate pick-up or delivery services. Section 3. Ratification of City Manager's Actions. The City Council hereby ratifies the actions of the City Manager taken pursuant to Resolution Nos. 2020-17 and 2020-20. Section 4. Further Actions. The City Manager shall: (a) Forward a copy of this Resolution to the Director of California Governor's Office of Emergency Services; (b) Reaffirm the City's request the Governor of California, pursuant to the Emergency Services Act issue a proclamation declaring an emergency in Riverside County and waive regulations that may hinder response and recovery efforts; (c) Reaffirm the City's request that recovery assistance be made available under the California Disaster Assistance Act; and (d) Reaffirm the City's request that the State expedite access to State and Federal resources and any other appropriate federal disaster relief programs. Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9tn day of June, 2020. ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] James Stewart, Mayor 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk Item No. 6 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Adopt Resolutions Regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election PREPARED BY: Randi Johl, Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the following resolutions regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election: RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE AT ANY MUNICIPAL ELECTION BACKGROUND: On January 27, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 04-01 establishing its general municipal election date as the first Tuesday after the first Monday in even -numbered years allowing for consolidation of its elections with the County of Riverside pursuant to Election Code Section 10400 et sue. As such, the City will hold its general municipal election on November 3, 2020 for two officeholder seats, each for a term of four years. The current terms for Council Members Naggar (District 2) and Stewart (District 4) are expiring. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 10220, the nomination period for candidates will be July 13, 2020 through August 7, 2020. If an incumbent does not file for candidacy, the nomination period will be extended by five days for the relevant district pursuant to Election Code Section 10225. The consolidation process requires cities and counties to take certain procedural actions in preparation for the conduct of the election. Generally, consolidated cities throughout the State adopt four standardized resolutions that do the following: (1) call for and give notice of an election being held in the city [Election Code Section 12001], (2) request the County to consolidate the election and render related services [Election Code Section 10403], (3) adopt regulations for candidate statements [Election Code Section 13307], and (4) provide for a runoff election in the event of a tie vote [Election Code Section 15651]. Given the above, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolutions regarding the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election. FISCAL IMPACT: The anticipated cost of the November 2020 General Municipal Election for officeholders for Districts 2 and 4 is approximately $70,000 - $100,000 and is budgeted in the 2020-21 fiscal year. This estimate is based on the cost of the previous district election held two years ago. The County Registrar of Voters will provide a more accurate cost estimate closer to the nomination period. ATTACHMENTS: Resolutions (4) RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State of California, a General Municipal Election shall be held on November 3, 2020, for the election of municipal officers. Section 2. Pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California relating to general law cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Temecula, California, on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, a General Municipal Election for the purpose of electing two (2) Members of the City Council from Districts 2 and 4, respectively, for the full term of four years. Section 3. The ballots to be used at the election shall be in the form and content required by law. Section 4. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to coordinate with the County of Riverside Registrar of Voters to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter, and all supplies, equipment, and items that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election. Section 5. The polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. on the day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of the same day when the polls shall be closed, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10242, except as provided in Section 14401 of the State of California Elections Code. Section 6. In all particulars not recited in this resolution, the General Municipal Election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding consolidated municipal elections. The consolidated election shall be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code Section 10418. Section 7. Notice of the time and place of holding the election is given, and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in time, form, and manner as required by law. Section 8. The City Council authorizes the City Clerk to administer said election and all reasonable and actual election expenses shall be paid by the City upon presentation of a properly submitted bill. Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula, California, has called a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the purpose of the election of two (2) members of the City Council from Districts 2 and 4, respectively. Section 2. It is desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the Statewide General Election to be held on the same date and that within the City the precincts, polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used for each of the two (2) affected Council positions. Section 3. Pursuant to Sections 10002 and 10403 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside is hereby requested to consent and agree to the consolidation of a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the purpose of the election of two (2) members of the City Council of the City of Temecula currently held by Council Members Mike Naggar (District 2) and James Stewart (District 4). Section 4. Except for those services routinely conducted by the City Clerk as the local elections official, delegation is hereby made to the Riverside County Registrar of Voters to conduct said election in accordance with all applicable laws and procedures. The Riverside County Registrar of Voters is hereby authorized, instructed, and directed to canvass the returns of the General Municipal Election and give such further or additional notice of said election, in time, form, and manner as required by law. Section 5. That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated election. Section 6. In all particulars not recited in this resolution, the General Municipal Election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding consolidated municipal elections. The consolidated election shall be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code Section 10418. Section 7. The City of Temecula recognizes that additional costs will be incurred by the County, by reason of this consolidation, and agrees to reimburse the County for such additional costs. Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Board of Supervisors and Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside. Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Pursuant to Section 13307 of the Elections Code of the State of California, each candidate for City Council to be voted for at an Election to be held in the City of Temecula on November 3, 2020, may prepare a candidate's statement on an appropriate form provided by the City Clerk. The statement may include the name, age, and occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more than 200 words of the candidate's education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself. The statement shall not include party affiliation of the candidate, nor membership or activity in partisan political organizations. The statement shall be filed in typewritten form in the office of the City Clerk at the time the candidate's nomination papers are filed. Except as provided in Elections Code Section 13309, the statement may be withdrawn, but not changed, during the period for filing nomination papers and until 5:00 p.m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination period. Section 2. FOREIGN LANGUAGE POLICY. A. Pursuant to the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, candidate statements will be translated into all languages required by the County of Riverside. The County is required to translate candidate's statements into Spanish. B. The County will print and mail sample ballots and candidate statements to all voters in English and Spanish. The County will make sample ballots and candidates statements in the required languages available at all polling places, on the County's website and in the election official's office. Section 3. PAYMENT. A. Translations: 1. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of translating the candidates statement into any required foreign language as specified in (a) and/or (b) of Section 2 above pursuant to federal and/or state law. 2. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of translating the candidate's statement into any foreign language that is not required as specified in (a) and/or (b) of Section 2 above, pursuant to federal and/or state law, but is requested as an option by the candidate. B. Printing: 1. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's statement in English in the main voter pamphlet. 2. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's statement in a foreign language required in (A) of Section 2 above, in the main voter pamphlet. 3. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's statement in a foreign language requested by the candidate per (B) of Section 2 above, in the main voter pamphlet. 4. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost of printing the candidate's statement in a foreign language required in (A) of Section 2 above, in the facsimile voter pamphlet. C. The City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling, translating, and mailing the candidate's statements filed pursuant to this section, including costs incurred as a result of complying with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended), and require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance to the local agency his or her estimated pro rata share as a condition of having his or her statement included in the voters' pamphlet. In the event the estimated payment is required, the estimate is just an approximation of the actual cost that varies from one election to another election and may be significantly more or less than the estimate, depending on the actual number of candidates filing statements. Accordingly, the City Clerk is not bound by the estimate and may, on a pro rata basis, bill the candidate for additional actual expense or refund any excess paid depending on the final actual cost. In the event of underpayment, the City Clerk may require the candidate to pay the balance of the cost incurred. In the event of overpayment, the City Clerk shall prorate the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess amount paid within 30 days of the election. Section 4. MISCELLANEOUS. All translations shall be provided by professionally - certified translators. Candidate statements shall be prepared and formatted in accordance with Elections Code Section 13307(b) and bold type, underlining, capitalized words, italics, and bullets shall be prohibited. Occupational designations shall be consistent with recommendations and standards set forth by the California Secretary of State. Section 5. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. No candidate will be permitted to include additional materials in the sample ballot package. Section 6. COPY OF RESOLUTION. The City Clerk shall provide each candidate or the candidate's representative a copy of this resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued. Section 7. APPLICATION. This resolution shall apply only to the election to be held on November 3, 2020, and shall then be repealed. Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PROVIDING FOR THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL RUNOFF ELECTION FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES IN THE EVENT OF A TIE VOTE AT ANY MUNICIPAL ELECTION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State of California, a General Municipal Election shall be held on November 3, 2020, for the election of municipal officers in the City. Section 2. Pursuant to Section 15651(b) of the Elections Code of the State of California, if any two or more persons receive an equal and the highest number of votes for an office to be voted for within the City, there shall be held within the City a special runoff election to resolve the tie vote. A special runoff election shall be called and held on a Tuesday not less than 40 nor more than 125 days after the administrative or judicial certification of the election which resulted in a tie vote. Section 3. This resolution shall apply only to the election to be held on November 3, 2020, and shall then be repealed. Section 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk Item No. 7 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Receive and File the 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report PREPARED BY: Brandon Rabidou, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report (GPAPR) BACKGROUND: State law (Government Code Section 65300) requires each local jurisdiction to adopt a comprehensive general plan that guides the physical development of a community. Government Code Section 65400 requires a General Plan Annual Progress Report (GPAPR). The purpose of the GPAPR is to update the community, City Council, and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) on General Plan implementation progress. This report is also used as an aid to identify prospective changes, or updates that may be needed for the General Plan. The City's last comprehensive General Plan update was completed in 2005. In 2013, the City updated the Housing Element of the General Plan in compliance with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) 5th Cycle. Since 2005, the City has amended the General Plan on several occasions to implement required Housing Element programs, and update the General Plan land use plan with updated policies (i.e. changing commercial zoning to residential, increasing residential density, etc.). Since 2005, the State of California has passed legislation and updated policies that require updates to the General Plan. Some notable updates include the upcoming July 1, 2020, transition to Vehicles Miles Travelled (VMT) for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance, the Housing Element's 6th Cycle RHNA update (currently underway), and Environmental Justice requirements. As the City embarks on a comprehensive update, the City is strategically sequencing these various updates to be efficient from a cost and technical perspective. The GPAPR documents the current General Plan's compliance, and provides a draft roadmap for updating the General Plan. Once received and filed by the City Council, staff will forward the 2019 GPAPR to OPR and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The filing will also include the 2019 Housing Annual Report as an attachment. The 2019 Housing Annual Report was approved by the City Council on April 28, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2019 General Plan Annual Progress Report 2. 2019 Housing Annual Report Summary 3. April 28, 2020 Housing Annual Report Staff Report CITY OF TEMECULA General Plan Annual Progress Report Reporting Period 2019 City Council Acceptance Date TBD General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 1 /1 Z TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...................................................................... GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS .................................................. COMPLIANCE WITH OPR GENERAL PLAN GUIDELINES HOUSING ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT ........................... ..3 ..5 ..8 13 General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 2112 INTRODUCTION The City of Temecula was incorporated in 1989 as a General Law City. Since incorporation, the City of Temecula has placed a high value on an excellent quality of life for the community. The vision, goals, and policies identified in City's General Plan reflect those values and the desire for an excellent quality of life. This General Plan Annual Progress Report (GPAPR) documents the City's progress on implementing the General Plan for calendar year 2019 while also forecasting anticipated changes and detailing compliance with statutory requirements. While the Temecula General Plan was last comprehensively updated in 2005, the General Plan is a living document that is often updated to reflect policy changes and statutory requirements. Since 2005, the City of Temecula has approved approximately ten General Plan Amendments', an updated Housing Element, and various Municipal Code amendments to advance the vision, goals, and policies of the General Plan. Several of these approved General Plan Amendments have increased the capacity and the ability of the market to generate additional housing (including adding additional density). While these updates have kept the General Plan current, the City recognizes there is a need to update the General Plan in a more comprehensive manner. The City of Temecula is currently developing a plan to comprehensively update the General Plan. The lingering side effects of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, significant housing legislation changes (ADUs, Density Bonus, Affordable Housing, etc.), other state legislative changes (cannabis, vendor carts, etc.) and CEQA changes, such as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), have slowed the City's comprehensive update. As the City updates the Housing Element, and adopts VMT, the City is in a position where a comprehensive update makes sense from a technical and cost-effective standpoint. A kick-off for the General Plan update was originally targeted for late 2020; this is being revaluated due to the COVID-19 crisis. Active public engagement is a core component of a General Plan update and the City is evaluating on how to best proceed with this outreach given the pandemic. Even through these challenging times, the City is applying for General Plan update grants, allocating funding, and preparing to take on a comprehensive update. The City anticipates a four phase general plan update. The first phase is currently underway and incorporates an updated Housing Element, VMT, and as well as other public safety requirements. Phase two will incorporate an update to the City's Quality of Life Master Plan and the adoption of a Complete Streets policy which will set the foundation for the General Plan's vision, goals, and policies. ' City of Temecula General Plan Use Map - Revision Table General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 3/1 2 Phase three will incorporate detailed SWOC analysis and fiscal land use studies. Phase four will comprehensively update the General Plan as well as the EIR for the General Plan. The below graphic is a DRAFT plan for the different phases of the General Plan update. The contents, schedule, and sequence may change based on recommendations from the City's consultant. General Plan Update Process & Timeline Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 (IN PROGRESS) (JAN. 1 2020 - DEC. 31 2020) (JAN. 1 2021 — MAR. 31 2021) (APR. 1, 2021 — JULY 1, 2023) HOUSING ELEMENT QLMP 2030 UPDATE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE FONN]6TIONFORTHEGENERAL PLAN 141 _ SWOC ANALYSIS I, B, PULITICAL CHALLENGES o GENERALgACTIOPNLAN UPDATE VEHICLE MITES ) TRAVELLED SB743 --.� VIS'ONFORTHEGENERALPLAN r.......................... I 1 Bl LIVABLE CITY i O STAFF ASSIGNMENT$ $UBCOMMITEE$ GPAC (ADVISORY COMT.) LAND -USE STUDY HEIR ECONOMIC � ;B2 ECONOMIC PROSPERITY � 1 93 SAFE & PREPARED COMMUNITY ®FISCAL 6-9 MONTHS (OVERLAPS W! PHASE 2) PUBLIC SAFETY LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (LHMP)-SB379 DISASTER PLANNING -AB747 1 #4 SUSTAINABLE CITY 1FSTRANSPORTATION,MOBILITY&CONNECTIVITYL -Afi ACCWNTABLE&RESPO NSIBLE CITY GCVr. � LYAG. RDGTE$-$699 COMPLETE STREETS QLMP CORE VALUES BECOME GENERAL PLAN #1 HEALTHY & LIVABLE #2 EGON_ PROSPERITY #3 SAFE & PREPARED 44 SUSTAINABLE CITY 45 TRANSP. MOBILITY & #6 ACCOUNTABLE & CITY COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY RESPONSIBLE CITY GOVT LAND USE ECON.DEV. PUBLIC SAFETY CONSERVATION CIRCULATION GROWTH MGT. + PUBLIC HOUSING NOISE OPEN SPACE COMPLETE STREETS (ATP) FACILITIES COMMUNITY DESIGN AIR QUALITY (CLIMATE ENV. JUSTICE ACTION PLAN) Figure 1 DRAFT General Plan Update Process & Timeline General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 4/1 2 GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS Project Progress The City continues to implement the Temecula General Plan. The below projects demonstrate General Plan progress and provide specific excerpts of goals, policies, and implementation programs that are complementary to the projects. This list is not meant to be exhaustive or all inclusive. VINE CREEK (PA18-0081) - A three story multi -family affordable housing complex consisting of 60 affordable housing units (15 reserved for those with special needs). The Vine Creek project furthers access to affordable housing, while also continuing the City's strong revitalization of Old Town Temecula (a form -based, mixed use Specific Plan). This project also navigated environmental issues that face projects located near sensitive habitat, in this case, a creek. To help the project "pencil", the City provided funding, land fee deferrals, density bonus concessions and development flexibility (parking reductions, etc.). Status: Project Approved. 1. Housing Element - Goal 2: Provide affordable housing for all economic Cn segments of Temecula. This project supports Policy 2.1, Policy 2.2, Policy 2.4, Q and Policy 2.5. Goal 5: Provide equal housing opportunities for all residents E in Temecula. This project supports Policy 5.2 and 5.3. M x w Ln 2. Land Use - A viable, high -quality Old Town Temecula area that enhances the L City economically, preserves historical structures, and provides civic, cultural, oshopping, and meeting and gathering places for tourists and residents. This project supports Policy 7.1, and 7.4. CL 3. Open Space/Conservation - Goal 3: Conservation of important biological y habitats and protection of plant, and animal species of concern, wildlife a movement corridors, and general biodiversity. This project supports Policy 3.1-3.7. General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 5/1 2 RORIPAUGH RANCH PARK AND RIDE (PA18-0131) -A 2.2-acre Park and Ride (56 space) and trailhead facility. The Roripaugh Ranch Park and Ride facility is a multi -use facility. First, the facility serves as a Park and Ride facility that mitigates traffic to facilitate the development of additional housing within the City. Second, the project enables public access to a trail system for walking, hiking, biking, and equestrians. Status: Project Approved. 1. Housing Element - Goal 1: Provide a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future a� residents of Temecula. This project supports Policy 1.5 and 1.6. Q E X 2. Circulation - Implementation Program C-18: Develop and promote park and LU ride and Transit Oasis facilities within the City. Encourage preferred parking U) U) for ride sharing and low emissions vehicles. Goal 1: Strive to maintain a Level of Service "D" or better at intersections within the City during peak hours and 0 Level of Service "C" or better during non -peak hours. This project supports Policy 1.2. Goal 5: Safe and efficient alternatives to motorized travel a_ throughout the City. This project supports Policy 5.6. L 3. Air Quality - Goal 3: Enhance mobility to minimize air pollutant emissions. This 0 project supports Policy 3.1, 3.3, and 3.4. It also supports implementation program AQ-14 (required by the General Plan EIR). General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 6/12 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendments for Age Qualified Development (PA19- 0408) - A Specific Plan Amendment to the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan to update the standards for certain Planning Areas. The Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan allows for the development of 2,015 residential units. During the development process, the applicant requested an amendment to have reduced setbacks for age qualified units. This amendment allows for the reduction in setbacks from 20 feet to 10 feet in some areas, while allowing further reductions from 15 feet to 10 feet in others. The City accommodated this request to support the applicant's desire to build age qualified housing. Status: Project Approved. 1. Housing Element - Goal 5: Provide equal housing opportunity for all residents in Temecula. This project supports Policy 5.2 and 5.3. E a� rZ2. Land Use - Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, > industrial, recreational, public, and open space land uses. This project Q supports Policy 1.2, and Policy 1.6. c n Lexus Dealership (PA19-1 164/1 165) A Development Plan & Conditional Use Permit to allow for the construction of a Lexus car dealership. The proposed Lexus project continues to enhance the City's ability to maintain a high level of services and high quality of life. The project will contribute to more jobs within the local economy as the City looks to address the jobs -housing imbalance. Status: Project Approved 1. Economic Development - Goal 1: Goal 3: A sound economic base providing a fiscal foundation for the City, quality community facilities, and high service W levels. This project supports Policy 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3. This also supports Implementation Program ED-3, as the City utilized an attraction program to incentivize this business. Q 2. Land Use - Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public, and open space land uses. This project supports Policy 1.1, and 1.5. c aD 0 General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 7/1 2 COMPLIANCE WITH OPR GENERAL PLAN GUIDELINES The City of Temecula comprehensively updated the Temecula General Plan in April 2005. Since that time, the state has adopted new required elements through direct statue or indirect means (such as making elements required for future funding/grant opportunities). The below table provides a glance at the City's compliance with OPR's General Plan Guidelines by labeling elements as compliant, in compliance under old guidelines, or out of compliance. Status Legend Compliant State Elements Circulation Conservation Housing Land Use In compliance under old guidelines, updates needed or may be • Out of compliance needed. Elements Status Notes Circulation Open Space Conservation Housing Land Use Pursuantto Senate Bill ("SB") 743, the City will adopt VMTthresholds in 20202 to meet the State mandated July 1, 2020 deadline. Future General Plan updates will incorporate additional "Complete Street" requirements. The City has also started interregional efforts to address circulation issues on the 1-15 corridor' that are outside the City's regular area of responsibilities. 1-15 congestion continues to be a major concern in the region and the City will continue to advocate for transportation solutions. The City will update the Conversation Element to address any possible deficiencies. The City is a participant in the Western Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP) as well the San Diego Regional Water Control Board's MS4 permit. The City is currently updating the Housing Element (61" Cycle). While the land -use element is up to date with older guidelines, changes will be needed as a part of the Housing Element update to 2 https://temeculaca.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=773092&GUID=DE32B7D6-2659-4CF7-8OB5-3ABA034AD5CO s https://temeculaca.gov/1228/Move-1-15-Through-Temecula-Valley-Reg-Ta General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 8/1 2 Noise Open Space Safety Noise Open Space Conservation Public Safety ensure adequate housing is in areas where infrastructure can support it. The City also has incorporated form -based Specific Plans that include mixed -land uses and increased density in Old Town Temecula and Uptown Temecula. The City is compliant with Noise element requirements. The City is a participant in the Western Riverside County Multi - Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP) as well the San Diego Regional Water Control Board's MS4 permit. A future update will need to incorporate the latest changes that including revised Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, climate change, and resiliency planning. The City of Temecula elected to include this optional element, as it Not required Air Quality is not required by statue. A future update will be necessary to \� \� ensure the latest data is incorporated into the General Plan. GHG analysis will be required. This optional element, while compliant, may warrant updating to Not required Community Design reflect substantial changes in the community's population since 2005. The City has achieved or is on -track to achieve many of the economic goals outlined in the General Plan. This includes Economic developing the SR-79 south corridor, further development of Old Not required Development 0 Town Temecula, the expansion of lodging along the freeway, and the recycling of old commercial centers (Uptown Temecula Specific Plan). Updates may be needed to reflect progress on these goals and the City may need to adopt new goals. The City's optional Growth Management/Public Facilities element Growth ensures that equitable, sustainable, and efficient growth occurs Not required Management within the City. This includes addressing level of service issues Public Facilities related to service providers (water, sewer, trash, etc.), public safety, and physical facilities. General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 9/1 2 Compliance with Other OPR Guidelines Environmental Justice According to the below map generated by CalEPA, the City of Temecula does not contain any SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities. The City does contain AB 1550 Low-income Communities. As the City updates the General Plan, the City will comply updated Environmental Justice requirements. SB 535 I;anla r03a TEMECUL VALLEY _egend 5B 535 Disadvantaged Communities AB 1550 Low-income Communities 5B 535 Disadvantaged Communities and AB 1550 Low- incomB Cammunities AB 1550 Low-income Communities within a 1/2 mile of a 313 535 Disadvantaged Community Temecula Y f P changa County of Riverside; Bureau of Land Management, . i y4 r Figure 2: h=s://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc%apandtrade/auctionproceeds/communityinvestments.htm General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg. 1 0/1 3 Military Lands and Facilities According to the California Military Land Use Compatibility Analyst (CMLUCA) map (available on the next page), the City of Temecula does not contain any military installations, training routes, or special air space. Additionally, the City is not located within 1,000 feet of any military installations. Even so, the City recognized Marine Corps Base Pendleton in the current General Plan, with a focus on the former San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONG S)4. The City has also engaged with the San Diego Regional Military Working Group (with SANDAG) and other SANDAG border liaisons to address the critical infrastructure needs along the 1-15 corridor. During recent studies, the City identified a significant number of military personnel who travel from Temecula and other adjacent cities to various bases within San Diego ounty. California Military Land Use Compatibility Analyst `' "i": RF B.iScS Murriela ` \\� MiYtary 13ra11Ltles AIR FORCE ■ ARMY ■ Te COAST GUARD MARINE CORPS N NAVY ■ '� FLIC-HT P.3T35 Ill in California Ill Instrument Route ■ brook ■ SR -Slow Route VR- Visual Route ■ No Training Routes Id AiR SPACE No Millary Installations d No Special ltir SUA in Califwre Esri, HERE, Garl (c) GpenStreetMapj6l_ Cnpyright0201I StateofCalifornia Mort Figure 3: http://Cmluca.gis.ca.govl 4 httl2s://temeculaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/288/Public-Safety-PDF?bidld= General Plan Annual Progress Report - 2019 Pg. 11 /13 Consultation with Native American Tribes The City of Temecula consults with local tribes on a regular basis in compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements. This is tracked by using the City's enterprise permitting system. In addition to regular consultation, the City holds quarterly meetings with one tribe to collaborate on upcoming projects. Finally, the City continues to work with our local tribal partners to achieve goals, policies, and plans identified in the General Plan. In a recent instance, the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians contributed $14.5 million dollars to a General Plan (Circulation Element) identified interchange improvements. s httl2s://temeculaca.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/129 General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg.12113 HOUSING ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT Please see Attachment A for the City's Housing Annual Progress Report. General Plan Annual Progress Report -2019 Pg.13/13 Jurisdiction Temecula Reporting Year 2019 (Jan. 1 - Dec. 31) Building Permits Issued by Affordability Summary Income Level Current Year Very Low Deed Restricted 0 Non -Deed Restricted 0 Low Deed Restricted 0 Non -Deed Restricted 0 Moderate Deed Restricted 0 Non -Deed Restricted 31 Above Moderate 123 Total Units 154 Note: Units serving extremely low-income households are included in the very low- income permitted units totals Housing Applications Summary Total Housing Applications Submitted: 0 Number of Proposed Units in All Applications Received: 0 Total Housing Units Approved: 0 Total Housing Units Disapproved: 0 Use of SIB 35 Streamlining Provisions Number of Applications for Streamlining 0 Number of Streamlining Applications Approved 0 Total Developments Approved with Streamlining 0 Total Units Constructed with Streamlining 0 Units Constructed - SIB 35 Streamlining Permits Income Rental Ownership Total Very Low 0 0 0 Low 0 0 0 Moderate 0 0 0 Above Moderate 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 Cells in grey contain auto -calculation formulas CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development DATE: April 28, 2020 SUBJECT: Receive and File Update on the Housing Element Annual Progress Report to the Department of Housing and Community Development PREPARED BY: Dale West, Associate Planer II RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file an update on the Housing Element Annual Progress Report to California Department of Housing and Community Development for the reporting period of January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. BACKGROUND: The City has an adopted and certified a Housing Element for the period of 2014 to 2021 and pursuant to Government Code Section 65400, the City is required to prepare an Annual Progress Report (APR). The APR includes information on the jurisdiction's progress in addressing the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), including the number of housing units permitted by income level, number of units entitled, and the status of programs identified within the Housing Element. The APR must be considered by the City Council at a public meeting prior to submitting it to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) by April 1 of each year. The table below briefly summarizes the City's housing activities in 2019. Residential Dwelling Units Production in 2019 Category Units Status Applications Submitted 379 Under Review by Community Development Completed Entitlement 60 Building Permit Ready Building Permits 123 Permits Finaled/Certificate of Occupancy The applications submitted consists of Solana Assisted Living (105 units), Arrive @ Rancho Highlands Apartments (270 dwelling units, which includes 55 affordable housing units), and four Accessory Dwelling Units for a total of 379 proposed dwelling units. The completed entitlements consisted of Vine Creek Apartment with 60 affordable housing dwelling units. The 123 building permits issued are for Nicolas Heights (19 single family dwelling units), Tri Pointe Cassis (18 single family dwelling units), Indigo Place (two single family dwelling units), Temecula Village Apartments (82 units), one Accessory Dwelling Unit, and one single-family custom home. As required by law, the attached 2019 Housing Element Annual Progress Report was submitted to HCD on April 1, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: The 2017 Legislative Housing Package increased the importance of the Housing Element Annual Progress Reports that are due to HCD and OPR April 1 each year. Consequences for failing to complete and submit the Annual Report may include court sanctions and losing local control over affordable multifamily housing development entitlements to a new streamlined approval process. ATTACHMENT: 2019 Housing Annual Report Summary Item No. 8 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MAY 26, 2020 CALL TO ORDER at 7:25 PM: President Schwank ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Rahn, Stewart, Schwank CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS - None CSD CONSENT CALENDAR Unless otherwise indicated below, the following pertains to all items on the Consent Calendar. Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Stewart, Second by Edwards. The vote reflected unanimous approval. 13. Approve Action Minutes of April 28, 2020 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors approve the action minutes of April 28, 2020. 14. Set Public Hearing to Approve Temecula Community Services District Proposed Rates and Charges for Fiscal Year 2020-21 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED RATES AND CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH 15. Terminate Easement for Maintenance of Landscaping on Property Within Tract 21764 and Service Level C, Zone 7 Recommendation: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TERMINATING THE EASEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING ON PROPERTY WITHIN TRACT 21764 AND TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, SERVICE LEVEL "C", ZONE 7 CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT At 7:28 PM, the Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 9, 2020, at 5:30 PM for a Closed Session, with a regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Zak Schwank, President ATTEST: Randi Johl, Secretary [SEAL] Item No. 9 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Approve Update to the 2017-22 Citizen Participation Plan and Substantial Amendment to the 2019-20 CDBG Annual Action Plan PREPARED BY: Lynn Kelly -Lehner, Principal Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN SETTING THE CITY'S POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROGRAM (CDBG) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING, ANNUAL ACTION PLANS, ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS, SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS, AND DISASTER RECOVERY AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE 2019-20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ANNUAL ACTION PLAN BACKGROUND: On July 1, 2012, the City of Temecula became and Entitlement City through the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program through the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). On June 28, 2016, the City Council adopted the updated Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds. The Citizen Participation Plan included policies and procedures for amending Annual Action Plans where CDBG-funded activities may be added or deleted, and funding for activities may be increased. On March 27, 2020, the Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), Public Law 116-136, was signed into law. The CARES Act distributed an additional allocation of CDBG funds, known as CDBG-CV funds, to entitlement jurisdictions, for the prevention and response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City anticipates receiving an $329,152 allocation of CDBG-CV funds for COVID-19 prevention and response and intends to utilize these funds through the implementation of Temecula Assist, which is outlined in more detail below. The funding authorized under the CARES Act allows for certain provisions and flexibilities to enable grantees to effectively and efficiently utilize the funding to respond to and address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. To take advantage of these flexibilities, the City must submit a waiver to HUD, requesting to utilize these provisions. The City must also amend its Citizen Participation Plan. The area of biggest flexibility is reducing the noticing period from thirty days to five days during this time. Temecula Assist At the May 21, 2020 City Council Budget Workshop, City Council recommended moving forward with a half million -dollar small business relief grant program called Temecula Assist. Primarily funded with CDBG-CV funding, Temecula Assist provides direct relief to business owners with two different grant opportunities, one funded with CDBG-CV funds, and the other funded with General Fund. The goal of the Temecula Assist: Rent Recovery and Job Retention is to assist business owners in operations during the global pandemic, as well as to create economic opportunities by creating and retaining jobs held by low- or moderate -income individuals within the City of Temecula. The application period opened on May 26, 2020 and runs through June 9, 2020. At the close of the application period, the City will hold a lottery to randomly order all applications and preliminarily select the businesses that are eligible to obtain grants from the Temecula Assist: Rent Recovery and Job Retention program. After the lottery is held, the City will notify businesses via email if they have been preliminarily selected for the grant. The City will conduct a thorough eligibility review of the application and request additional, supporting documentation from the business to confirm program eligibility. During this review, the City will request additional information from each business owner including demographic and socioeconomic data for Federal program reporting and documentation. A Notice of Public Hearing and the commencement of the 5-day public review period was published in the San Diego Union Tribune on June 4, 2020, informing the public of the proposed substantial amendment and updated Citizen Participation Plan and inviting comments. FISCAL IMPACT: The approval of the Substantial Amendment will allow the expenditure of a supplemental appropriation of $329,152 of federal CDBG-CV funds. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution — Citizen Participation Plan Exhibit A — Citizen Participation Plan 2. Resolution — Substantial Amendment Exhibit A — Substantial Amendment 3. Notice of Public Hearing RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN SETTING THE CITY'S POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROGRAM (CDBG) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN, ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING, ANNUAL ACTION PLANS, ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS, SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS, AND DISASTER RECOVERY AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine, and declare that: A. The City of Temecula has participated directly within the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as an entitlement jurisdiction for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds since July 1, 2012; B. The City of Temecula has prepared all documents, notices, and forms required by HUD for participation in the CDBG Program by entitlement jurisdictions; C. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-42 on June 14, 2011 initiating the City to obtain entitlement community status from HUD, and authorized the Director of Community Development to prepare and return for City Council approval all documents required for the designation as an Entitlement City; D. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-78 on November 1, 2011, approving the Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds; E. On June 28, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 16-43 approving the updated Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds; F. On March 27, 2020, Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), Public Law 116-136, was signed into law; G. The CARES Act distributed an additional allocation of CDBG funds, known as CDBG-CV funds, to entitlement jurisdictions, for prevention and response to the COVID-19 pandemic; H. The City anticipates receiving an $329,152 allocation of CDBG-CV funds for COVID-19 prevention and response; I. Pursuant to the provisions in the CARES Act, the City is updating its Citizen Participation Plan to outline citizen participation requirements for the development or amendment of Action Plans for disaster recovery and supplemental appropriations; J. The proposed Citizens Participation Plan was available for comment between June 4, 2020 and June 9, 2020; K. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby finds, determines and declares: A. Pursuant to Title 24, Housing and Urban Development, of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A Office of the Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Part 91 Consolidated Submissions For Community Planning And Development Programs, Subpart B Citizen Participation and Consultation, Section 91.105 Citizen Participation Plan; Local Governments (24 CFR Part 91, Section 91.105), each entitlement jurisdiction must adopt a Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth its CDBG program policies and procedures to encourage community involvement; and B. The City Council encourages the participation of all of its residents particularly low and moderate income persons, non-English speaking persons and persons with special needs in the development of the City's CDBG program; and C. The City Council has reviewed and approved the proposed City of Temecula Citizen Participation Plan. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The proposed action on the Annual Action Plan (2016-2017) is exempt from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) pursuant to the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and specifically 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1) because the Citizen Participation Plan is a resource identification study and the development of plans and strategies for the prioritization and funding of proposed programs through CDBG and the proposed action involves the feasibility and planning studies to determine prioritization and CDBG funding to begin the development of certain projects. The potential projects discussed in the proposed actions that might involve physical activity will be reviewed under NEPA or the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of the development of those projects. The proposed action is also exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and 15378(b)(4). N Section 4. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9t' day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk City of Temecula Citizen Participation Plan Prepared by: City of Temecula Community Development Department 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Adopted May 2016 Revised June 2020 City of Temecula Citizen Participation Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Temecula receives an annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). As a condition of funding, the City of Temecula must adopt and follow a Citizen Participation Plan that describes how the City will encourage public involvement in the development of the City's Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan and Assessment of Fair Housing. PURPOSE OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN The City of Temecula recognizes the importance of public participation in both defining and understanding current housing, community development and fair housing needs, prioritizing resources to address those needs and reviewing performance. The City's Citizen Participation Plan is designed to encourage participation by residents and organizations representing people of all ages, genders, economic levels, races, ethnicities, special needs and protected classes of the development of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plans and Assessment of Fair Housing as well as to inform them of the CDBG decision -making process. The City shall actively encourage participation by non -English-speaking residents of the community and residents of low- and moderate -income neighborhoods and other areas where CDBG funds are proposed to be used. This Citizen Participation Plan addresses Sections 91.100 and 91.105 of HUD's Consolidated Plan regulations, as amended on July 16, 2015 and Section 5.158 of HUD's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Final Rule. This Citizen Participation Plan shall be effective until amended or superseded. The HUD requirements for citizen participation do not restrict the responsibility or authority of the City of Temecula for the development and execution of the Consolidated Plan documents, but rather to facilitate citizen access to, and engagement with the CDBG program. GLOSSARY OF RELEVANT TERMS Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Actions that, when taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and opportunities, replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and facilitate compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH)/ Analysis of Impediments (Al): An analysis of fair housing data, an assessment of fair housing issues and contributing factors, and an identification of fair housing priorities and goals. City CDBG Webpage: All draft and final Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report, Analysis of Impediments, Assessment of Fair Housing documents, public hearing, and program workshop schedules and announcements may be accessed on the following City webpage: http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG Low- and Moderate -Income Areas (LMA): LMAs are typically areas where 51 % of the residents earn less than 80% of the County's median income, as determined with HUD -supplied data. However, since there are few areas of Temecula meeting this criterion, the City is considered an "Exception Community," whereby LMAs are those areas where the highest 25% (upper quartile) of block groups with low- and moderate -income persons. Therefore, an LMA in Temecula would be currently defined as U.S. Census block group where approximately 35% of the residents are low- or moderate -income persons. From time to time, HUD will adjust that threshold based on changing demographics. Appendix A provides a map that 2� shows the eligible low- and moderate -income areas. Examples of CDBG activities that may be undertaken based on LMA eligibility include: • Acquisition of land for a LMA neighborhood park or recreation center; • Construction of a health clinic serving a LMA; and • Installation or replacement of gutters and sidewalks and other street improvements. Low and Moderate Limited Clientele Benefit (LMC): LMC activities provide benefits to a group of low - or moderate -income persons regardless of where they live. LMC activities are eligible if at least 51 % of the clients are of low or moderate income. There are some groups that are generally presumed by HUD to be principally of low- to moderate -income such as: • Abused children; • Elderly persons (age 62 and older); • Battered spouses; • Homeless persons; • Severely disabled adults (not children); • Illiterate adults; • Persons living with AIDS; and • Migrant farm workers. Examples of eligible activities include: • Acquisition of a building for a shelter for the homeless; • Rehabilitation of a center to train severely disabled persons to live independently; • Development of a senior center or provision of senior citizen programs; • Public services activities (i.e., the provision of health or child care services); and • Removal of architectural barriers to the disabled. Protected Classes: The Federal protected classes include: • Disability • Family status • National origin • Race • Color • Religion • Sex Additional State of California protected classes include: • Marital status • Medical condition • Ancestry • Source of income • Age • Sexual orientation • Gender identity • Gender expression • Genetic information • Arbitrary discrimination 3 1 P _ Severely Disabled Adults: Adults are classified as having a severe disability, if they: (a) have used a wheelchair or another special aid for 6 months or longer; (b) were unable to perform one or more functional activities or needed assistance with an activity of daily living or instrumental activity of daily living; (c) were prevented from working at a job or doing housework; or (d) had a condition including autism, cerebral palsy, Alzheimer's disease, senility, or mental retardation. Finally, persons who are under 65 years of age and who are covered by Medicare or receive Social Security are considered to have a disability (and a severe disability). Functional activities include seeing, hearing, having one's speech understood, lifting and carrying, walking up a flight of stairs, and walking. Activities of daily living include getting around inside the house, getting in and out of bed or a chair, bathing, dressing, eating, and toileting. Instrumental activities of daily living include going outside the home, keeping track of money or bills, preparing meals, doing light housework, and using the telephone. ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING (AFH) or ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS (Al) TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE The AFH or Al is required every five years prior to the preparation of the Consolidated Plan. If HUD requires an AFH, the City must prepare, adopt, and submit its initial AFH for HUD review no later than 270 calendar days prior to the start of the following program year. AFHs must be submitted 195 days prior to the start of the following program year, which would be on December 181" every five years. This schedule will allow the City to consider any fair housing issues when developing the City's Consolidated Plan. As part of its AFH or Al, the City will consult with agencies that provide assisted housing, health and social services, including those focusing on services to children, elderly persons, and persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families and homeless persons. This will also include consultations with community -based and regionally -based organizations that represent protected class members and organizations that enforce fair housing laws. The consultation efforts will include regional government agencies, Public Housing Authorities and adjoining cities. Agencies including businesses, developers, nonprofit organizations, philanthropic organizations and faith -based organizations will also be consulted. These agencies will also be consulted in the preparation of the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans. A list of these agencies is attached as Appendix B. Other interested agencies are invited to join the notification list at any time. When preparing an AFH or Al, the City will provide HUD -provided data and other information to interested citizens, agencies and organizations in an effort to provide meaningful analyses of local fair housing conditions and issues. The City will endeavor to provide this information as early in the planning process as possible, but it is subject to HUD releasing that data to the City. After the consultation process is under way, one public hearing will be conducted to obtain citizen input at least 30 days prior to publishing the proposed AFH or Al. The City may choose to conduct this hearing in conjunction with one of the two required public hearings on the Consolidated Plan. CONSOLIDATED PLAN The Consolidated Plan is a HUD prerequisite for the City to receive CDBG funds. The Consolidated Plan examines housing and community development needs, sets priorities for grant monies and establishes a strategic plan with specific measurable goals to address priority needs. The City is in its second multi -year Consolidated Plan covering the program years July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2022. The City Consolidated Plan only covers the geographic area within the city limits of Temecula. In addition to the Consolidated Plan, the City will annually conduct public hearings in the preparation of the Annual Action Plan describing the amount of funds available to the City and the activities to be undertaken with CDBG funds. Each of the agencies included in Appendix B will be consulted in the development of the Consolidated Plan and notified of the availability of draft documents including the Consolidated Plan and Action Plans. 4 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION The consolidated planning processes includes many opportunities for citizen participation. These include surveys, community outreach meetings, City Finance Committee meetings and City Council public hearings. The City will particularly encourage participation of persons with special needs and/or persons who are often underrepresented in public process (i.e. low income, non-English speaking persons, and minorities, persons with disabilities, and persons who are homeless). The City will make a concerted effort to notify and encourage the participation of citizens, local and regional institutions, the local Continuum of Care organization addressing homelessness, and public and private organizations including businesses, developers, nonprofit organizations, philanthropic organizations, community -based and faith -based organizations, broadband internet service providers, organizations engaged in narrowing the digital divide, agencies whose primary responsibilities include the management of flood prone areas, public land or water resources, emergency management agencies, state and local health service providers, social service providers, fair housing organizations, state and local governments, public housing agencies, affordable housing developers, businesses, community and faith based organizations, and other stakeholders in the amendment of the Citizen Participation Plan or the development of the Al or AFH, Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans through mailings (including electronic mailings), online postings and public notices in the newspaper. Language Access Plan: The City has assessed its language needs and identified the need for translation of notices and other vital documents such as marketing materials and applications for CDBG assistance in Spanish to provide meaningful access, upon request. Community Surveys: As part of its Consolidated Plan and AFH/AI process, the City will conduct a needs survey of residents and stakeholders in the City. The purpose of the survey to obtain a broad range of community input and perspectives. Community Meetings: During the preparation of the Consolidated Plan and AFH/AI, at least two community meetings will be held to gather public input about the housing and community development needs from citizens and their neighborhoods. During the Action Plan preparation, the City will conduct two technical assistance workshops on CDBG applications. The community meetings will provide an opportunity for citizens and interested parties to obtain information about the City's housing and community development programs and eligibility requirements. The Annual Action Plan community meetings will provide information to potential applicants that wish to submit funding proposals for their service programs or neighborhoods. City staff will be available at the meetings to provide technical assistance for developing funding proposals to address priority needs and meet the goals of the AFH/AI and Consolidated Plan. At least one community meeting will be held in the early evening to accommodate work schedules and one community meeting will be held during daylight to accommodate those uncomfortable driving at night. City Finance Committee: The City has a Finance Committee that meets on an as -needed basis and performs in an advisory function to City staff and to the City Council concerning financial matters. The Finance Committee consists of two appointed City Council members. The Committee meets at least once a year regarding CDBG funding. They will review of all CDBG funding proposals and will direct staff on which activities should be included in the draft Action Plan. This meeting provides interested residents and agencies with an opportunity to participate in the funding process and the public is invited to attend. The meeting generally occurs about 45 days before City Council CDBG public hearing after City staff has determined the eligibility of all CDBG service applications. In the event City staff proposes a substantial amendment to any of the CDBG plans, then a Committee meeting may be scheduled before proposing a substantial amendment at a City Council public hearing. Typically, the public is notified of any Committee meetings three days prior to the meeting; however, when CDBG is a topic item on their agenda, there will be a minimum of ten days' advance notice. All applicants 5 1 F_ will be notified by email of the meeting so that they can answer any Committee questions about their application. A public notice is published in the local newspaper. Public Hearings: A minimum of two public hearings will be held by the City Council each year. The first public hearing is usually held in September each year as part of the CAPER review process. This hearing will be held earlier than September if done in conjunction with the public hearing on the initial Assessment of Fair Housing to meet HUD's submittal deadline. The citizen process will conclude with a final City Council public hearing in April or May to adopt the Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Action Plan. The public will have the opportunity of reviewing the draft Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Action Plan (and providing input to City Staff) within a 30-day comment period during March and/or April each year. City staff will incorporate public comments submitted to City staff during the 30-day comment period into the Consolidated Plan (and/or Action Plan).. Public comments and citizen participation are encouraged during all public hearings each year. Notifications and Location of Public Hearings and Meetings: All public hearings will take place at the City of Temecula Civic Center, Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California, 92590, a location which is accessible to persons with physical disabilities. Community outreach meetings will also take place at a City facility where there are available meeting rooms. All sites selected for public meetings and public hearings are accessible to persons with disabilities. The City will provide a translator upon request to accommodate non-English speaking persons at public hearings or community meetings. Persons needing special accommodations, or a translator should make their request one week before the meeting so the City can assure the special needs are met. These requests should be made to the Community Development Department at (951) 694-6400. Unless otherwise stated in this Plan, citizens will be given at least 10 days' advance notice of the City Council public hearings and community meetings. This will be accomplished through posting a summary of the documents on the City website(http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG), and at public places including the City of Temecula Ronald H. Roberts Public Library and City of Temecula Civic Center. Official notification shall take place through publication of a public notice in a local newspaper of general circulation (The Press Enterprise or The San Diego Union Tribune). To encourage participation, the City may also send email notifications or other outreach materials to residents, agencies and advocates, such as those interested parties and individuals listed on Appendix B. The City will maintain the list and verify the contact information periodically and, at a minimum, annually. The list will continue to evolve and be administratively modified each year without a substantial amendment, as stakeholders or potential participants are identified or dissolved. Organizations or groups and persons interested to be added the list may contact the City of Temecula Community Development Department at (951) 694-6400. During the preparation of the Consolidated Plan and AFH/Al, the City may distribute public notices to residents through property landlords or directly to residents living within existing, designated low income areas and neighborhoods throughout the City to inform residents about the public hearings as an effort to increase public participation by underrepresented groups. Other Requirements: The draft Consolidated Plan will also include the City's policies related to displacement of low- and moderate -income individuals, reducing poverty, removal of lead -based paint hazards, preventing and mitigating homelessness and removing barriers to fair housing choice. The City does not anticipate any displacement of individuals, but the Consolidated Plan will describe how the City will minimize displacement of persons or, in the unanticipated event of displacement, how the City will assist any persons who are actually displaced as a result of the use of these funds, specifying the type and levels of assistance and amount of compensation. Plan Availability: The proposed Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, AFH/AI, Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) and any substantial amendments to plans will be available P - at the City of Temecula Ronald H. Roberts Public Library, the City Hall (in the City Clerk's Office and Community Development Department) and on the City's website at http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG during public comment periods. A reasonable number of hard copies will be available to the public and provided upon request. Citizens or groups that attend any of the community meetings or public hearings will be notified when the draft documents are available for comment. These materials will also be available in a form accessible to persons with disabilities, upon request. Comments, questions, or suggested amendments should be directed to the Community Development Department at 951-694-6400. The City will consider any comments from individuals or groups received in writing during the process of drafting the Consolidated Plan and/or annual Action Plan as well as public testimony at hearings or meetings. A summary of the written and public hearing comments will be included in the final Consolidated Plan and/or Annual Action Plan, along with the City's response to the comments. Please note however that copies of the complaints, along with the City's response will still be sent to HUD, if they occur outside of the Consolidated Planning and/or Annual Action Planning process but may not appear in the Consolidated Plan. The City will provide a written response to all written citizen comments and complaints related to the Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, Amendments, and CAPER within 30 days of receiving the comments and complaints. Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER): In addition to the required Plans and Assessment, the City is required to prepare a CAPER, which reports on its performance in the prior year. Before the City submits a CAPER to HUD, the City will make it available to interested parties for a comment period of no less than 15 days. Any comments or views of citizens received in writing, or orally at public hearings in regarding the performance report will be considered prior to submitting the CAPER. A summary of these comments shall be attached to the performance report. COMPLAINTS Residents or other interested parties may submit complaints to the City in relation to administration of the CDBG programs or plans. Complaints may be made via telephone by calling (951) 694-6400 or in writing to: Community Development Department/CDBG, City of Temecula, 41000 Main St., Temecula, CA 92590. The complaining party should state the nature of the complaint, what prior efforts have been made to resolve the problem and any other pertinent information which would help staff determine a solution. All complaints will receive careful consideration and a timely, substantive response will be provided within fifteen (15) days where practicable, but no less than thirty (30) working days. SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS Occasionally, situations warrant an amendment to the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans. Minor amendments may be completed by staff with the approval of the Director of the Community Development Department. Minor amendments involve any change that does not meet the criteria for a Substantial Amendment. A Substantial Amendment to the Consolidated Plan occurs when: • There is a new goal proposed or the City proposes the deletion of a previously approved Strategic Plan goal (changes to performance measurement indicators or numeric accomplishment goals shall not be considered a substantial change). 7 1 F_ • The City may make minor changes to the Consolidated Plan, as needed, so long as the changes do not constitute a substantial amendment as described above. Changes to numeric accomplishment goals within an existing strategic plan goal shall not constitute a substantial amendment. Such changes to the Consolidated Plan will not require public review or a public hearing. A Substantial Amendment to the Action Plan occurs when: • A CDBG activity budget will increase by $50,000 or 25% of the project's original budget; • There is a significant change in the purpose, scope, location, or beneficiaries of an activity; or • The City proposes to add or delete an activity, except in the following cases: o If the activity is on the back up list approved by the City Council in the Annual Action Plan; o If the activity is being deleted due to delays and would be included in the following year's Annual Action Plan; o If there are nonperformance or eligibility issues requiring activity termination; o If project deletion or funding reductions are due to facility closure or bankruptcy; o If the agency becomes disqualified or ineligible to receive funding or is unable to produce sufficient eligible billings in accordance with the provisions of the agreement; or o If an applicant requests that their activity be terminated. A Substantial Amendment to the AFH or Al occurs when: There is a significant revision involving a material change in the AFH or Al pursuant to 24 CFR 5.164(a)(1) or upon HUD's written notification specifying a material change that requires the revision. A material change is a change in circumstances in thejurisdiction of a program participant that affects the information on which the AFH or Al is based to the extent that the analysis, the fair housing contributing factors, or the priorities and goals of the AFH or Al no longer reflect actual circumstances. Minor edits to the Citizen Participation Plan, such as updating contact information, updating the map identifying eligible low- and moderate -income areas or technical details about schedules and publications, will not constitute a "Substantial Amendment." Modifications to appendices of any plans are not considered to be a Substantial Amendment. If there is a rescission of funds by HUD, shifting of funds would not be considered a Substantial Amendment. If such federal government funding cuts or changes were to happen, the City would be required to follow its plan of action as outlined in the Consolidated Plan and/or the Annual Action Plan; however, any HUD -directed change would normally not be considered a Substantial Amendment. Citizen Participation for Substantial Amendments: In the event of a Substantial Amendment to the Consolidated Plan or Action Plan, the City will conduct at least one public hearing. This hearing will be held after a comment period of no less than 30 days, where the proposed, substantially amended Consolidated Plan/Action Plan will be made available to interested parties. Citizens will be informed of the substantial amendment by public notice prior to the public review and comment period. The newspaper advertisement shall summarize the Substantial Amendment and inform the public of the date, time and location of the public hearing. The substantially amended sections of the Consolidated Plan will be available for review at the City during the full public comment period. In addition, the amended sections will be on the City's website, http://www.TemeculaCA.gov/CDBG, for the full duration of the public comment period. 8 I CDBG DISASTER RECOVERY (CDBG-DR) AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS In the event of a federally -declared major disaster or emergency for which the City is to receive and administer HUD disaster recovery assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act or supplemental assistance under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES) or other supplemental appropriations, either directly from HUD or through the State of California, the following citizen participation requirements shall apply to the development of Action Plans and Substantial Amendments to Action Plans for disaster recovery and supplemental appropriations: 1. Before the City adopts the Action Plan for a disaster recovery grant or supplemental appropriation or any substantial amendment to a disaster recovery grant or supplemental appropriation Action Plan, the City will publish the proposed plan or amendment on the City website. For disaster recovery assistance, the City will cross-reference with any additional disaster recovery websites established to provide information to the public concerning assistance that may be available. 2. The City and/or subrecipients will notify affected citizens through USPS and/or electronic mailings, press releases, public service announcements, public notice(s), and/or through social media, or as otherwise required by HUD. 3. The City will ensure that all citizens have equal access to information about the programs, including persons with disabilities and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons. Program information will be made available in the appropriate languages for the City. 4. Subsequent to publication of the Action Plan or substantial amendment, the City will provide a reasonable opportunity for receiving comments as prescribed by the Federal Register Notice governing administration of the disaster recovery assistance or as otherwise permitted by HUD for supplemental appropriations. 5. The City will receive comments via USPS mail to Lynn Kelly -Lehner, Principal Management Analyst, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590, or via email at lynn.lehner@temeculaca.gov. 6. In the Action Plan, the City will specify criteria for determining what changes in the City's plan constitute a substantial amendment to the plan. At a minimum, the following modifications will constitute a substantial amendment: a change in program benefit or eligibility criteria; the addition or deletion of an activity; or the allocation or reallocation of a monetary threshold of more than $750,000. 7. For disaster recovery assistance, a public website shall be established and publicized specifically for the disaster. Initially, the City's CDBG website may be used at: https://temeculaca.gov/CDBG. The website shall contain the Action Plan (including all amendments); each Quarterly Performance Report (QPR); procurement policies and procedures; executed contracts; status of services or goods currently being procured by the City (e.g., phase of the procurement, requirements for proposals, etc.). 8. The City will consider all written comments regarding the Action Plan or any substantial amendment. A summary of the comments and the City's response to each comment will be provided to HUD or the State with the Action Plan or substantial amendment. 9. The City will provide a timely written response to every citizen complaint. The response will be provided within 15 working days of the receipt of the complaint, to the extent practicable. 10. The City will notify HUD when it makes any plan amendment that is not substantial. HUD or the State will be notified at least five business days before the amendment becomes effective or in accordance with HUD or State requirements. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND URGENT NEED WAIVERS When authorized by HUD via waiver or statute to respond to an exigent or emergency situation, the City of Temecula may modify its Citizen Participation Plan approach to conform with the flexibilities granted by HUD. These exceptions may be applied to all documents referenced in this Citizen Participation Plan, including the Citizen Participation Plan, Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report, Analysis of Impediments/ Assessment of Fair Housing, and any amendments to these documents. Such modifications may include: P - 1. Reduced public review period, 2. Modified placement of notices and documents for public review, 3. Modified structure of public hearings, or 4. Alternative requirements, as identified and allowed by HUD. ANTI -DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION The City's Anti -displacement and Relocation Plan describes how the City will assist persons who must be temporarily relocated or permanently displaced due to the use of HUD CPD funds. This plan takes effect whenever the City funds projects that involve the following: • Property acquisition; and • Potential displacement of people from their homes and the need to relocate people (either permanently or temporarily); and • The demolition or conversion of low- and moderate -income dwelling units. 1. Background Two Acts apply whenever any of the above issues are present: the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Policies Act of 1970 (URA) and Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Each of these acts places different obligations on the City. The URA governs the processes and procedures which the City and the Finance Department must follow to minimize the burden placed on low- and moderate -income tenants, property owners, and business owners who must move (either temporarily or permanently) as the result of a project funded in whole or in part by the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs. The URA applies to: • Displacement that results from acquisition, demolition, or rehabilitation for HUD -assisted projects carried out by public agencies, nonprofit organizations, private developers, or others; • Real property acquisition for HUD -assisted projects (whether publicly or privately undertaken); • Creation of a permanent easement or right of way for HUD -assisted projects (whether publicly or privately undertaken); and • Work on private property during the construction of a HUD -assisted project even if the activity is temporary. 2. What is Displacement? Displacement occurs when a person moves as a direct result of federally assisted acquisition, demolition, conversion, or rehabilitation activities, because they are: • Required to move; or • Not offered a decent, safe, sanitary and affordable unit in the project; or • Treated "unreasonably" as part of a permanent or temporary move. A person may also be considered displaced if the necessary notices are not given or provided in a timely manner and the person moves for any reason. 3. What is a Displaced Person? The term displaced person means any person that moves from real property or moves his or her personal property from real property permanently as a direct result of one or more of the following activities: • Acquisition of, written notice of intent to acquire, or initiation of negotiations to acquire such real property, in whole or in part, for a project; and • Rehabilitation or demolition of such real property for a project; and • Rehabilitation, demolition, or acquisition (or written notice of intent) of all or a part of other real property on which the person conducts a business or farm operation, for a project. The City offers advisory and financial assistance to eligible tenants (or homeowners) who meet the above definition. 4. Persons Not Eligible for Assistance A person is not eligible for relocation assistance under the provisions of the URA if any of the following occurs: • The person was evicted for serious or repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the lease or occupancy agreement, violation of applicable Federal, State, or local law, or other good cause. However, if the person was evicted only to avoid the application of URA, then that person is considered displaced and is eligible for assistance; • The person has no legal right to occupy the property under State or local law; • The City determines that the person occupied the property to obtain relocation assistance and the HUD Field Office concurs in that determination; • The person is a tenant -occupant that moved into the property after a certain date, specified in the applicable program regulation, and, before leasing and occupying the property, the City or its subgrantee provided the tenant -occupant written notice of the application for assistance, the project's impact on the person, and the fact that they would not qualify as a "displaced person" because of the project; • The person is a tenant -occupant of a substandard dwelling that is acquired or a tenant -occupant of a dwelling unit to which emergency repairs are undertaken and the HUD field office concurs that: o Such repairs or acquisition will benefit the tenant; o Bringing the unit up to a safe, decent, and sanitary condition is not feasible; o The tenant's new rent and average estimated monthly utility costs will not exceed the greater of: the old rent/utility costs or 30 percent of gross household income; and o The project will not impose any unreasonable change in the character or use of the property. • The person is an owner -occupant of the property who moves because of an arm's length acquisition; • The City or its subgrantee notifies the person that they will not displace them for the project; and • The person retains the right of use and occupancy of the real property for life following the acquisition. The City determines that the person is not displaced as a direct result of the acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition for the project and the HUD field office concurs in the determination. 5. Minimizing Displacement The City will take reasonable steps to minimize displacement occurring as a result of its CDBG, HOME and ESG activities. This means that the City will: • Consider if displacement will occur as part of funding decisions and project feasibility determinations; • Assure, whenever possible that occupants of buildings to be rehabilitated are offered an opportunity to return; • Plan substantial rehabilitation projects in "stages" to minimize displacement; and • Meet all HUD notification requirements so that affected persons do not move because they have not been informed about project plans and their rights. 6. Anti -Displacement Policy 11 1 F _ The City seeks to minimize, to the greatest extent feasible, the displacement, whether permanently or temporarily, of persons (families, individuals, businesses, nonprofit organizations, or farms) from projects funded with CDBG, HOME or ESG involving single- or multi -family rehabilitation, acquisition, commercial rehabilitation, demolition, economic development, or capital improvement activities. Projects that the City deems beneficial but that may cause displacement may be recommended and approved for funding only if the City or its subgrantee demonstrates that such displacement is necessary and vital to the project and that they take efforts to reduce the number of persons displaced. Further, they must clearly demonstrate that the goals and anticipated accomplishments of a project outweigh the adverse effects of displacement imposed on persons who must relocate. 7. Displacement Assistance Consistent with the goals and objectives of the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs, the City will take all reasonable steps necessary to minimize displacement of persons, even temporarily. If displacement occurs, the City will provide relocation assistance to all persons directly, involuntarily, and permanently displaced according to HUD regulations. If the City temporarily displaces a low- or moderate -income household, that household becomes eligible for certain relocation payments. The assistance applies to those persons residing in the residence at the time the application is processed and is based on the following procedures: • If the structure and its occupants are determined eligible for temporary relocation assistance, the owner -occupants and tenants are eligible for the actual reasonable cost (based on fair market rent) of temporary lodging facilities until the structure is determined habitable by the City's Building Official; • The City must approve housing and the Lessor and Lessee must sign a rent agreement before move - in. Housing must be comparable functionally to the displacement dwelling and decent, safe, and sanitary. This does not mean that the housing must be in comparable size. The term "functionally equivalent" means that it performs the same function, has the same principal features present, and can contribute to a comparable style of living. Approved lodging accommodations include apartments and houses. The City does not reimburse "rental expenses" for living with a friend or family member; • Either the City will provide the owner -occupants and tenants a direct payment for moving expenses (to and from temporary housing) and storage costs, or the City will arrange moving and storage of furniture with a moving company. If the City makes a direct payment, complete documentation and receipts are necessary to process claims when storage costs exceed the amount assumed by the direct payment; • Damage deposits, utility hookups, telephone hookups and insurance costs are not eligible for reimbursement; and • The City may pay the cost of relocation assistance from Federal funds or funds available from other sources. 8. One -For -One Replacement Dwelling Units The City will generally avoid awarding funds for activities resulting in displacement. However, should the City fund an activity, specific documentation is required to show the replacement of all occupied and vacant dwelling units demolished or converted to another use. The City will assure that relocation assistance is provided as described in 24 CFR 570.606(b)(2). Before obligating or expending funds that will directly result in such demolition or conversion, the City will make public and submit to the HUD field office the following information in writing: • A description of the proposed assisted activity; • The general location on a map and approximate number of dwelling units by size (number of bedrooms) that will be demolished or converted to a use other than as low- and moderate -income units; A time schedule for the commencement and completion of the demolition or conversion; • The general location on a map and approximate number of dwelling units by size (number of bedrooms) that will be provided as replacement units; • The source of funding and a time schedule for the provision of replacement dwelling units; or • The basis for concluding that each replacement dwelling unit will remain a low- and moderate -income unit for at least ten years from the date of initial occupancy. Consistent with the goals and objectives of the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs, the City will take all reasonable steps necessary to minimize displacement of persons from their homes. The City will avoid funding projects that cause displacement of persons or businesses and will avoid funding any project that involves the conversion of low- and moderate -income housing to non-residential purposes. 9. Decent, Safe and Sanitary Dwelling The basic definition is found at 49 CFR 24.2(1). The term decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling means a dwelling that meets the following standards and any other housing and occupancy codes that are applicable. It will: • Be structurally sound, weather tight, and in good repair; • Contain a safe electrical wiring system adequate for lighting, and other devices; • Contain a safe heating system capable of sustaining a healthful temperature for the displaced person; • Be adequate to accommodate the displaced person. There will be a separate, well lit, ventilated bathroom that provides privacy to the user and contains a toilet, sink, and a bathtub or shower, all in good working order and properly connected to appropriate sources of water and to a sewage drainage system. There should be a kitchen area that contains a fully usable sink, properly connected to hot and cold water and to a sewage drainage system, and adequate space and utility service connections for a stove and refrigerator; • Contain unobstructed egress to safe, open space at ground level; • For a mobility -impaired person, be free of any barriers that would preclude reasonable ingress, egress, or use of the dwelling by such person. This requirement will be satisfied if the displaced person elects to relocate to a dwelling that they select, and the displaced person determines that they have reasonable ingress, egress, and the use of the dwelling; and • Comply with lead -based paint requirements of 24 CFR Part 35. REAL PROPERTY POLICIES The City and its CDBG, subrecipients must follow specific guidelines regarding the acquisition and use of real property funded in whole or in part with CDBG funds. 1. Use of Real Property The following standards apply to real property within the recipient's control and acquired or improved, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds. These standards will apply from the date funds are first spent for the property until five years after the project is audited and closed. A recipient may not change the use of any such property (including the beneficiaries of such use) from that for which the acquisition or improvement was made unless the recipient gives affected citizens reasonable notice of, and opportunity to comment on, any such proposed change, and either: • The use of such property qualifies as meeting a national objective and is not a building for the general conduct of government; • The requirements in the paragraph below are met; • If the recipient determines, after consultation with affected citizens, that it is appropriate to change the use of property to a use that does not qualify under the above paragraph, it may retain or dispose of the property. The City CDBG, HOME, and ESG programs must be reimbursed in the amount of the current fair market value of the property less any portion 13 attributable to expenditures of non-federal funds for the acquisition of and improvements to the property; If the change of use occurs within five years of the project being audited and closed, income from the disposition of the real property will be returned to the City CDBG programs; and Following the reimbursement of the federal program pursuant to the above paragraph of this section, the property is no longer subject to any federal requirements. 2. Real Property Acquisition All real property acquisition activities described in this section and funded in whole or in part with CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds and all real property that must be acquired for an activity assisted with Federal funds, regardless of the actual funding source for the acquisition, are subject to the URA (as amended). 3. What is Real Property Acquisition? Real property acquisition is any acquisition by purchase, lease, donation, or otherwise, including the acquisition of such interests as rights -of -way and permanent easements. HUD Handbook 1378 and 49 CFR Part 24 currently contains such regulations. These regulations detail a standard procedure for acquiring property and methods of determining a purchase price and outline other documents that must be provided to the City before disbursement of funds. These regulations further require the applicant to provide relocation payments and assistance to any business or residential occupant of the property whom the acquisition will displace. 4. Eligible Activities The City or its sub -grantee may acquire real property for a project using CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds where the proposed use of the acquired property will be an activity that the City can demonstrate as beneficial to low- and moderate -income persons. 5. Environmental Review Process (24 CFR Part 58) HUD requires that all real property acquisition projects be reviewed before the commitment of Federal funds to assess the impact of a project on the environment. The City will undertake this review process. The applicant should be aware, however, that this review process may delay the date by which CDBG funds may be available and, in case of serious adverse environmental impacts, may effectively stop a project. 14 I Appendix A City of Temecula Map of Low- to Moderate -Income Areas Citv of Temecula CDBG - LOW AND MODERATE INCOME AREA MAP 2010 CENSUS AREAS As d July 1, 2u14) LEGEND -••� CITYBOUNDARY LOW AND MODERAI t INCOME BLOCK GROUPS CENSUS TRACK BLOCK GROUP 15 Appendix B CDBG and AFH/AI Notification List of Persons or Organizations Any person or organization may be added to this list (or deleted) upon request. Please contact Lynn Kelly -Lehner, Principal Management Analyst Lynn.Lehner@TemeculaCA.gov or 951-694-6400 Agency Type Amcal Housing Affordable Housing Assistance League of Temecula Valley Youth Atria Senior Living Seniors Autism Society Inland Empire Persons with Special Needs Boys and Girls Club of Southwest County Youth Services Bridge Housing Affordable Housing Building Industry Association Builders California Apartment Association Inland Empire Rental Property Cameron Historical Building Affordable Housing Canine Support Teams Persons with Disabilities Catholic Charities Faith based Circle of Care Ministries Food Bank City of Murrieta Adjacent City City of Temecula Departments City government Coachella Valley Housing Coalition Affordable Housing Community Access Persons with Disabilities Community Mission of Hope Homeless provider 16 Comprehensive Autism Center Persons with Disabilities County of Riverside Department of Social Services Social Services S County of Riverside Economic Local Government Development Agency County of Riverside Health Health Services Department County of Riverside Behavioral Mental Health Health Department Court Appointed Special Advocate Youth Services of Riverside County Creekside Senior Apartments Senior Housing Desert AIDS AIDS Economic Development of Economic Development Southwest California S Fair Housing Counsel of Riverside Fair Housing County, Inc. C Front Street Plaza Affordable Housing Go Bananas Persons with Special Needs GRID Alternatives Affordable Housing Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley Affordable Housing Heritage Mobile Home Estates Affordable Housing Hitzke Consulting Affordable Housing Hospice of the Valleys Healthcare Housing Authority of the County Public Housing Authority of Riverside Hugs Foster Family Agency Persons with Developmental Disabilities Iglesia Bautista del Valle de Faith Based Temecula Inland Regional Center Persons with Developmental Disabilities Jamboree Housing Affordable Housing Jesus Love Church Faith Based 17 1 F r- John Stewart Company Affordable Housing Ken Follis Business Community League of Women Voters Community based Legacy Ridge Persons with Developmental Disabilities Love of Christ Fellowship Church Faith Based Madera Vista Apartments Affordable Housing Margarita Summit Apartments Affordable Housing Michelle's Place Healthcare Mission Village Apartments Affordable Housing Morning Ridge Apartments Affordable Housing Mt. San Jacinto College Education NAACP Protected Class Nu -Way International Christian Ministries Faith Based Oak Tree Apartments Affordable Housing Operation School Bell Youth Services Our Nicholas Foundation Persons with Special Needs Path of Life Ministries Homeless provider Pechanga Casino Employer Portola Terrace Apartments Affordable Housing Project Touch Homeless Provider Rancho California Apartments Affordable Housing Rancho Community Church Faith Based Rancho Creek Apartments Affordable Housing 18 Rancho Damacitas Foster Youth Rancho en Espanol Faith Based Rancho West Apartments Affordable Housing Renee Jennex Small Family Affordable Housing Riverbank Village Apartments Rental Property Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center Domestic Violence Riverside City and County CoC Homeless Provider Riverside County Office on Aging Senior Services Riverside County Sheriff's Department Public Safety Riverside County Transit Agency Transportation Riverside County Veteran Services Veterans Rochelle Sherman Small Family Group Home Rose Again Foundation Foster Youth SAFE Alternatives for Everyone Domestic Violence Safety Research Associates Special Needs/Senior Housing Senior Care Referral Specialists Senior Services Senior Citizens Service Center Food Bank Food Bank SMURF Youth Services Solari Enterprises Affordable Property Management Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors Housing St. Catherine's Catholic Church Faith Based State Council on Developmental Disabilities Persons with Developmental Disabilities TEAM Evangelical Assistance Ministries Food Bank 19 1 F -- Temecula Convention and Visitors Business Community Bureau Temecula Murrieta Rescue Homeless provider Mission Temecula Reflection Townhouses Affordable Housing Temecula Valley Chamber of Business Community Commerce Temecula Valley Historical Society Historic Preservation Temecula Valley Hospital Health Services Temecula Valley Therapy Persons with Disabilities Temecula Valley Unified School Education District Temecula Valley Unified School District —Adult Transition Program Education Temecula Valley Winegrowers Employer Association The Center for Life Change Addictive Recovery US Vets Initiative Veterans VA Loam Linda Healthcare Healthcare Vintage View Apartments Affordable Housing Voice of Children Youth Services Warehouse at Creekside Affordable Housing Apartments Wells Fargo Business Community Western Riverside Council of Regional Government Governments RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE 2019-20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ANNUAL ACTION PLAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. The City of Temecula has participated directly within the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as an entitlement jurisdiction for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds since July 1, 2012; B. The City of Temecula has prepared all documents, notices, and forms required by HUD for participation in the CDBG Program by entitlement jurisdictions; C. On June 28, 2016, the City Council adopted the updated Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds; D. The Citizen Participation Plan included policies and procedures for amending Annual Action Plans where CDBG-funded activities may be added or deleted, and funding for activities may be increased; E. On March 27, 2020, Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), Public Law 116-136, was signed into law; F. The CARES Act distributed an additional allocation of CDBG funds, known as CDBG-CV funds, to entitlement jurisdictions, for prevention and response to the COVID-19 pandemic; G. The City anticipates receiving an $329,152 allocation of CDBG-CV funds for COVID-19 response; H. On June 9, 2020, the City Council was presented with an updated Citizen Participation Plan, pursuant to the requirements of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES), Public Law 116-136; I. It was determined that the changes for activities listed in Exhibit A required a substantial amendment in accordance with the City's adopted Citizen Participation Plan; J. The proposed Substantial Amendment was available for comment between June 4, 2020 and June 9, 2020; K. The Substantial Amendment was presented to the City Council at a public hearing held on June 9, 2020; L. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the Substantial Amendment on June 9, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. M. At the conclusion of the City Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the City Council approved the Substantial Amendment, subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. N. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council, in approving the Plan hereby finds, determines and declares that: A. Pursuant to Title 24, Housing and Urban Development, of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A Office of the Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Part 91 Consolidated Submissions For Community Planning And Development Programs (24 CFR Part 91) each entitlement jurisdiction shall amend its approved Annual Action plan whenever it makes a change in the purpose, scope, location or beneficiaries of an activity and if there is an increase by $50,000 or 25% of the activity's original budget.. B. Pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES), Public Law 116-136, which was signed on March 27, 2020, each entitlement jurisdiction shall amend its approved Annual Action Plan to demonstrate the proposed plan for a disaster recovery grant, or supplemental appropriation such as Community Development Block Grant -CV (CDBG-CV) funding. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The proposed action on the Substantial Amendment is exempt from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) pursuant to the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and specifically 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1) because the Substantial Amendment is a resource identification study and the development of plans and strategies for the prioritization and funding of proposed programs through CDBG and the proposed action involves the feasibility and planning studies to determine prioritization and CDBG funding to begin the development of certain projects. The potential projects discussed in the proposed actions that might involve physical activity have been reviewed under NEPA or the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of the development of those projects. The proposed action is also exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and 15378(b)(4). Section 4. Approvals. A. The City Council hereby approves the Substantial Amendment as set forth as Exhibit A attached hereto, and any and all other documents deemed necessary by HUD to obtain the CDBG-CV allocation of the federal CDBG funds and authorizes and directs the City Manager, or his designee, to serve as the Certifying Officer for all environmental review procedures associated with the various CDBG projects, and Certifying Officer for the purpose of signing correspondence, agreements, and other required documents. B. The City Council hereby approves the reprogram of the funds as set forth in Exhibit A. Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk Substantial Amendment Amending 2019-20 Action Plan to Incorporate CDBG-CV Funding Executive Summary (AP-05) As authorized by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), enacted on March 27, 2020, the City of Temecula received a special CDBG allocation (CDBG-CV) of $329,152. The funding authorized under the CARES Act allows for certain provisions and flexibilities to enable grantees to effectively and efficiently utilize the funding to respond to and address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This substantial amendment incorporates the CARES Act funding into this Action Plan and expands the following Consolidated Plan goal to specifically target the impact of COVID-19. • Small business creation and expansion including job creation and retention HUD authorized an expedited public review and comment period of five (5) days for this amendment to enable the efficient allocation and use of these resources. Process Section Sort Mode of Target of Summary of Response / Summary of Summary of URL Order Outreach Outreach attendance Comments comments not Received accepted/ received 6 Newspaper Minorities Notice of the 5-day public Insert any None http://tmecula ca.gov/CDBG Ad Persons w/ review and comment period for comments Disabilities the draft 2019-20 Annual Action received. Plan was published in the San Non -English Diego Union Tribune. The public Speaking - notice invited interested residents Specify to review the draft document and other to provide written comments at language: the City of Temecula Spanish Community Development Department, City of Temecula Non- City Clerk's Office, or online at targeted/ the CDBG website. Residents are broad invited to a virtual public hearing community to provide written comments before the Temecula City Council on June 9, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. 7 Public Non- Public hearing for the draft 2019- Insert any None Not applicable. Hearing targeted/bro 20 Amendment to the Annual comments ad Action Plan to be held before the received. community Temecula City Council on June 9, 2020. Expected Resources (AP-15) Program Source of funds Use of Funds CDBG Allocation Narrative Description CDBG-CV Public -Federal CDBG activities to $329,152 CARES Act allocation of address COVID-19 CDBG to address COVID- 19 Annual Goals (AP-20) Sort Start End Geographic Needs Goal Outcome Goal Name Category Funding Order Year Year Area Addressed Indicator Economic Create or retain 9 Business Retention 2019 2021 Citywide jobs $329,152 33 Development 9 Goal Name Small business creation and expansion including job creation and retention Goal Provide direct relief to energize Temecula's local economic backbone, retain jobs, especially those held by low- and Description moderate -income residents, and to stabilize local businesses. Temecula Assist Program has two funding tracks; this program falls under the Rent Recovery and Job Retention Track. The total funding for the Rent Recovery and Job Retention Track is $329,152, made available through CDBG funds. The maximum grant request is $10,000 per business. Projects (AP-35) # Project Name 9 Small Business Creation and Expansion including Job Creation and Retention 8 Project Name Temecula Assist Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Job Creation and Retention Needs Addressed Improve Neighborhoods, Public Facilities and Infrastructure Funding CDBG: $329,152 Description Provide direct relief to energize Temecula's local economic backbone, retain jobs, especially those held by low- and moderate -income residents, and to stabilize local businesses. Target Date 9/30/2022 Estimate the number Create or retain at least 33 low- and moderate -income jobs in and type of families businesses adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. that will benefit from the proposed activities Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Temecula Assist (33 jobs): $329,152 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND AVAILABILITY FOR REVIEW OF DRAFT SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE 2019-2020 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Temecula has prepared draft Substantial Amendment No. 2 to the 2019-2020 Annual Action Plan to address an increase in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program funds provided under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). The CARES Act also requires the City to revise its Citizen Participation Plan. The review period for public review period has been shortened to five days to address the urgency created by the pandemic. The public review and comment period begins on June 5, 2020 and runs through June 9, 2020. PLACE OF HEARING: This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the meeting on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber. DATE OF HEARING: June 9, 2020 TIME OF HEARING: 7:00 p.m. DRAFT 2019-2020 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT NO.2 The One -Year Action Plan sets forth specific activities to be funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The City proposes the following addition to the activities included in the 2019-2020 Action Plan: Temecula Assist: To provide direct relief to businesses, retain jobs, especially those held by low- and moderate - income residents. Funding: $329,152. The City also proposes to modify its Citizen Participation Plan to shorten citizen review periods so that the City can quickly address needs created by local disasters, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the City Council shall be filed within the time required by, and controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action or proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the City Council, shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice. Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this public hearing, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the public hearing by the City Clerk. Email comments must be submitted to the City Clerk at randi.johl@temeculaca.gov. Electronic comments for this public hearing may only be submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted. Due to the closure of the library and other city buildings and facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the agenda packet is only viewable on the City's website at https://temeculaca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. For questions concerning the Substantial Amendment or Citizen Participation Plan, please contact Lynn Kelly -Lehner at (951) 506-5172. ACCESSIBILITY TO MEETINGS AND DOCUMENTS: It is the objective of the City to comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 and the ADA Amendment Act of 2008, the Fair Housing Act, and the Architectural Barriers Act in all respects. If you require public documents in an accessible format, the City will make reasonable efforts to accommodate your request. If you require a disability -related accommodation to attend or participate in a hearing or meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the City Clerk's Office at least 48 hours prior to the meeting at (951) 694-6444. Item No. 10 CITY OF TEMECULA / TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT / SARDA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/Board of Directors FROM: Aaron Adams, City Manager/General Manager/Executive Director DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Approve Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Adopt Fiscal Year 2020-21 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency (SARDA) PREPARED BY: Jennifer Hennessy, Finance Director/Treasurer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council/Board of Directors adopt resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-25 AND ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020- 21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2021-25, ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21, ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 BACKGROUND: At its May 21, 2020 Budget Workshop, the City Council was presented the Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program and 2019-20 CIP and Annual Operating Budgets for the City, Temecula Community Services District (TCSD), and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency (SARDA). At this workshop, the Council recommended bringing forward the Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP and Proposed Budgets in their entirety. Council provided tacit approval for the City Manager to launch the Temecula Assist: A Small Business Emergency Relief Grant program utilizing $171,000 of available General Fund dollars and Council discretionary funds to complement $329,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG-CV) funding, related to the COVID-19 economic relief package. For Council consideration, attached is a list of budgetary changes to amend Fiscal Year 2019-20 and Proposed Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budgets (Exhibit A). Additionally, the following adjustments to the Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program are included: • Ynez Road Improvements — shift out $1,800,000 in DIF-Streets funding from FY2021-22 to FY2024-25, as construction on this project will not occur until all funding is secured. • Local Roadway Plan — add new project to program grant funding received from CalTrans ($72,000, plus $18,000 in Measure S funds) to develop a citywide data -driven traffic safety plan. • Parks Improvement Program —shift forward $125,000 in Measure S funding from FY2021- 22 to FY2020-21 to allow for park improvements next fiscal year. The attached Transmittal Letter summarizes the highlights of the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Proposed Annual Operating Budget and Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program documents. FISCAL IMPACT: The specific fiscal impacts by fund are noted in the attached Transmittal Letter and Exhibit A. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit A — Summary of Budget Adjustments 2. Exhibit A — CIP Budget Adjustments 3. Transmittal Letter 4. Resolution - Approving the CIP for Fiscal Years 2021-25 and Adopting the CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2020-21 5. Resolution - Adopting the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget 6. Resolution - Adopting the Fiscal Year 2020-21 TCSD Preliminary Annual Operating Budget 7. Resolution — Approving the budget for SARDA CIP Fiscal Years 2021-25, Adopting the CIP budget for Fiscal Year 2020-21, and Adopting the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget 8. Resolution - Schedule Of Authorized Positions 9. Salary Schedule 10. Schedule of Authorized Positions 11. Resolution - Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2020-21 12. Gann Limit EXHIBIT A City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget Summary of Adjustments to the Proposed FY19-20 and FY20-21 Annual Operating Budget Adopted Account Account Description Proposed Budget Annual Operating Budget To align with the Animal Control Adopted Budget, approved by the SCFA Board on May 001.172.999.5454 Animal Shelter Operations $239,300 $16,218 $255,518 21, 2020 Shift forward funding for the Parks Improvement Program CIP project ($125,000) and Operating Transfer Out to CIP allocate funding for the Local Roadway Safety Plan CIP project to supplement CalTrans 002.199.999.5901 (from Measure S) $4,945,872 $143,000 $5,088,872 Grant ($18,000) f Adk The Heart of Southern California Wine Country YNEZ ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Circulation Project Project Description: This project includes widening Ynez Road, from Rancho Vista Road to La Paz Street, to two lanes in each direction, and the completion of missing segments of curb & gutter, sidewalk, landscaped medians, street lights and modify the traffic signal at Santiago Road. Benefit: This project improves traffic circulation by widening an important arterial road in this part of the City. Core Value: Transportation Mobility and Connectivity Project Status: The project will be completed by Fiscal Year2021-22. Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.265.999.535 / PW17-17 Level: II City of Temecula Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program Project Cost: Prior Years Actuals 2020-21 2019-20 Adopted 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Total Project Cost Administration 38,129 456,871 495,000 Construction 5,055,000 5,055,000 Construction Engineering 165,000 165,000 Design & Environmental 121,747 490,019 50,000 661,766 MSHCP 165,000 30,000 195,000 Total Expenditures 159,876 1,111,890 5,300,000 6,571,766 Source of Funds: DIF-Street Improvements Unspecified 619,451 652,315 1,800,000 3,500,000 3,071,766 3,500,000 Total Funding 619,451 652,315 5,300,000 6,571,766 Future Operating & Maintenance Costs: Total Operating Costs Alk c7" The Heart of Southern California Wine Country LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN Infrastructure Project Project Description: This project is to develop a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) in support of a statewide data -driven traffic safety plan to reduce traffic accident fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The preparation of an LRSP creates a framework to systematically identify and analyze safety problems and recommend safety improvements. Benefit: The project will provide a prioritized list of improvements and actions that can demonstrate a defined need and contribute to a proactive approach for addressing local safety needs. Core Value: Transportation Mobility and Connectivity Project Status: This project is estimated to be complete on FY2020-21. Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.265.999.NEW Level: I City of Temecula Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program Alk The Heart of Southern California Wine Country 2020-21 Prior Years 2019-20 Adopted 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 Total Project Project Cost: Actuals Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Cost Administration 5,000 5,000 Design & Environmental 85,000 85,000 Total Expenditures 90,000 90,000 Source of Funds: Grants Measure S 72,000 18,000 72,000 18,000 Total Funding 90,000 90,000 Future Operating & Maintenance Costs: Total Operating Costs Notes : 1. (1) Grant source: CalTrans Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) Alk c7" The Heart of Southern California Wine Country PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Parks/Recreation Project Project Description: This project facilitates rehabilitation and improvement projects at various City parks The rehabilitation and improvement projects could include, but are not limited to, parking lot repairs and resurfacing, landscape medians, raised and cracked concrete sidewalk replacement, fencing repair and replacement, landscaping and irrigation system efficiency upgrades, lighting system repairs and efficiency upgrades, on -site drainage improvements and other similar projects. Benefit: This project protects the City's vast investment in parks and open space facilities. Core Value: Healthy and Livable City Project Status: A priority list of rehabilitation projects has been developed. Rehabilitations are completed on an on -going basis. Department: Public Works - Account No. 210.290.999.130 Level: I City of Temecula Fiscal Years 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program 2020-21 Prior Years 2019-20 Adopted 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 Total Project Project Cost: Actuals Adjusted Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Cost Administration 21,400 10,000 10,000 20,000 61,400 Construction 1,684,036 254,565 115,000 115,000 230,000 2,398,601 Total Expenditures 1 1,705,4351 254,565 125,000 125,000 - 250,000 2,460,000 Source of Funds: D I F-Quimby 250,000 250,000 General Fund 1,003,059 1,003,059 Measure S 400,000 250,000 125,000 125,000 250,000 1,150,000 Reimbursements 56,941 56,941 Total Funding i 1,710,000 250,000 125,000 125,000 - 250,000 2,460,000 Future Operating & Maintenance Costs: Total Operating Costs City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget June 9, 2020 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: I am pleased to submit the Proposed Annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year 2020-21. This budget document was developed to serve as the financial plan for the City's programs and policies. It reflects the resources necessary to meet the goals, programs, and service priorities that the City Council is committed to providing its citizens. The Fiscal Year 2020-21 Proposed Annual Operating Budget has been developed after a considerable review process. Departmental budget submittals were prepared and reviewed by line item in connection with projected revenues. Detailed performance objectives and accountability measures were developed consistent with the City's Quality of Life Master Plan. Five-year revenue and expenditure projections were developed to identify the future impacts of proposed staffing and program changes, as well as the impact of proposed capital improvement projects. The resulting budget is realistic and balanced, and continues to provide quality services to the community while effectively utilizing available resources. Given the unprecedented circumstances brought on by the COVID-19 novel coronavirus pandemic and the associated stay-at-home orders, the City's revenue sources have been significantly impacted, as you will read below. As such, a comprehensive review and analysis of all Operating and Capital expenditures has been completed and the Proposed Annual Operating and Capital Budgets reflect the necessary reductions to maintain fiscal solvency over the ensuing five-year forecast period. It is anticipated that the Operating and Capital budget projections will be revisited with the City Council in the October time -frame, as staff learns more information regarding the true impact of the pandemic. CITY OF TEMECULA PROFILE The City of Temecula is a dynamic community comprised of approximately 111,970 citizens. The City maintains 41 parks on 330 developed acres throughout the community, which provide recreation opportunities for both the citizens of Temecula, as well as surrounding communities. Police and Fire protection services are provided through contracts with Riverside County. The Temecula Valley Unified School District provides 32 schools with 27,979 students at the kindergarten through 12th grade levels within the City. The City of Temecula prides itself on its community focus and quality of life. Temecula's residents enjoy one of the finest lifestyles Southern California has to offer. Environmental and residential factors create a beautiful setting that attracts young, well- educated families to upscale homes that are relatively inexpensive by Southern California standards. Geography contributes to the City's population and retail growth from San Diego and Orange Counties. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 w Annual Operating Budget The i",�� o€ 4z4aer,�) .Gail Temecula's leadership has approached economic growth from a qualitative standpoint, providing the City with a favorable share of the region's higher paying and high technology career opportunities. The City's average income levels are higher than the surrounding region, the educational performance of its young people is above the State average, and Temecula has been recognized as one of Nation's safest cities. ECONOMIC INDICATORS The City of Temecula has experienced steady economic growth over the past year, as illustrated by the indicators discussed below. • Estimated Population: 111,970down 1.7%from 2019 (Source: State Department of Finance) • Median Age: 35.5 years old, up 0.2 from 2019 (source: clariras36oReport— to-2-19) • Number of Households: 36,203, up 0.5% from 2019 (source: claritas36oReport -to-2-19) • Average Household Income: $128,557, up 10.4%from 2019 (source:claritas36oReport- to-2-19) • March Median Home Price: $500,000, up 5% from March 2019 (source: Southwest Riverside county Association of Realtors) • Number of Jobs: 52,900, down 5.0% from 2019 (source: EDD) • March Unemployment Rate: Temecula: 4.2% (up from 3% in March 2019), Riverside County: 5.3%, CA: 5.6%, Nation: 4.4% (source: EDD & BLS) As the pandemic's impact on the workforce continues, it is anticipated the unemployment rates will continue to rise over the coming months. IMPACTS OF STATE/COUNTY LEGISLATION A number of legislative changes are being considered, which could have profound fiscal impacts on the City, including: ➢ California State Governor Executive Order N-33-20 (COVID-19) On March 19, 2020, the California State COVID-19 Impact to City Revenue Sources Governor issued Executive Order N-33- Mar-Jun'20 FY20-21 20, requiring a statewide Stay -at -Home Sales Tax (6,612,629) (5,686,237) order as a result of the rapidly spreading Measure S Tax (5,279,316) (346,571) COVID-19 coronavirus. Subsequent to TCSD Program Revenue (824,330) this order, the Governor authorized Transient Occupancy Tax (816,822) (570,441) small business taxpayers to take Gas Tax (343,516) (521,795) advantage of a payment plan for sales MeasureATax (250,000) (428,000) tax payments, up to $50,000, applicable Property Tax (278,528) (656,098) to sales and use tax liabilities. The RMRA Revenue (137,869) (322,472) combination of these two orders, has Other General Fund Revenue (108,625) {248,256} had a significant impact on several City revenue sources, as businesses have shut down, hotels have closed and tax -payers are required to stay at home. The impacts of this global pandemic are still in the early stages, and will have 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget far-reaching economic impacts as time goes on. The ensuing Operating and Capital Budgets reflect the anticipated revenue reductions and the corresponding expenditure budget reductions necessary to balance all funds over the five-year forecast period. ➢ State of California Housing Bills In 2017, 2018 and 2020, the State adopted numerous housing related bills designed to increase the supply of housing in California, including the number of affordable homes. While the City is eligible for some of the direct sources of funding to facilitate the production of housing, including funding from SB 2, the Building Jobs and Homes Act, and other state sources. It is anticipated that the City will be subject to a number of unfunded mandates as a result of the passage of any number of the current and proposed housing related bills. 2020-21 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The City Council adopted the Temecula 2030 Quality of Life Master Plan (QLMP) in October 2011. The QLMP defines the strategic priorities of Temecula's residents, leaders, and partners for the City's next twenty years. It reflects the vision for the City's future, and commits the City to a performance based process to accomplish those goals. This plan was developed by engaging residents, businesses, local institutions and regional partners in an inclusive process. The QLMP outlines six Core Values: • Healthy and Livable City • A Sustainable City • Economic Prosperity • Transportation Mobility and Connectivity • A Safe and Prepared Community • Accountable and Responsive City Government In an effort to incorporate the QLMP into the City's budget process, City of Temecula Executive Staff met at the outset of the budget process to update the Citywide Five -Year Goals based on the Core Values of the Quality of Life Master Plan. These goals were then used by each Department to develop Short Term Objectives for completion in the upcoming fiscal year, and are reflected in the Department Information section of the budget document. OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES The budget document includes the operational objectives for completion in Fiscal Year 2020-21 and the performance measures for evaluating the completion of those objectives. These objectives were developed in a collaborative process with City staff in order to identify how each department can contribute to the overall long term goals of the City. The objectives were then used by the departments in order to identify and justify their Annual Operating Budget submittals. The short term objectives are detailed by Department in the Departmental Information section of this budget document. Each Department section also includes the objectives and performance measures cross referenced by the City's Long -Term Goals and QLMP Core Value, along with significant accomplishments, and a detail of the expenditure requests and personnel allocations which will be used to meet the objectives. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 w a Annual Operating Budget The HRAV� o€ 4z4aezn .Gansu* 6 GENERAL FUND ANALYSIS The General Fund Forecast over the coming five years has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with a decline in tax revenue of nearly $15 million in Fiscal Year 2019-20 alone. It is anticipated that economic recovery will begin slowly in Fiscal Year 2020-21, as consumer confidence returns. For the ensuing five-year period, the General Fund is balanced, with its Reserve for Economic Uncertainty fully - funded in all five years, however a portion of the Secondary Reserve must be utilized to offset the loss in revenue due to the pandemic. As illustrated below, in response to the dramatic decline in General Fund Revenues, the usage of Unassigned Fund Balance and Secondary Reserves are necessary in order to remain fiscally solvent throughout the ensuing five-year period. Ending Fund Balance for Fiscal Year 2020-21 is projected to be $19,550,397. While the target level of Reserves is 25% of Expenditures, or $19,393,918 Reserves will fall slightly short with a total $18,372,434, or 24% of Operating Expenditures. A total of $377,961 of fund balance is committed to cover the costs of a Police Officer position funded by the Pechanga Tribe, plus $800,000 is assigned to future Capital Improvement Projects. General Fund 5-Year Projections Fund Balance Trend 35,000,000 30,000 25,000 20,000, 15,000 10,000. -no ".9 OP L L L J I FY12-13 4V73.1b FY1415 f115,16 fV16.11 FV12-18 4V18,19 FV1g 10 4V20,21 FYL122 4'2703 FV2' 24 4'14115 Fund Balance —Funded Reserve O Desired Reserve General Fund Revenue Highlights Fiscal Year 2019-20 General Fund Operating Revenue is projected to decrease by 12%, or $8.7 million, from the prior fiscal year due to the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority of the reduction is occurring in Sales Tax (18%, or $6.6 million) and Transient Occupancy Tax (19%, or $816,822). Fiscal Year 2020-21 General Fund Operating Revenue is projected to increase 1.5%, or $971,090 over Fiscal Year 2019-20, as the economy is expected to begin rebounding in the Fall of 2020. Although revenue growth is projected, Operating Revenue remains $7.7 million below pre-COVID levels, creating an increased reliance on Measure S transfers to augment General Fund Revenue. In addition to Measure S funding 11 additional police officers, and staffing at Fire Station 95, as has occurred in prior years, an additional $3 million transfer is required to supplement General Fund revenue due to the impact of the pandemic. To balance the General Fund over the ensuing five-year period and maintain the Reserve for Economic Uncertainty, an increased level of Measure S transfers to the General Fund will continue until Sales Tax, and other revenue sources recover from the economic downturn. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget The Fiscal Year 2020-21 General Fund major revenue sources are summarized below: • Sales Tax ($33,054,736) is projected to increase by 5.4% compared to the prior fiscal year as retail establishments are allowed to reopen once the pandemic is contained. • Property Tax ($8,379,137) is projected to decrease by 1.3%, due primarily to the anticipated decline in home sales activity and supplemental property taxes. Because the City of Temecula participates in the Teeter program with Riverside County, the City receives the full amount of property taxes assessed as opposed to paid by the property owner. In the event of late payment, the County receives all penalties and interest accrued on the delinquent tax payment. • Franchise Fees ($3,381,908) are projected to increase 2.7% due to anticipated increases in utility rates charged for electricity, gas, and cable services. • Transient Occupancy Tax ($3,181,349) is projected to increase by 15.1%, as the hospitality sector was heavily impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. With an anticipated rebounding of the economy in the Fall of 2020 combined with the recovery campaign launched by the Temecula visitors' bureau (Visit Temecula Valley), Transient Occupancy Tax revenue is expected to increase as tourism and travel is permitted once again. • Licenses, Permits & Service Charges ($3,913,915) are projected to decrease by 26.1% due to less development activity projected compared to the prior year, as the Roripaugh Ranch, Phase II development (Sommer's Bend) experienced a high-level of permit activity in FY2019-20. • Intergovernmental Revenues ($8,800,736) are projected to increase by 3.7% due to the increases expected in Property Tax In Lieu of Vehicle License Fees which is driven by property value assessments within the City. • Operating Transfers In ($2,590,599) are projected to decrease by 4.4%. Transfers In represents funds deposited into Special Revenue Funds that are transferred into the General Fund to cover eligible expenditures. The Gas Tax Fund is anticipated to transfer $2,418,092 to be spent on street and road maintenance, which is a decrease of 4.8% as a result of the decline in gasoline sales due to the stay-at-home orders related to the pandemic. The Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund is anticipated to transfer $172,507 to supplement the Police Department budget. • Operating Transfers In - Measure S ($8,944,780) will continue to fund 11 Police Officers, staffing for Fire Station No. 95 plus an additional $3 million to help offset the impact to General Fund Operating Revenues. General Fund Expenditure Highlights To respond to the reductions in General Fund revenues, a thorough review of Departmental Operating budgets was conducted as part of the Annual Operating Budget. Each Department prioritized their operational needs and modified their requests accordingly. In addition to Departmental operating 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget reductions, a number of budgetary reduction measures are also reflected in the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Operating Budget, necessary to balance the General Fund, including: • Deferral of adding Sworn Police officers, to maintain ratio to population growth • Reduce contributions to the Workers' Compensation Fund, as adequate reserves exist in this fund to address potential claims • Eliminate all Departmental training budgets • Defer hiring of 4 vacant positions • Reduce additional contributions to Retiree Medical Trust and meet minimum payment level only • Defer/reduce contributions to Asset Replacement Funds (i.e. Fleet, Technology, Facilities) The largest expenditure of the General Fund is Public Safety, which has grown from 58% of total expenditures in the prior fiscal year to 60% in Fiscal Year 2020-21, due to the reductions in the non -safety departments. In accordance with the Measure S ballot language and City Council appropriation guidelines, the City has invested heavily in Public Safety over the past several years and continues to hold Public Safety as its highest priority. A total of $9.1 million, or 38%, of Measure S revenue is dedicated to Public Safety expenditures for Fiscal Year 2020-21 including the funding of the following: • Eleven Sworn Police Officers ($3.9 million) • Fire Station No. 95 Staffing ($1.8 million) • The operations and maintenance of the Citywide Surveillance Camera system ($260,000) • An additional $3 million to augment General Fund Operating Revenue necessary to balance the General Fund and preserve the Reserve for Economic Uncertainty In addition to the ongoing Measure S-funded Public Safety expenditures, the Police Department will maintain 112 sworn officers and the Fire Department will provide four firefighter personnel per engine at all five Fire Stations. General Fund Expenditures total 1s% $77,575,676, which represents a Fire 13% 0.1% increase over the prior Administrative � fiscal year, inclusive of 13% adjustments. The majority of the increase is reflected in the two Public Safety departments, as noted below: • Police ($36,239,386) is increasing by 7.8% over the prior year, due to a projected 6% increase in the contract rates charged by the County to account for increased CalPERS pension costs and labor increases resulting from union negotiations. The prior fiscal year expenditures included a $550,000 reduction due to vacancies and a more favorable contract rate than originally budgeted, creating a higher percentage increase in Fiscal Year 2020-21. • Fire ($10,223,828) is decreasing by 0.6% due to the deferral of the contribution to the Fleet Asset Management fund, slightly offset by the 1.5% anticipated increase in the contract rates 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 w Annual Operating Budget The H��o€sa4aeu) "ii *6060*7 charged by CalFire and Riverside County. The Total Fire Contract of $18.3 million is reduced by the Structural Fire Tax Credit of $8.8 million. • Non -Safety Departments ($29,924,934) which represents a 4.8%, or $1.5 million decrease from the prior year, due to the necessary budget reduction measures as a result of the COVID- 19 pandemic's impact on General Fund revenues. • Non -Departmental ($1,187,529) reflects a 29.4% decrease due to the reduction to the amount deposited into the Retiree Medical Contribution. In prior years, the deposit exceeded the required amount in order to improve the City's funded -status of this trust fund and reduce future years' required contributions. For Fiscal Year 2020-21, the trust contribution will match the required amount, as determined by an independent actuary. Operating Transfers Out & One -Time Payments This category of expenditures reflects funds that are transferred to the Debt Service Funds. A total of $2,077,767 will be transferred to the Debt Service Fund for the annual Civic Center Lease payment, and $555,808 for the Debt Service on the Margarita Recreation Center renovation. Fund Balance & Reserves As noted above, the Ending Fund Balance, as of June 30, 2021 is projected to be $19,550,395, with the Reserve for Economic Uncertainty fully funded at $15,515,135, which represents 20% of General Fund Expenditures. The Secondary Reserve will fall slightly below the target of 5% of Operating Expenditures, with a balance of $2,857,299. MEASURE S FUND With the approval of a one -cent transactions and use tax measure in November 2016, the Measure S Fund was established to account for this new revenue source and enhance budgetary accountability. Fiscal Year 2020-21 Measure S revenue has also been negatively impacted by the economic downturn caused by the global pandemic. It is anticipated that Measure S Revenue, in Fiscal Year 2019-20 will decline by nearly $5.3 million as a result of the closures of retail establishments. As mentioned previously, the General Fund's reliance on Measure S will increase until Sales Tax and other General Fund revenues rebound. As such, the proportion of Measure S revenue dedicated to maintain Public Safety and General Services within the General Fund will be higher than in prior years. Measure S Funds available for Capital Improvement Program projects has decreased as a result of the shift of funds to balance the General Fund. Measure S - FY20-21 Appropriations $24,011,244 General Services $9,298,488 39% Asset Mgmt $500,000 2% 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget Measure S appropriations for Fiscal Year 2020-21 reflect the following: Public Safety (38%) The Proposed Budget includes $9,123,884 of Measure S funding dedicated to Public Safety, for the continued funding of 11 Sworn Police Officers and Fire staffing for Fire Station No. 95 which opened January 1, 2018. Additionally, Measure S will contribute $3 million to the General Fund to help offset the reduction in Operating Revenues. Asset Management/Investment (2%) As noted in Council's appropriation guidelines for Measure S, ensuring adequate reserves are set -aside for the future replacement of City -owned assets is critical to the long-term viability of the City's operations. Over the past four years, a significant level of funding has been deposited in the City's Asset Replacement Funds. However, due to the economic downturn, it is recommended that these annual contributions be redirected to fund the operations of the General Fund during the downturn. The Facilities Replacement Fund, however, has a smaller fund balance and therefore a $500,000 contribution to this fund is included in the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget. Capital Improvement Program (21%) The Proposed Budget includes $5,088,872 of Measure S revenue allocated to fund 15 separate CIP projects for Fiscal Year 2020.21. The influx on Measure S funding has allowed the City to leverage other funding sources, such as Development Impact Fees and various Grant funds, to complete projects in a more timely manner. Major Projects for FY2020-21 include: • Cherry Street Extension and Murrieta Creek Low -Flow Crossing - $424,300 to provide funding for an extension of Cherry Street from Adams Avenue to Diaz Road. • French Valley Parkway/1-15 Improvements -Phase II - $1,865,640 — to augment the $50 million Federal INFRA grant to construct this highly anticipated project. • Mary Phillips Senior Center Enhancement and Renovation - $30,000 to augment $400,000 in CDBG funding to provide a renovation of the heavily utilized Senior Center. • Ronald Reagan Sports Park Restroom Expansion and Renovation - $395,000 to complete the construction of the restroom expansion and snack bar facility. • Santa Gertrudis Creek Phase II — Margarita Under -Crossing - $382,464 to augment Senate Bill 1 funding for the design and construction of the under -crossing in Santa Gertrudis Creek at Margarita Road. • Traffic Signal Installation — Citywide - $375,000 to install or modify traffic signals throughout the City. General Services (39%) The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has historically been funded with voter -approved Measure C funding and program -related revenue. Measure S funding is used to augment Measure C, in order to maintain the award -winning programs, activities and events TCSD provides to the citizenry. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget • TCSD Operations contribution - $8,297,243 • Library contribution - $847,181 • Service Level B — Residential Streetlights - $73,168 • Enhanced Custodial Services - $80,896 The Ending Fund Balance within the Measure S Fund is projected to be $4,182,723, which will carry - forward to the ensuing fiscal year. MAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special Revenue Funds are used to account for activities paid for by taxes or other designated revenue sources that have specific limitations on use according to law. The City has fifteen Special Revenue Funds. The major Special Revenue funds are highlighted below. Fund 100 - Gas Tax: Gas Tax revenue is projected to be $2,418,092, which reflects a decrease of 4.6% due to reduced volumes of gasoline sales over the prior year, as a result of the stay-at-home orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic. These funds are transferred to the General Fund to support street and road maintenance. Fund 102 — Road Maintenance Rehabilitation Account (RMRA): Per the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1-Beall), increased gas tax and vehicle registration fees were imposed to fund street and road projects and other transportation uses Statewide. RMRA revenue is projected to be $1,827,342 for FY2020-21, to be allocated to the Pavement Rehabilitation Capital Improvement Project. Fund 103 — Street Maintenance Fund: This fund was established in FY2018-19 to accumulate resources for the future replacement of streets and roads throughout the City. Funding for FY2020-21 has been deferred as part of budget reduction efforts in response to the economic downturn caused by the COVID- 19 pandemic. Fund 105 — NPDES In Lieu Fees Fund: This fund was established in FY2019-20 to account for the collection of In Lieu fees associated with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Revenue is received as private development subject to NPDES requirements occur. There is no revenue anticipated to be received in FY2020-21. Fund 106 — Jefferson Street In Lieu Fees Fund: This fund was established in FY2019-20 in conjunction with the adoption of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan New Streets In Lieu Fee. Developers within the Specific Plan who cannot build new streets will be charged the In Lieu Fee. For FY2020-21, a new hotel development is anticipated to contribute $222,718 of In Lieu Fees into this fund. Fund 120 — Development Impact Fees: DIF revenue is projected to be $4,755,870, which reflects an increase of 20%. DIF revenue varies from year-to-year as it is based on anticipated development projects. The majority of DIF Revenues are transferred to the CIP to fund capital projects. Fund 125 — Public, Education & Government (PEG): PEG Fund revenues are received from local cable operators for the sole purpose of supporting the access facilities within the City. PEG Revenues are 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget projected to be $220,219, which will be spent on various technology equipment used to support the broadcast of City Council meetings and events. Expenditures for FY2020-21 are suspended, as a budget reduction measure related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Fund 140 — Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): CDBG revenue is projected to be $559,063, which reflects the reimbursement for operations and Capital projects expected to be completed during the fiscal year. Fund 165—Affordable Housing Fund: The Affordable Housing Fund reflects the housing -related activities of the former Temecula Redevelopment Agency. Total Revenue for FY2020-21 of $340,100 includes the State Department of Finance allocation of $250,000 designated for the administration of the wind down of Redevelopment obligations. The fund received a $1.3 million one-time revenue in FY2019-20 as a result of the refinancing of an affordable housing development project. Fund 170 — Measure A: Measure A revenue is projected to be $2,818,800, which reflects a 6.1% decrease from the prior year, due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This revenue is restricted for use on local streets and roads, and is programmed to support street and road maintenance. INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Internal Service Funds are used to account for the funding of goods and services provided by one department to other benefitting departments on a cost -reimbursement basis. Additionally, the City maintains several Replacement Funds designed to accumulate resources for the future replacement of City equipment, technology and facilities. Fund 300 — Insurance: Projected expenses total $1,085,602, which covers the cost of administering the City's liability and property insurance programs. The projected Fund Balance is $738,524, which exceeds the desired balance of $450,000. Fund 305 — Workers' Compensation: Projected expenses total $258,309, which covers the cost of administering the City's self -insured Workers' Compensation program. The projected Fund Balance is $1,862,227, which exceeds the desired balance of $1.5 million. As such, and for budget reduction purposes, Workers' Compensation charges to departments was suspended for FY2020-21. Fund 310 — Vehicles and Equipment: Projected expenses total $134,000 to replace a utility trailer for Public Works and a Medic Squad for the Fire Department, as the existing equipment has reached the end of their useful life. The projected Fund Balance is $3,285,627. Fund 320 — Information Technology: Projected expenses total $4,448,202, which provides for the management of the City's computer and telephone systems. The projected Fund Balance is $684,011. Fund 325 — Technology Replacement: Projected expenses for FY2020-21 have been deferred, as part of budget reduction measures related to the COVID-19 economic impact. The projected Fund Balance is $827,755. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget Fund 330 — Support Services: Projected expenses total $376,769, which provides for the management of the City's central receptionist, printing and mail activities. The projected Fund Balance is $10,008. Fund 335 — Support Services Replacement: Projected expenses for FY2020-21 have been deferred, as part of budget reduction measures related to the COVID-19 economic impact. The projected Fund Balance is $431,315. Fund 340 — Facilities: Projected expenses total $1,338,520, which provide for the operations and maintenance of the City's buildings and parking structure. The projected Fund Balance is $576,669. Fund 350— Facility Replacement: Projected expenses total $315,000, which provide for the replacement of equipment, systems and fixtures within City -owned facilities. The projected Fund Balance is $691,127. SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (SARDA) Fund 380 — SARDA: Projected expenses total $5,903,653, which reflects a decrease of $1,626,668, due mostly to the deferral of the $750,000 contribution to a capital project, and the elimination of an Owner Participation Agreement payment for property tax increment. Debt Service expenditures are in accordance with the debt service schedule on the outstanding 2017A and 2017B Redevelopment Agency Tax Allocation Bonds. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT (TCSD) The Temecula Community Services District was established as an assessment district to provide a comprehensive neighborhood and community park system, as well as a complement of recreational and cultural programs and events. Combined revenue for TCSD totals $24,888,200, which reflects an increase of 3.3% due primarily to the contributions from the Measure S Fund to fill the funding gap in the TCSD Operations Fund, as well as an increase in Service Level D — Refuse/Recycling Fund, due to inflationary rate increases per the franchise agreement with CR&R. Combined expenditures total $24,940,900, which reflects an increase of 0.8% due to higher costs in the TCSD Operations Fund as a result of the anticipated re -hiring of laid -off part- time/seasonal staffing who were separated from employment in TCSaPerCapitaFunding March 2020 due to the COVID-19 5zao.00 pandemic. Expenditures in Service $240.00 Level B — Street Lights are projected sloo.ou to decrease due to the acquisition of s16o.o0 the street light network from $130.00 59 Southern California Edison and the $89.00 subsequent conversion to LED bulbs, $49.00 � both of which generate significant o.00 FY16-17 FY17-18 FY38-19 FY1B-20 FY20-21 savings. ■Sp -A Tax TCSD Funding As noted in the adjacent chart, TCSD's Special Tax (Measure C) funds approximately 32% of the District's Parks and Recreation budget. The remaining 68% comes from Measure S and programmatic revenues. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) The City's five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is presented to the City Council under separate cover. This program provides a five-year plan for capital improvements that is updated annually to ensure compliance with the program. The impact of capital projects on maintenance and operating costs were taken into consideration in the development of the operating budget. Circulation, infrastructure, parks, affordable housing, and other various projects are identified in the CIP budget. Overall, the Proposed Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP includes 84 separate projects with total project costs estimated at $623,566,187, as outlined in the table below. Revenue from various identified sources for the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program is projected to be $514,165,560. This amount includes a $50 million INFRA grant to fund the French Valley Parkway Phase II project. The City of Temecula's CIP is a project planning and delivery document which includes several projects with unidentified funding sources in the third, fourth, and fifth years of the five-year program, totaling $109,400,627. The City is continually exploring and applying for federal, state and regional funding opportunities to enable the delivery of these currently unfunded projects. The five-year CIP is updated annually and newly secured revenues are programmed toward prioritized projects that may be shown as unfunded at this time. Type of Project Number of Projects Cost of Projects Circulation 25 $506,852,861 Infrastructure 41 74,580,211 Parks and Recreation 16 25,951,175 SARDA/ Housing 2 16,181,940 TOTAL:4 2020-21 AUTHORIZED STAFFING Total authorized Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions total 172.95 authorized positions, which reflects a decrease of 3.5 positions compared to the prior year. Two of the authorized positions were added in FY2019-20 to assist with public outreach related to the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 3 vacant positions are currently on hold, until such time as the City recoups adequate resources to fund these positions. The affected positions include the following: • Accounting Support Supervisor (Finance Department) • Engineering Technician I (Public Works Department) • Community Services Specialist I (TCSD) In addition, two positions related to the rehabilitation of the Margarita Recreation Center are unfunded until the facility is complete and open for operation. 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 w Annual Operating Budget The H�� o€ 4; u%4aeu) .Gail 6 Total Authorized Positions total 172.95 remains below the peak in 2007-08 by 37.8 positions. In addition to the Authorized Positions, the City employs a significant number of part-time, non-benefitted Project employees, primarily to assist with the multitude of programs offered by the Temecula Community Services District. For FY2020-21, an estimated 59.5 full- time equivalent (FTE) will be hired as seasonal and part-time support. City of Temecula Authorized Positions 250.0 210.8 208.8 197.0 197.0 195.0 2000.168.2 171.7 176.5 173.0 160.0 160.0 158.0 158.2 158.2 150.0 100.0 50.0 o� p$ AA ,�o titi �ti ti'' tia ti5 do ,^ ti� ti� do titi Public Safety personnel is supplied through contracts with Riverside County and CalFire. A total of 112 Sworn Police Officers and 17 Community Service Officers are included in the Police Budget, and a total of 71 Fire personnel are reflected in the Fire Department Budget for FY2020-21. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the City of Temecula has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with the loss of over $15 million in several major revenue sources. In response to this economic situation, I'm proud to say that the City's Executive Team has shown great leadership in prioritizing their operational needs and submitted responsive budgetary reductions necessary to balance all funds over the ensuing five-year period. While the City will maintain its Reserve for Economic Uncertainty, it will be necessary to fully expend the General Fund's available fund balance as well as utilize a portion of the City's Secondary Reserve to remain fiscally solvent during these unprecedented economic times. I would like to express my appreciation to the City Council for providing the direction and support crucial to achieving the City's goals. I would also like to recognize the contributions of the City staff for not only creating a responsive operating budget, but also for their commitment to providing top quality services to all who live, work and play in Temecula. I would like to give special thanks to: Greg Butler, Assistant City Manager, Jennifer Hennessy, Director of Finance; Rudy Graciano, Fiscal Services Manager; Patricia Hawk, Fiscal Services Manager; and Tina Rivera, Accounting Assistant for their long hours and dedication to the City and this budget process. Sincerely, Aaron Adams City Manager 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 ♦ Phone (951) 694-6444 ♦ Facsimile (951) 694-6479 RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-25 AND ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption of this Program is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. In reviewing this Program and conducting public hearings on it, the City Council has considered relevant environmental factors. This City Council, as the lead agency for environmental review, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the Guidelines promulgated there under (collectively "CEQA), has reviewed the scope and nature of this Capital Improvement Program and has concluded that the planning and prioritization process comprising this activity is not a project pursuant to CEQA because it does not order or authorize the commencement of any physical or other activity that would directly or indirectly have a significant effect upon the environment. The Capital Improvement Program merely establishes a listing of priority and allocates funds for the City to commence the necessary planning studies, including review pursuant to CEQA, at a future unspecified date. The future planning studies will be conducted at the earliest possible time so as to ensure thorough review pursuant to CEQA. Recognizing that the protection of the environment is a key factor in the quality of life within the City of Temecula and to further the City's strict adherence to both the spirit and letter of the law as regards to CEQA, this City Council has also considered this Capital Improvement Program as if it were a Project pursuant to CEQA. Reviewing this Program as a Project, this City Council concludes the Project would be exempt from review under CEQA, both pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and to the categorical exemption set forth in Section 15262 of CEQA. Section 15061(b)(3) would apply because it can be seen with certainty that this prioritizing and fund allocation program cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required CEQA review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Program are undertaken. Section 15262 provides a categorical exemption to actions that are feasibility or planning studies related to possible future actions. This Council is aware of and has considered the current and relevant environmental factors as an integral component of the review of this Program. This Council, as lead agency, hereby determines and decides that the exemption provided in both Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15262 apply in the event this is deemed a Project pursuant to CEQA. Section 2. On June 3, 2020, the Planning Commission found the Capital Improvement Program consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65401 of State Planning and Zoning Law. Section 3. The City Council hereby finds and declares that the requirements of Government Code Section 65402(a) shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a larger parcel which was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for street purposes, acquisition, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment projects are of a minor nature. Section 4. The City Council hereby finds that the acquisition of land necessary for the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2021-25 is consistent with the General Plan. Section 5. That a certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula, entitled "City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2021- 25" include herein appropriations for Fiscal Year 2020-21, and are hereby adopted. The CIP appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2019-20 which have not been completed, encumbered, nor included in the Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP, are hereby carried over for each applicable project to the Fiscal Year 2020-21. Certain Development Impact Fees from future revenue may be used to replace the expenditure of current capital reserve funds in the CIP. Section 6. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations: A. No expenditures of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure. B. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000 requires City Council action. C. The City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00), if sufficient appropriated funds are available. D. The City Manager may authorize transfers up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) between approved Capital Improvement Program projects. E. Notwithstanding Section 6.13. above, pursuant to Section 3.32.050 of the Municipal Code, the City Manager may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) require City Council action, except that the City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Council in amounts up to project contingency established by Council. Section 7. Certification: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 0 day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) Preliminary Operating Budget is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations: A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure. B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the General Manager. C. The Board of Directors must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts. D. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the General Manager shall administer the City personnel system. This General Manager is authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the Board of Directors. E. The General Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000.00 requires Board of Directors action. F. The General Manager may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of $60,000.00 require Board of Directors action, except that the General Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Board in amounts up to the project contingency established by the Board. G. Pursuant to Section 3.28.130 of the Municipal Code, the General Manager may authorize purchases of supplies and equipment in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any purchases of supplies and equipment in excess of $60,000.00 shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to formal bid procedures and require City Council action, except that the General Manager may approve change orders on purchases of supplies and equipment approved by the Board in amounts up to the contingency established by Board. H. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of $5,000 or less. I. Appropriations and Revenue Estimates for grant funded programs for Fiscal Year 2019-20 which have not been expended or encumbered, are hereby carried over for the applicable grant program to the Fiscal Year 2020-21. Section 3. The Finance Director is authorized to make temporary short term interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source. Section 4. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the District books at June 30, 2020, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Section 5. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be made for or on behalf of the District; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows: A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the Finance Department. B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by Finance Director. Section 6. The Board Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June, 2020. Zak Schwank, President ATTEST: Randi Johl, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 91h day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: BOARD MEMBERS: NOES: BOARD MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS: ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS: Randi Johl, Secretary 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS, ESTABLISHING CONTRACT AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER, ESTABLISHING LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF CITY MANAGER THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula entitled "City of Temecula Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2020-21" is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations: A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure. B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the City Manager. C. The City Council must authorize transfers (appropriations) of funds from the Unreserved Fund Balance and transfers between departmental budget accounts. D. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the City Manager shall administer the City personnel system. The City Manager is authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the City Council. E. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00). Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000.00 requires City Council action. F. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into the following types of agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services Distract, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency where the amount of the agreement is sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) or less, there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the fund account against which the cost of the agreement is to be charged, and all applicable procedures for approval of the agreement have been fulfilled: public works construction agreements; agreements for purchase of supplies or equipment; personal, professional, consultant and maintenance services agreements; theater, entertainment and talent agreements; and real property leases, licenses and facility use agreements in which the term is one (1) year or less. All sponsorship agreements, tax reimbursement agreements, and fee waiver agreements shall be approved by the City Council. G. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to settle personal injury and property damage lawsuits and enter into settlement agreements on behalf of the City, Temecula Community Services District, and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency where the amount of the settlement does not exceed twenty- five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). H. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) or less. I. Appropriations and Revenue estimates for grant funded programs for FY 2019-20 which have not been expended, encumbered or received, are hereby carried over for the applicable grant program to the subsequent fiscal year. J. Appropriations for the transfer of funds to the Capital Improvement Program for FY 2019-20 which have not been expended are hereby carried over to the subsequent fiscal year. Section 3. The Director of Finance, in consultation with the City Manager, is delegated the authority to determine and define the amounts of those components of fund balance that are classified as "Assigned Fund Balance". Section 4. The Director of Finance is authorized to make temporary short term interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source. Section 5. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the City books at June 30, 2020, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for FY 2020-21. Section 6. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be made for or on behalf of the City; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows: A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the Finance Department. a B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by Director of Finance. Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify adoption of the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9ffi day of June, 2020. ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] James Stewart, Mayor 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2021-25, ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21, ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption of this Program is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the Board of Directors has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. In reviewing this Program and conducting public hearings on it, the Board of Directors has considered relevant environmental factors. This Board of Directors, as the lead agency for environmental review, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the Guidelines promulgated there under (collectively "CEQA), has reviewed the scope and nature of this Capital Improvement Program and has concluded that the planning and prioritization process comprising this activity is not a project pursuant to CEQA because it does not order or authorize the commencement of any physical or other activity that would directly or indirectly have a significant effect upon the environment. The Capital Improvement Program merely establishes a listing of priority and allocates funds for the City to commence the necessary planning studies, including review pursuant to CEQA, at a future unspecified date. The future planning studies will be conducted at the earliest possible time so as to ensure thorough review pursuant to CEQA. Recognizing that the protection of the environment is a key factor in the quality of life within the City of Temecula and to further the City's strict adherence to both the spirit and letter of the law as regards to CEQA, this Board of Directors has also considered this Capital Improvement Program as if it were a Project pursuant to CEQA. Reviewing this Program as an Project, this Board of Directors concludes the Project would be exempt from review under CEQA, both pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and to the categorical exemption set forth in Section 15262 of CEQA. Section 15061(b)(3) would apply because it can be seen with certainty that this prioritizing and fund allocation program cannot and does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. No physical activity will occur until all required CEQA review is conducted at the time the physical improvements prioritized in the Program are undertaken. Section 15262 provides a categorical exemption to actions that are feasibility or planning studies related to possible future actions. This Board is aware of and has considered the current and relevant environmental factors as an integral component of the review of this Program. This Board, as lead agency, hereby determines and decides that the exemption provided in both Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15262 apply in the event this is deemed a Project pursuant to CEQA. Section 2. On June 3, 2020, the Planning Commission found the Capital Improvement Program consistent with the General Plan in accordance with Government Code Section 65401 of State Planning and Zoning Law. Section 3. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency hereby finds and declares that the requirements of Government Code Section 65402(a) shall not apply to: (1) the disposition of the remainder of a larger parcel which was acquired and used in part for street purposes; (2) acquisitions, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening; or (3) alignment projects, provided such dispositions for street purposes, acquisition, dispositions, or abandonments for street widening, or alignment projects are of a minor nature. Section 4. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency hereby finds that the acquisition of land necessary for the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program FY 2021-25 is consistent with the General Plan. Section 5. That a certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula, entitled "City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2021- 25" include herein appropriations for Fiscal Year 2020-21, is hereby adopted. The CIP appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2019-20 which have not been completed, encumbered, nor included in the Fiscal Years 2021-25 CIP, are hereby carried over for each applicable project to the Fiscal Year 2020-21. Section 6. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations: A. No expenditures of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered appropriation available to cover the expenditure. B. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to $60,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000 requires Board of Directors action. C. The Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts in amounts up to $60,000, if sufficient appropriated funds are available. D. The Executive Director may authorize transfers up to $60,000 between approved Capital Improvement Program projects. E. Notwithstanding Section 6.13. above, pursuant to Section 3.32.050 of the Municipal Code, the Executive Director may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to $60,000. Any expenditures of Public Works funds in excess of $60,000 require Board of Directors action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Board in amounts up to project contingency established by Board. Section 7. That the Fiscal Year 2020-21 SARDA Operating Budget is hereby adopted. Section 8. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of budget appropriations: A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless the Oversight Board of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has adopted a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2020-21 SARDA Operating Budget and the State Department of Finance has approved the expenditure on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS), pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34177. B. The Department Director may prepare a transfer of appropriations within departmental budget accounts, with the approval of the Executive Director. C. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the Executive Director shall administer the City personnel system. The Executive Director is authorized to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the Agency Board. D. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to $60,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $60,000 requires Agency Board action. E. The Executive Director may authorize Public Works contracts in amounts up to $60,000. Any expenditure of Public Works funds in excess of $60,000 require Agency Member action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on Public Works contracts approved by the Agency Board in amounts up to the project contingency established by the Agency Board. F. Pursuant to Section 3.28.130 of the Municipal Code, the Executive Director may authorize purchases of supplies and equipment in amounts up to $60,000. Any purchases of supplies and equipment in excess of $60,000 shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to formal bid procedures and require Agency Board action, except that the Executive Director may approve change orders on purchases of supplies and equipment approved by the Agency Board in amounts up to the contingency established by Agency Board. G. Pursuant to Section 3.28.250 of the Municipal Code, purchases of supplies and equipment of an estimated value of $60,000 or less, may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market pursuant to the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.260 through 3.28.280 and without observing the procedure prescribed in Sections 3.28.130 through 3.28.240; provided, however, that all bidding may be dispensed with for purchases of supplies and equipment having a total estimated value of $5,000 or less. Section 9. The Director of Finance is authorized to make temporary short term interfund loans between appropriate funds in order to cover short term cash needs caused by cash flow timing differences. These interfund loans must have an identified repayment source. 3 Section 10. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the Agency books at June 30, 2020, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Section 11. There are numerous occasions when small dollar valued purchases must be made for or on behalf of the Agency; and it is appropriate that a petty cash fund be used to provide for the purchase of these smaller dollar valued items; now, therefore, the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows: A. There is hereby established a renewable petty cash fund to be maintained in the Accounting and Purchasing Department. B. The imprest balance amount of the petty cash fund shall be $3,000. C. Vouchers, receipts, or other evidence of payment shall be required before reimbursement shall be made from said petty cash fund, in such form as shall be required by Finance Director. Section 12. The Agency Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency this 91h day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Chair ATTEST: Randi Johl, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, Secretary of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. SARDA 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: BOARD MEMBERS: NOES: BOARD MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS: ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS: Randi Johl, Secretary RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule, attached hereto, is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 45001 of the California Government Code. Such list is attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. The Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule shall become effective July 1, 2020, and may be, thereafter, amended. Section 3. The City Manager shall implement the attached Schedule of Authorized Positions and Salary Schedule and has the authority to select and appoint employees and approve Executive Staff employment agreements in accordance with the City of Temecula's Municipal Code and personnel policies. Section 4. In accordance with City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 2.6.030, the City Manager shall administer the City personnel system. This resolution specifically authorizes the City Manager to fix and alter the titles, compensation, and number of positions in the Schedule of Authorized Positions as needed, subject to the total personnel expenditure budget limitations approved by the City Council. Section 5. All prior resolutions and parts of this resolution in conflict with this Resolution are hereby rescinded. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9tn day of June, 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code f 2.5 SalarySteps W 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 MCP 7.0 Only ADMINISTRATIVE Executive Assistant 4 951-004 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.64 34.49 35.35 36.23 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,830.93 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,971.20 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 Senior Administrative Assistant 4 952-004 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 Administrative Assistant 3 953-003 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 45,988.80 1 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 1 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 1 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 Senior Office Specialist 2 954-002 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.30 29.01 29.74 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,905.33 5,028.40 5,154.93 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,864.00 60,340.80 61,859.20 Office Specialist II 1 955-001 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 Office Specialist 1 1 956-001 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 37,752.00 1 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 1 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 1 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 Office Aide 111 1 957-001 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 Office Aide 11 1 958-001 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.54 20.03 20.53 21.05 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,386.93 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,643.20 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 Office Aide 1 959-001 13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 27,393.60 1 28,080.00 1 28,766.40 29,494.40 1 30,222.40 1 30,992.00 31,761.60 1 32,552.00 1 33,363.20 34,195.20 1 35,048.00 1 35,942.40 1 36,836.80 1 37,752.00 38,688.00 ANALYST Principal Management Analyst 7 901-007 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 Senior Management Analyst 6 902-006 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 Management Analyst 5 903-005 32.82 33.64 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 5,688.80 5,830.93 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 68,265.60 1 69,971.20 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 1 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 1 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 Management Assistant 4 904-004 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 Management Aide111 3 905-003 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 Management Aide 11 2 906-002 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 41,662.40 1 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 1 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 Management Aide 1 907-001 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 Intern 1 908-001 13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 27,393.60 28,080.00 28,766.40 29,494.40 30,222.40 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 Page 1 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Salary Steps MCP Only Class Family/Title Level Class Code r 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Director of Community Development 8 300-008 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 11,358.53 11,642:80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 1 14,539.20 14,903.20 15, 275.87 15, 657.20 16,048.93 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 183,310.40 187,886.40 192,587.20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUILDING & SAFETY Building Official 7 331-007 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 Field Supervisor- Building 4 330-004 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 Plan Checker 4 308-004 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 87,401.60 1 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 1 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 Senior Building Inspector 3 332-003 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 Building Inspector II 2 333-002 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 Building Inspector 1 1 334-001 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 1 68,265.60 1 69,992.00 1 71,739.20 1 73,528.00 75,358.40 1 77,251.20 1 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - CODE ENFORCEMENT Field Supervisor- Code Enforcement 4 343-004 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 Senior Code Enforcement Officer 3 340-003 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 Code Enforcement Officer 11 2 341-002 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 Code Enforcement Officer 1 1 342-001 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- PLANNING Planning Manager 7 301-007 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 Principal Planner 6 302-006 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 Senior Planner 5 303-005 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 5S.13 56.51 57.92 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 85,259.20 1 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 1 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 1 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 Associate Planner II 4 304-004 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 Associate Planner 1 3 305-003 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,58S.60 Assistant Planner 2 306-002 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,S98.80 6,763.47 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 Planning Technician 1 307-001 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 1 60,340.80 1 61,859.20 1 63,398.40 1 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 1 68,265.60 1 69,992.00 1 71,739.20 1 73,528.00 Page 2 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code =I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - SERVICES CommDev Processing Supervisor 4 320-004 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 Senior CommDev Services Technician 3 321-003 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 CommDev Services Technician 11 2 322-002 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 56,035.20 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 1 60,340.80 1 61,859.20 1 63,398.40 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 1 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 CommDev Services Technician l 1 323-001 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 CITY CLERK Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk 8 500-009 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 Deputy City Clerk 7 501-007 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 Records Manager 6 510-006 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 1 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 1 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 Records Supervisor 4 511-004 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Senior Records Coordinator 3 512-003 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 Records Coordinator 2 513-002 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 Records Technician 1 514-001 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 40,664.00 1 41,662.40 1 42,702.40 1 43,784.00 1 44,865.60 1 45,988.80 1 47,153.60 1 48,318.40 1 49,524.80 1 50,772.80 1 52,041.60 CITY MANAGER City Manager (per Employment Contract) 8 100-009 118.20 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,488.58 245,863.00 Assistant City Manager 8 101-008 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 94.90 97.28 99.71 102.20 104.76 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 15, 275.87 15,657.20 16,048.93 16,449.33 16,861.87 17, 283.07 17,714.67 18,158.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 183,310.40 187,886.40 192,587.20 197,392.00 202,342.40 207,396.80 212,576.00 217,900.80 Deputy City Manager 7 102-007 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 94.90 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 1S,275.87 1S,657.20 16,048.93 16,449.33 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 183,310.40 187,886.40 192,587.20 197,392.00 Assistant to the City Manager 6 103-007 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 7S.99 77.89 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,78S.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 Economic Development Manager 5 120-005 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.1 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,S55.87 9,791.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,147.33 10,810.80 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 Page 3 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Salary Steps W MCP Only Class Family/ Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 •uu � Director of Community Services 8 600-008 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 15, 275.87 15, 657.20 16,048.93 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 183,310.40 187,886.40 192,587.20 Asst Director of Community Services 7 601-007 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 Community Services Superintendent 6 602-006 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 94,120.00 1 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 1 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 1 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 Community Services Manager 5 603-005 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 Community Services Supervisor II 4 610-004 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 Community Services Supervisor 4 611-004 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 60,340.80 1 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 1 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 Community Services Coordinator II 3 612-003 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 59,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Community Services Coordinator 3 613-003 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 Community Services Specialist II 2 614-002 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 47,153.60 1 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 Community Services Specialist 2 615-002 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 Community Services Assistant 1 616-001 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 Senior Recreation Leader 1 617-001 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 34,195.20 1 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 1 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 Recreation Leader 1 618-001 14.53 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 2,518.53 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 30,222.40 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 Recreation Assistant 1 619-001 13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 27,393.60 28,080.00 28,766.40 29,494.40 30,222.40 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 COMMUNITY SERVICES - AQUATICS Aquatics Supervisor II 4 620-004 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 1,832:67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 Aquatics Supervisor 1 4 621-004 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 Aquatics Coordinator 3 622-003 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 Lead Lifeguard 2 623-002 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 Senior Lifeguard 1 624-001 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 Page 4 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53 Salary Steps 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 Lifeguard 1 625-001 2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 27,393.60 28,080.00 28,766.40 29,494.40 30,222.40 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 Water Safety Instructor 1 626-001 13.17 13.50 13.83 14.18 14.53 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 2,282.80 2,340.00 2,397.20 2,457.87 2,518.53 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 27,393.60 28,080.00 28,766.40 29,494.40 30,222.40 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 COMMUNITY SERVICES - DAY CAMP Day Camp Director 1 654-001 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 Assistant Day Camp Director 1 655-001 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 COMMUNITY SERVICES - PARK RANGERS Supervising Park Ranger 4 630-004 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 Park Ranger III 3 631-003 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 Park Ranger II 2 632-002 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 53,331.20 1 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 1 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 1 60,340.80 1 61,859.20 1 63,398.40 1 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 1 68,265.60 Park Ranger 1 1 633-001 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231:07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 1,028:40 5,154.93 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 COMMUNITY SERVICES -THEATER Theater Technical Coordinator11 3 640-003 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Theater Technical Coordinator l 3 641-003 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 Theater Technical Specialist11 2 642-002 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 47,153.60 1 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 Theater Technical Specialist l 2 643-002 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 Theater Technical Assistant 1 644-001 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 FINANCE Director of Finance 8 200-008 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14, 539.20 14,903.20 15, 275.87 15, 657.20 16,048.93 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 183,310.40 187,886.40 192,587.20 Assistant Director of Finance 7 201-007 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 Fiscal Services Manager 6 202-006 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 Page 5 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Salary Steps MCP Only Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 FINANCE -ACCOUNTING Senior Accountant 4 240-004 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 Accountant II 3 241-003 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 Accountant 1 3 242-003 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 69,992.00 1 71,739.20 1 73,528.00 1 75,358.40 77,251.20 1 79,185.60 1 81,161.60 1 83,179.20 1 85,259.20 1 87,401.60 1 89,585.60 1 91,811.20 1 94,120.00 96,470.40 1 98,883.20 FINANCE - ACCOUNTING SUPPORT in Accounting Support Supervisor 4 250-004 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 Senior Accounting Technician 3 251-003 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 Accounting Technician II 2 252-002 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 1 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 1 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 Accounting Technician 1 2 253-002 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 Accounting Assistant 1 254-001 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Cashier 1 230-001 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 49,524.80 1 50,772.80 1 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 1 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 1 60,340.80 61,859.20 1 63,398.40 FINANCE - BUSINESS LICENSE Business License Supervisor 4 260-004 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 Senior Business License Technician 3 261-003 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 Business License Technician 2 262-002 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Business License Assistant 1 263-001 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 49,524.80 1 50,772.80 1 52,041.60 1 53,331.20 1 54,662.40 56,035.20 1 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 1 60,340.80 61,859.20 1 63,398.40 FINANCE - PAYROLL Payroll Manager 5 220-005 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 Payroll Administrator 4 222-004 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 Payroll Supervisor 4 221-004 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 Senior Payroll Coordinator 3 223-003 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 1 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 Payroll Coordinator 2 224-002 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 Payroll Technician 1 225-001 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Page 6 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Salary Steps 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0�= 7.5 8.0 FINANCE -PURCHASING Purchasing Manager 5 203-005 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 Purchasing Supervisor 4 204-004 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 Senior Buyer 3 205-003 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 63,398.40 1 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 1 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 Buyer II 2 206-002 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 Buyer 1 2 207.002 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Purchasing Assistant 1 208-001 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 49,524.80 1 50,772.80 1 52,041.60 1 53,331.20 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 57,428.80 1 58,884.80 1 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 FIRE Field Supervisor - Fire 4 353-004 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 Senior Fire Inspector 4 350-003 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 49.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 55.51 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,621.73 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 115,460.80 Fire Inspector II 2 351-002 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20I ,475.20 Fire Inspector 1 1 352-001 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,198..0 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,24.3.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94:120.00 96,470.40 HUMAN RESOURCES Director of HR/Risk Management 8 800-008 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 Asst Director of HR/Risk Management 7 801-007 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 HR Manager 6 802-006 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 91,811.20 1 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 1 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 Risk Manager 6 803-006 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 HR Supervisor 4 804-004 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 Senior HR Technician 3 805-003 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 HR Technician II 2 806-002 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 1 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 1 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 HR Technician 2 807-002 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 HR Assistant 1 808-001 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 Page 7 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Salary Steps MCP Only 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Director ofIT/Support Services 8 700-008 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 Asst Director of IT/Support Services 7 701-007 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 IT Manager 6 702-006 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 98,883.20 1 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 1 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 IT Administrator 5 703-005 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 IT Supervisor 4 704-004 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 Senior IT Specialist 3 705-003 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 73,528.00 1 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 1 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 IT Specialist)) 2 706-002 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 IT Specialist) 2 707-002 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 69,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 ITTechnician II 1 708-001 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,029.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20I ,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20I ,528.00 ITTechnician ) 1 709-001 26.28 26.94 27.61 29.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5:283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58:884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 MEDIA/MARKETING Multimedia Coordinator 3 921-004 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 Multimedia Specialist II 2 922-003 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 Multimedia Specialist I 2 923-002 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.201 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Multimedia Assistant 1 924-001 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 4:336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 1,414.93 5,550.13 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58:884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 PUBLIC WORKS Director of PW/City Engineer 8 400-008 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 88.13 90.33 92.59 94.90 97.28 99.71 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14903.20 15,275.87 15657.20 16,048.93 16,449.33 16,861.87 17,283.07 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178:838.40 183,310.40 187:886.40 192,587.20 197,392.00 202,342.40 207,396.80 PUBLIC WORKS - CUSTODIAL Custodian II (Y-Rate) 2 460402 16.51 16.92 17.34 17.78 18.22 18.68 19.14 19.62 20.11 20.61 21.13 2,861.73 2,932.80 3,005.60 3,081.87 3,158.13 3,237.87 3,317.60 3,400.80 3,485.73 3,S72.40 3,662.53 34,340.80 35,193.60 36,067.20 36,982.40 37,897.60 38,854.40 39,811.20 40,809.60 41,828.80 42,868.80 43,950.40 Custodian II 2 460-002 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 Custodian) 1 461-001 14.90 15.27 15.65 16.04 16.44 16.85 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 2,582.67 2,646.80 2,712.67 2,780.27 2,849.60 2,920.67 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 30,992.00 31,761.60 32,552.00 33,363.20 34,195.20 35,048.00 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 Page 8 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 SaIarySt'ejjj1V MCP Only Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING is Engineering Manager 7 401-007 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 79.84 81.84 83.88 85.98 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12, 232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 13,838.93 14,185.60 14,539.20 14,903.20 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 166,067.20 170,227.20 174,470.40 178,838.40 Principal Civil Engineer 6 402-006 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 72.33 74.14 75.99 77.89 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 12,537.20 12,850.93 13,171.60 13,500.93 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 150,446.40 154,211.20 158,059.20 162,011.20 Senior Civil Engineer 5 403-005 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 65.53 67.17 68.85 70.57 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 11,358.53 11,642.80 11,934.00 12,232.13 103,875.20 1 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 1 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 136,302.40 1 139,713.60 143,208.00 146,785.60 Associate Civil Engineer 4 404-004 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 Associate Engineer II 4 405-004 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 Associate Engineer 1 3 406-003 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 79,185.60 1 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 1 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 Assistant Engineer II 2 407-002 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 39.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 Assistant Engineer 1 2 408-002 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,979.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 Engineering Technician 11 1 409-001 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 1 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 Engineering Technician 1 1 410-001 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.479 35.35 36.23 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS Construction Manager 4 415-004 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 Supervising PW Inspector 4 420-004 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 Senior PW Inspector (Y-Rate) 3 421-403 32.23 33.03 33.86 34.70 35.57 36.46 37.37 38.31 39.26 40.25 41.25 5,586.53 5,725.20 5,869.07 6,014.67 6,165.47 6,319.73 6,477.47 6,640.40 6,805.07 6,976.67 7,150.00 67,038.40 68,702.40 70,428.80 72,176.00 73,985.60 75,836.80 77,729.60 79,684.80 81,660.80 83,720.00 85,800.00 Senior PW Inspector 3 421-003 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 1 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 PW Inspector II 2 422-002 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 S,832.67 S,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 PW Inspector 1 1 423-001 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,26S.60 PUBLIC WORKS - MAINTENANCE Maintenance Manager 7 430-007 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,S55.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 Maintenance Superintendent 6 431-006 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 5S.13 56.51 57.92 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 Page 9 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code 1.0 1.5 2.0 Salary Steps 2.5 3.0 3.5 MCP Only 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 PUBLIC WORKS -LANDSCAPE Maintenance Supervisor - Landscape 5 443-005 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 Field Supervisor- Landscape 4 444-004 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 Senior Landscape Inspector 3 440-003 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 1 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 1 87,401.60 Landscape Inspector II 2 441-002 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 Landscape Inspector 1 1 442-001 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS/PARKS Maintenance Supervisor - Streets/Parks 5 432-005 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 Field Supervisor - Streets/Parks 4 433-004 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,689.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 Lead Maintenance Worker - Streets/Parks 3 434-003 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 54,662.40 1 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 1 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 Maintenance Worker II - Streets/Parks 2 435.002 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 Maintenance Worker I - Streets/Parks 1 436-001 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 PUBLIC WORKS - FACILITIES Maintenance Supervisor - Facilities 5 432-005 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 Field Supervisor - Facilities 4 472-004 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 Lead Maintenance Worker- HVAC 3 484-003 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 64,979.20 1 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 1 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 Lead Maintenance Worker- Facilities 3 473-003 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 S,688.80 S,832.67 S,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 Maintenance Worker II - Facilities 2 474-002 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 30.48 31.24 32.02 32.82 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 5,283.20 5,414.93 5,550.13 5,688.80 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 63,398.40 64,979.20 66,601.60 68,265.60 Maintenance Worker I - Facilities 1 475-001 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 S,028.40 5,154.93 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 Page 10 of 11 CITY OF TEMECULA SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2020 Class Family/Title Level Class Code f 2.5 3.0 Salary Steps MCP Only 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 PUBLIC WORKS -TRAFFIC SIGNALS Maintenance Supervisor - Signals 5 453-005 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 53.78 55.13 56.51 57.92 59.37 60.85 62.37 63.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 9,321.87 9,555.87 9,795.07 10,039.47 10,290.80 10,547.33 10,810.80 11,081.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 111,862.40 114,670.40 117,540.80 120,473.60 123,489.60 126,568.00 129,729.60 132,974.40 Field Supervisor - Signals 4 454-004 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 48.73 49.94 51.19 52.47 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 8,446.53 8,656.27 8,872.93 9,094.80 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 101,358.40 103,875.20 106,475.20 109,137.60 Senior Signal Technician 3 450-003 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 44.14 45.25 46.38 47.54 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 7,650.93 7,843.33 8,039.20 8,240.27 77,251.20 1 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 1 91,811.20 94,120.00 96,470.40 98,883.20 Signal Technician II 2 451-002 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 42.02 43.07 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 7,283.47 7,465.47 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 87,401.60 89,585.60 Signal Technician 1 2 452-002 32.02 32.82 33.65 34.49 35.35 36.23 37.14 38.07 39.02 39.99 40.99 5,550.13 5,688.80 5,832.67 5,978.27 6,127.33 6,279.87 6,437.60 6,598.80 6,763.47 6,931.60 7,104.93 66,601.60 68,265.60 69,992.00 71,739.20 73,528.00 75,358.40 77,251.20 79,185.60 81,161.60 83,179.20 85,259.20 SUPPORTS ERVICE5 Support Services Supervisor 4 720-004 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 27.61 28.31 29.01 29.74 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 4,785.73 4,907.07 5,028.40 5,154.93 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 57,428.80 58,884.80 60,340.80 61,859.20 Senior Support Services Technician 3 721-003 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 25.02 25.64 26.28 26.94 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 4,336.80 4,444.27 4,555.20 4,669.60 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 52,041.60 53,331.20 54,662.40 56,035.20 Support Services Technician 2 722-002 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 22.67 23.23 23.81 24.41 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832.40 3,929.47 4,026.53 4,127.07 4,231.07 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 47,153.60 48,318.40 49,524.80 50,772.80 Support Services Assistant 1 723-001 17.28 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.07 19.55 20.03 20.53 21.05 21.57 22.11 2,995.20 3,069.73 3,146.00 3,224.00 3,305.47 3,388.67 3,471.87 3,558.53 3,648.67 3,738.80 3,832:40 35,942.40 36,836.80 37,752.00 38,688.00 39,665.60 40,664.00 41,662.40 42,702.40 43,784.00 44,865.60 45,988.80 Page 11 of 11 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS As of July 1, 2020 FY2020-21 Number of Positions Salary Schedule Bargaining Unit* Exempt/Non- Exempt Monthly Salary Minimum Maximum CITY COUNCIL Councilmember 5.0 600 800 N/A E EL City Council Subtotal: CITY MANAGER Assistant City Manager 1.0 12,851 18,158 Exec E Assistant to the City Manager 1.0 9,556 13,501 MCP E City Manager Executive Assistant Management Assistant ** Office Aide III City Manager Subtotal: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Administrative Assistant (Confidential) Economic Development Manager 1.0 N/A 20,489 Contract E 1.0 4,444 6,280 MCP E 1.0 4,231 5,415 Rep NE 0.75 5.75 1.0 2,921 3,739 3,832 5,415 Rep MCP NE NE 1.0 7,651 10,811 MCP E Management Aide III ** 1.0 3,832 4,907 Rep NE Management Analyst Senior Management Analyst 1.0 5,689 8,039 MCP E 1.0 6,280 8,873 MCP E Economic Development Subtotal: 5.0 CITY CLERK Administrative Assistant 1.0 3,832 4,907 Rep NE Director of Legislative Affairs/City Clerk 1.0 10,547 14,903 Exec E Management Aide III 1.0 3,832 4,907 Rep NE Records Manager 1.0 5,833 8,240 MCP E Records Technician 1.0 3,389 4,337 Rep NE City Clerk Subtotal: 5.0 HUMAN RESOURCES Director of HR/Risk Management 1.0 10,547 14,903 Exec E Human Resources Assistant (Confidential) 1.0 4,027 5,689 MCP NE Human Resources Technician II (Confidential) 1.0 4,670 6,599 MCP NE Senior Management Analyst 1.0 6,280 8,873 MCP E Human Resources Subtotal: 4.0 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Management Aide Confidential 1.0 3,146 4,444 MCP NE Emergency Management Subtotal: 1.0 FINANCE Accountant II (Confidential) Accounting Assistant Accounting Assistant - Cashier Accounting Technician 1 1.0 6,127 8,656 MCP NE 2.0 4,127 5,283 Rep NE 1.0 4,127 5,283 Rep NE 1.0 4,555 5,833 Rep NE Accounting Technician II 1.0 4,786 6,127 Rep NE Business License Technician 1.0 4,555 5,833 Rep NE Director of Finance 1.0 11,359 16,049 Exec E Fiscal Services Manager 2.0 7,651 10,811 MCP E Management Analyst (Limited Term Assignment) 1.0 5,689 8,039 MCP E Management Analyst 1.0 5,689 8,039 MCP E ,Purchasing Manager 1.0 6,438 9,095 MCP E Finance Subtotal: City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS As of July 1, 2020 FY2020-21 Number of Positions Salary Schedule Bargaining Unit* Exempt/Non- Exempt Monthly Salary Minimum Maximum INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Administrative Assistant 0.5 3,832 4,907 Rep NE Assistant Director Information Technology/Support Svcs 1.0 9,095 12,851 MCP E Director of Information Technology/Support Svcs 1.0 10,547 14,903 Exec E Information Technology Manager 1.0 8,240 11,643 MCP E Information Technology Specialist 1 1.0 5,283 6,763 Rep NE Information Technology Specialist II 1.0 5,550 7,105 Rep NE Information Technology Supervisor 2.0 6,763 8,656 Rep NE Information Technology Supervisor (Multimedia Services) 1.0 6,763 8,656 Rep NE Information Technology Technician 1 1.0 4,555 5,833 Rep NE Senior Information Technology Specialist 2.0 6,127 7,843 Rep NE Support Services Office Specialist II - AM 0.6 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Office Specialist 11- PM Support Services Supervisor Support Services Technician 0.6 3,305 4,231 Rep NE 1.0 4,027 5,155 Rep NE 0.5 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Information Technology Subtotal: 14. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Administrative Assistant Director of Community Development Principal Management Analyst SARDA/CDBG/Service Level D Assistant Planner Associate Planner 11 Senior Planner 1.0 3,832 4,907 Rep NE 1.0 11,359 16,049 Exec E 1.0 6,932 9,795 MCP E 0.25 5,283 6,763 Rep NE 0.5 6,438 8,240 Rep NE 0.35 7,105 10,039 MCP E Planning Assistant Planner 0.75 5,283 6,763 Rep NE Associate Planner 1 2.0 5,833 7,465 Rep NE Associate Planner II 1.5 6,438 8,240 Rep NE Community Development Technician 1 2.0 4,231 5,415 Rep NE Community Development Technician II 2.0 4,670 5,978 Rep NE Office Specialist 11 0.5 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Planning Manager 1.0 8,656 12,232 MCP E Planning Technician 1.0 4,786 6,127 Rep NE Senior Management Analyst Senior Planner Building and Safety/Code Enforcement Building Inspector 1 Building Inspector II 0.1 6,280 8,873 MCP E 0.65 7,105 10,039 MCP E 1.0 5,415 6,932 Rep NE 3.0 5,978 7,651 Rep NE Building Official 1.0 9,556 13,501 MCP E Code Enforcement Officer II 1.0 4,907 6,280 Rep NE Field Supervisor - Code Enforcement 1.0 5,978 7,651 Rep NE Office Specialist II 0.5 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Senior Building Inspector 1.0 6,599 8,447 Rep NE Senior Code Enforcement Officer Senior Management Analyst Senior Office Specialist 1.0 5,415 6,932 Rep NE 0.9 6,280 8,873 MCP E 2.0 3,649 4,670 Rep NE Community Development Subtotal: 28.0 IN City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS As of July 1, 2020 FY2020-21 Number of Positions Salary Schedule Bargaining Unit* Exempt/Non- Exempt Monthly Salary Minimum Maximum PUBLIC WORKS Administrative Assistant 1.0 3,832 4,907 Rep NE Director of Public Works 1.0 12,232 17,283 Exec E Principal Management Analyst 1.0 6,932 9,795 MCP E CIP Administration Associate Civil Engineer 2.0 7,651 9,795 Rep E Associate Engineer II 3.0 7,283 9,322 Rep E Office Specialist II 1.0 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Principal Civil Engineer 1.0 9,556 13,501 MCP E Public Works Inspector II 1.0 4,907 6,280 Rep NE Senior Civil Engineer 2.0 8,656 12,232 MCP E Senior Public Works Inspector (Y-Rate) 1.0 5,587 7,150 Rep NE Land Development/NPDES Associate Civil Engineer 3.0 7,651 9,795 Rep E Associate Engineer 1 1.0 6,599 8,447 Rep E Associate Engineer II 1.0 7,283 9,322 Rep E Office Specialist 11 1.0 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Principal Civil Engineer 1.0 9,556 13,501 MCP E Public Works Inspector II 1.0 4,907 6,280 Rep NE Senior Public Works Inspector 1.0 5,415 6,932 Rep NE Traffic Assistant Engineer II 1.0 5,978 7,651 Rep NE Senior Civil Engineer 1.0 8,656 12,232 MCP E Senior Signal Technician 1.0 6,438 8,240 Rep NE Signal Technician 1 1.0 5,550 7,105 Rep NE Maintenance (Streets, Facilities, Parks) Custodian I - Facilities 1.0 2,583 3,305 Rep NE Custodian II (Y-Rate) - Facilities 1.0 2,862 3,663 Rep NE Field Supervisor - Facilities 1.0 5,415 6,932 Rep NE Landscape Inspector II 1.0 5,155 6,599 Rep NE Lead Maintenance Worker - HVAC 1.0 5,415 6,932 Rep NE Lead Maintenance Worker - Streets 3.0 4,555 5,833 Rep NE Lead Maintenance Worker- Parks 2.0 4,555 5,833 Rep NE Lead Maintenance Worker- Facilities 1.0 4,907 6,280 Rep NE Maintenance Manager 1.0 7,843 11,081 MCP E Maintenance Supervisor - Streets/Facilities 2.0 6,438 9,095 MCP E Maintenance Supervisor - Landscape 1.0 6,932 9,795 MCP E Maintenance Worker I - Streets 2.0 3,739 4,786 Rep NE Maintenance Worker I - Parks 1.0 3,739 4,786 Rep NE Maintenance Worker I - Facilities 2.0 4,027 5,155 Rep NE Maintenance Worker 11 - Streets/Parks Management Assistant Office Specialist 11 Senior Landscape Inspector Senior Office Specialist Public Works Subtotal: FIRE Administrative Assistant Community Development Technician 1 3.0 4,127 5,283 Rep NE 1.0 4,231 5,978 Rep NE 1.0 3,305 4,231 Rep NE 1.0 5,689 7,283 Rep NE 1.0 1.0 3,649 4,670 3,832 4,907 Rep Rep NE NE 1.0 4,231 5,415 Rep NE Community Development Technician 11 1.0 4,670 5,978 Rep NE Fire Inspector 1 1.0 6,280 8,039 Rep NE Fire Subtotal: 4.0 City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Operating Budget SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS As of July 1, 2020 FY2020-21 Number of Positions Salary Schedule Bargaining Unit` Exempt/Non- Exempt Monthly Salary Minimum Maximum COMMUNITY SERVICES Aquatics Supervisor II 1.0 5,415 6,932 Rep NE Assistant Director of Community Services 1.0 8,656 12,232 MCP E Community Services Assistant 1.0 3,389 4,337 Rep NE Community Services Coordinator 1 1.0 4,337 5,550 Rep NE Community Services Coordinator II 2.0 4,555 5,833 Rep NE Community Services Manager 9.0 7,105 10,039 MCP E Community Services Superintendent 1.0 7,843 11,081 MCP E Community Services Supervisor 1 3.0 5,028 6,438 Rep NE Community Services Supervisor II 2.0 5,283 6,763 Rep NE Director of Community Services 1.0 11,359 16,049 Exec E Management Aide II 1.0 3,472 4,444 Rep NE Management Analyst 1.0 5,689 8,039 MCP E Multimedia Coordinator 1.0 5,283 6,763 Rep NE Office Specialist 11 1.0 3,305 4,231 Rep NE Park Ranger 1 1.0 4,027 5,155 Rep NE Park Ranger 11 2.0 4,444 5,689 Rep NE Risk Manager 1.0 7,651 10,811 MCP E Senior Administrative Assistant 1.0 4,231 5,416 Rep NE Senior Management Analyst 1.0 6,280 8,873 MCP E Theater Technical Assistant Theater Technical Coordinator II 1.0 3,389 4,337 Rep NE 1.0 4,555 51833 1 Rep NE Community Services Subtotal: 34.0 Total By Department Positions City Council 5.0 City Manager 5.75 Economic Development 5.0 City Clerk 5.0 Human Resources 4.0 Emergency Management 1.0 Finance 13.0 Information Technology 14.2 Community Development 28.0 Public Works 54.0 Fire 4.0 Community Services Positions:Total of Authorized 34.0 * Bargaining Units: Rep = Represented MCP = Management/Confidential Exec = Executive " Temporary Positions due to COVID-19 Pandemic include: (1) Management Assistant (CM), and (5) Management Aide 111 (ED) Vacant positions currently on hold due to the COVID-19 pandemic include: (1) Accounting Support Supervisor, (1) Engineering Technician I, and (1) Community Services Specialist I Unfunded positions include: (1) Payroll Coordinator (1) Office Specialist I (TCSD), and (1) Community Services Manager (TCSD) The two TCSD positions are associated with the Margarita Recreation Center and will remain unfunded until the facility has been rehabilitated and is open for operation. RESOLUTION NO.2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Appropriations Limit will be calculated based on the changes in City population and California per capita personal income. Section 2. The Appropriations Limit for the City of Temecula for FY 2020-21, attached hereto, is hereby adopted. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the office of the City Clerk. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 9th day of June 2020. James Stewart, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of June, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2020-21 a Annual Operating Budget GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Article XIIIB of the California State Constitution, more commonly referred to as the Gann Initiative or Gann Limit, was approved by California voters in November 1979, and placed limits on the amount of proceeds of taxes that state and local government agencies can receive and spend each year. For cities that incorporated after 1978- 79 (such as the City of Temecula), the voters set the initial appropriations limit at the time of incorporation. Proposition 111 was approved by California voters in June 1990, which provided new adjustment formulas which make the appropriations limit more responsive to local growth issues. Each year the City Council must adopt by resolution the appropriations limit for the following year. Following is the calculation of the City's Gann Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2020-21: Fiscal Year 2019-20 Appropriations Limits................................................................... $284,375,703 CityPopulation Growth............................................................................................................0.08% Per Capita Personal Income Change.........................................................................................3.73% Fiscal Year 2020-21 Appropriations Limit.......................................................................$295,210,417 Appropriations subject to the limit in the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget total $80,172,527 which is $215,037,890 less than the computed limit. Additional appropriations to the budget funded by non -tax sources such as service charges, restricted revenues from other agencies, grants or beginning fund balances would be unaffected by the appropriations limit. However, any supplemental appropriations funded through increased tax sources would be subject to the appropriations limit and could not exceed the $215,037,890 variance indicated. Further, any overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $215,037,890 from budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess of the City's appropriations limit, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years or voter approval of an increase in the City's appropriations limit. Voter approval for an increase in the City's appropriations limit is not anticipated in the future due to the margin between the limit and tax revenue. 350,000,000 300,000,000 250,000,000 200,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 50,000,000 7 GANN Appropriations Limit 0 __W __W 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 ■ Appropriations Subject to Limit Legal Limit Annual Operating Budget Item No. 11 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development DATE: June 9, 2020 SUBJECT: Provide General Direction to Staff on a Proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail Program in Old Town PREPARED BY: Brandon Rabidou, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide general direction to staff on whether to proceed with a proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program in Old Town. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an unprecedented burden on local restaurants and retail establishments. Over the past few months, many restaurants located within the City of Temecula have been operating with limited service (to -go) or no service at all. A significant portion of retail establishments were limited/closed. Under the current public health orders, social distancing, reduced occupancy, and other operational restrictions are limiting the ability of restaurants and retail establishments to service customers as they are allowed to reopen/expand operations. Analysis from the National Restaurant Association and National Retail Federation indicates the following: • Restaurant sales have fallen to the lowest level in 35 yearsl • Three decades of restaurant jobs were lost in the last two months • Retail sales have dropped 16.4% in April (nationwide)' Even amongst these challenging circumstances, the National Restaurant Association's analysis shows that there is strong consumer demand for restaurants. As the State of California, and Riverside County Public Health loosen restrictions, the City Council has directed staff to implement multiple programs (Temecula Revive) that accelerate local economic activity while maintaining compliance with all State or County mandates. Staff has developed the Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program to assist businesses during these challenging times. The Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program consists of two different avenues for businesses to temporarily expand their businesses. 1 htWs://www.restaurant.orWresearch 2 htWs://www.restaurant.orWresearch 3 https://nrfcom/media-center/press-releases/april-retail-sales-drop-nearly-twice-much-march-during-coronavirus 1. Temporary expansions on private property 2. Temporary expansions within the public right-of-way in Old Town Temecula Temporary Expansions on Private Property Temporary expansions on private property would consist of businesses temporarily expanding their footprint in outdoor areas such as adjacent private parking spaces, private courtyards, or underutilized private sidewalk/frontage areas. Under the proposed program, applicants would submit a no fee Temporary Use Permit with a next -day turnaround. The Temporary Use Permit would ensure that all safety/legal requirements are met. Safety/legal requirements include maintaining fire access, temporary barriers in parking spaces to protect customers from vehicles, Americans with Disability Act compliance, and property owner approval. This program would serve a wide range of restaurant and retail establishments throughout the City but would not provide adequate relief to restaurants and retail establishments within Old Town Temecula, due to the urban nature of the district. Temporary Expansions within the Public Right -of -Way in Old Town Temecula The unique urban nature of Old Town Temecula requires a different solution than other areas of the City. Consequently, staff has developed a Temporary Expansion Dining/Retail program within the public right-of-way for Old Town Temecula. The proposed expansions in Old Town would allow restaurants/retail to utilize temporary street closures and sidewalks within the public right- of-way to temporarily expand the footprint of businesses. Under the current proposal, Old Town Front Street, Fifth Street, and Fourth Street would be temporally closed to vehicular traffic. Applicants for the program would submit a Special Event Permit at no cost, with a next day turnaround. The Special Event Permit would include a licensing agreement that would allow the program to be stopped at the City's discretion. Staff is working with various internal and external partners to address prospective issues, take appropriate public safety precautions, and help support our businesses within the Old Town area. On Friday, May 29, 2020, the City Council Old Town Steering Subcommittee (Naggar/Schwank) received a presentation from staff regarding the proposed Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program. At the conclusion of that meeting the City Council subcommittee directed staff to bring the Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail proposal to the City Council on June 9, 2020. Staff received fourteen public comments regarding the proposed program. All comments were supportive of the Temporary Expanded Dining/Retail program. Staff is looking for general direction from the City Council on whether to proceed with the program. CEQA The proposed Program is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act because it can be with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption and implementation of the proposed program may have a significant effect on the environment, because the Program only provides for temporary uses of already developed urban space. It is therefore not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act review pursuant to Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Code of Regulations. The uses authorized by the proposed program are minor public or private alterations in the condition of land which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees. Therefore, the proposed program is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review pursuant to Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15304(e) of the California Code of Regulations. FISCAL IMPACT: Existing funds would be adequate to implement and facilitate the program. Program expenses could be offset by increased retail sales that would otherwise be absent under the current COVID-19 circumstances. ATTACHMENTS: None ELECTRONIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:51 AM To:krissybunny1 Subject:RE: Public concern for city council Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: krissybunny1 < Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:44 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public concern for city council We have 100's of upset children and parents who just want to finish our little league season. As of now we will be canceling the season on the 13th if the fields don't open. The children have already had to go thru so much during this time and LOVE playing this sport. Let them have something! We drive past bars/restaurants that are packed with people that have no social distance and our kids aren't able to throw a ball from 8 feet apart. Temecula hasn't been harshly affected by covid and the kids should get to finish the season. The fields are plenty big for family's to social distance. There is absolutely no reason to not let them play. Please reopen the fields and let us finish our games and season. Please care a little bit about the kids and not just businesses. They're affected too Kristiana Ruiz Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S10, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:52 AM To:Jessica Ward Subject:RE: Public Comment - Community Services Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Jessica Ward < Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:34 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment - Community Services Good afternoon - I am requesting this comment to be read during the community services portion of the June 9th meeting. My name is Jessica Ward and I am a long time board member of Temecula Little League. I am reaching out to ask that the City Council discuss and approve reopening of athletic fields for Youth Sports usage. We are excited to see that Professional Sports are able to continue on Friday 6/12, though there was no mention of Youth Sports. We have reached out to the State Essential Services department, and they confirmed that Youth Sports fall within Stage 3, however the State has failed to provide any guidelines. Today, we also asked Riverside County to approve the usage of athletic fields for Youth Sports such as baseball, which is an extremely low contact sport. If I can go into a Bar surrounded by people, our children should be able to play a baseball game in the park. The Skate Park and Pump track are open and being used daily by a large number of people SAFELY, so we are asking to be given the opportunity to do the same for athletic fields. While we understand opening up athletic fields is low on the priority level at this time because there are a ton of businesses around our City still closed, we didn't want Youth Sports to fall by the wayside as it is an integral part of children’s lives. We know this will be a great outlet for kids who have been stuck inside for weeks with no ability to fully practice their athletic hobbies. Our current plan is to space out players in the dugout and bullpens, hand sanitizer stations in every dugout, wipe down the balls between each half inning and recommend our players perform temperature checks before each practice/game . All of these things, while different than normal play, will allow our Coaches/Players/Families to conform to the State 2 health guidelines while participating in something that is good for their mental and physical health. We appreciate your time and consideration of these requests. Jessica Ward Scheduler, Media & Website Manager Temecula Little League 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:34 PM To: Subject:RE: Temecula Police Presence At Temecula Duck Pond on Saturday, May 30 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. Begin forwarded message: From: Eva Smith < Date: June 1, 2020 at 9:46:47 AM PDT To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Subject: Temecula Police Presence At Temecula Duck Pond on Saturday, May 30 Good morning City Council members, I am writing you as a concerned Temecula resident of over 20 years. On Saturday, May 30th we witness an enormous number of police presence at the peaceful protest. You can locate multiple videos on Twitter under the hashtag, #TemeculaProtest. The peaceful protest was organized by High school students in the Temecula area. Were you aware that there were families at the protest? Were you aware there were children at the protest? Were you aware there were moms, dads and kids in strollers at the protest? The City put a lot of innocent people at risk with the unnecessary show of force. I saw parents clutching their children in their arms. I saw teen frozen in fear of what the police was going to do next. At no point did it become an unlawful assembly. At no point was anyone involved in destruction. The force wasn't just strong, it was an overkill. You stopped all the parents in their tracks and everyone started recording in disbelief that that the police was going to do next. Why was this amount of police presence was necessary? Where is the civility, compassion, empathy and unity that our community needs at this time from its leadership? This is not the Temecula that we have grown fond of and love. As a 2 registered voter and active member of my community, I am concerned about the direction the city of Temecula is headed. Concerned Temecula Citizen. Eva Smith 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:35 PM To: Subject:RE: request sensitivity training Thank you for your email Gia. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. Begin forwarded message: From: Gia Rueda < Date: June 1, 2020 at 9:58:01 AM PDT To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: request sensitivity training June 1, 2020 Re: Request Sensitivity Training for Temecula City Employees To the Temecula City Council: I used to be that cop that responded, “All lives matter,” but I know better now. If I told you I battled breast cancer in 2019, and that breast cancer research is important, would you assert, "No. Pancreatic cancer research is important!"? No, you wouldn’t. When someone is trying to convey strongly held feelings, we don’t actively try to negate their personal experiences. And it is the same with our current civil unrest. On May 30, 2020, at the Temecula Duck Pond, a Riverside County Sheriff’s Deputy was having a polite discussion with a group of protesters. During this discussion he asserted, “All lives matter.” I know he meant well, and I understand the intent of his response. The comment is 2 truthful- standing alone. But when it is said in response to “Black lives matter,” the statement is racially charged and insensitive. To say Black Lives Matter, does not mean other lives don’t matter. It is a statement that social injustice is not okay. It is not the time to say, "Well, white people need social justice too." White people have been on the winning end of social inequality for centuries. I respectfully request that all Temecula City Employees, but most specifically, deputies and their supervisors assigned to Temecula Police Department undergo sensitivity training, presumably as part of their on-going Civil Rights/diversity/inclusion training. The goal of training would be: · to understand historically the centuries old struggle fueling the anger behind the Black Lives Matter movement. · learn to actively listen, instead of giving a visceral response. · to understand what White Privilege is not an insult; it's a simple state of being that life will not be made more difficult simply due to the color of your skin. · to understand the insulting and counterproductive nature of the flippant retort “All lives matter.” · to agree with the speaker, or at minimum to remain respectfully silent when they hear “Black lives matter.” I would also recommend that the training include, or to be led by people/person of color, a community representative, who wants to effect change by working in partnership with the police. Ms. Denise Y Denson-Hains has volunteered to lead this training. I used to be that cop that responded, “All lives matter.” But I know better now. I want to share this truth with you. I can emphatically say, without reservation, without preamble, without apology, without alteration: BLACK LIVES MATTER. Our country is on the precipice of change and it's being led by kids like our Temecula youth. I am hopeful that the City of Temecula can actively listen to the outpouring of frustration from our community and help escort our city into a new era of equality. Respectfully submitted, Gia Rueda Temecula Resident & Retired Police Sergeant Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:38 PM To: Subject:RE: Injustices in America Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. Begin forwarded message: From: Israel Mazariegos < Date: June 1, 2020 at 10:18:52 PM PDT To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Injustices in America Hello City council members, My name is Israel Mazariegos and I have been a resident of Riverside County for just about four years. Before that i lived in a small town called Moorpark (Ventura County). As the years have gone by my interest in politics and social justice has only grown. Though the world is filled with many joys and immense beauty, it is also filled with pain, unrest, and atrocities we must not shy away from. I am merely a 23 year old Hispanic-American man. Racial slurs and prejudice towards me have come few and far between. I am blessed to have grown up in the communities i did, but there are thousands of others who cannot say the same. The current outcry of the Black Lives Matter movement is one of many years. I write this letter to you asking for guidance during this historical time. History is being written whether you or I get involved. I ask for your help, for a direction i should be going. I live in Murrieta; Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Hemet, and Temecula are my neighboring cities. What can i become involved in? Who are local officials i can meet? Who do i discuss these, and future issues with? Where do i volunteer? There is a regular meeting every 2nd and 4th Tuesday of every month in the City Council Chambers, is 2 this open to the public? I would love to attend tomorrow! A good phone number to reach me at is ( Protesting is power for the people, yet there is more that can be done. Help me help our community. Help me help our world. Sincerely, Israel Mazariegos 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:36 PM To: Subject:RE: Temecula Policing Policies Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. Begin forwarded message: From: Savannah McLaughlin < Date: June 1, 2020 at 11:16:02 AM PDT To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Zachary Hall <zachary.hall@temeculaca.gov> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Temecula Policing Policies Dear Mayor Stewart, Council Members, Captain Hall, and Temecula Police Department, I am a resident of Temecula and I am getting in touch because I am deeply troubled by what I have seen recently of the treatment of Black Americans by police in police departments nationwide. I would like to know what kinds of safeguards our town's police department has in place to prevent police brutality and incidents of racism by police. Does Temecula PD perform any kind of anti-racism training for officers? Are Temecula PD officers required to wear body cameras to record their responses to calls on video? Does Temecula PD train its officers in de-escalation? Are new recruits screened in any way to prevent the hiring of racists, for instance by looking at social media posts? How does internal affairs investigate and respond to reports of discrimination by officers? If these safeguards are not in place, and they certainly should be, I would support my local taxes paying to fund these interventions. Additional, tangible policy recommendations can be found here: https://static1.squarespace.com/…/1590859294859/CampaignZer… 2 Thank you for your attention to my concerns. These are very literally matters of life and death. I hope to hear back from you soon. Sincerely, Savannah McLaughlin 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:36 PM To:saman Subject:RE: Legislative Action for BLM Thank you for your email Saman. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: saman < Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:31 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Legislative Action for BLM To Whom It May Concern, My name is Saman Arzo and I am a resident of Temecula, California. I am writing to demand the following legislative changes you can make to eradicate the decimation of Black people at the hands of police officers. The following is a compilation of background information and implementation strategies for necessary legislative actions derived from collecting the pleas of Black organizers, activists, and journalists: 1. Redirect Police Funding Phillip McHarris (doctoral candidate focusing on race) and Thenjiwe McHarris (strategist with the Movement for Black Lives) explain the problem with current police reform efforts: “More training or diversity among police officers won’t end police brutality, nor will firing and charging individual officers. Look at the Minneapolis Police Department, which is held up as a model of progressive police reform. The department offers procedural justice as well as trainings for implicit bias, mindfulness and de-escalation. It embraces community policing and officer diversity, bans ‘warrior style’ policing, uses body cameras, implemented an early intervention system to identify problematic officers, receives training around mental health crisis intervention, and practices ‘reconciliation’ efforts in communities of color.” 2 Evidently, that was not enough. Instead of heightening the resources that officers have, they advocate redirecting funds to alternative emergency response programs, which can also be fueled by state-level and local- level grants. The McHarris’ argument is that we should work towards a reality in which healthcare workers and emergency response teams should handle substance abuse, domestic violence, homelessness, or mental health cases, while rapid response social workers provide individuals with the care they need. Community organizers would be responsible for spearheading responses to the pandemic. “The average police recruit spends 58 hours learning how to shoot and only 8 hours learning how to de-escalate .” Police officers are not trained nor necessary in reacting to such crises—specialized responders are. Most police funding is budgeted and taxed at the local level, with city-level and county-level votes periodically increasing budgets. In 2017, Oakland allocated the highest share of its general fund to policing nationwide, at 41 percent and $242.5 million. It is crucial to establish state-level and local-level bans on heightening police funds, while simultaneously redirecting budgets to the aforementioned alternatives. For-profit policing is a large culprit. Even though Governor Brown’s 2016 bill helped protect Californians from civil asset forfeitures, this is far from sufficient. As of 2020, 66.25% of forfeiture profits go to police—a C+ rating. The Black Lives Matter Movement demands “acknowledgment and accountability for the devaluation and dehumanization of Black life at the hands of the police… We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.” The McHarris’ conclusion states, “We need to reimagine public safety in ways that shrink and eventually abolish police and prisons while prioritizing education, housing, economic security, mental health and alternatives to conflict and violence.” A persistent, genuine, and well-thought-out legislative effort to redirect police funds and end for-profit policing is imperative. 2. Abolish Legislative Police Protections Murderers who wear a badge have consistently been given a free pass to decimate Black life. BLM “demand[s] accountability [for] those who are victims of police violence.” It is vital to ensure that police officers are met with precisely the same consequences as their badgeless counterparts. Accountability has been denied to Black people for centuries, and it is crucial to impose l egislative confirmation that accountability is ensured. Campaign Zero is an organization dedicated to “limiting police interventions, improving community interactions, and ensuring accountability.” They propose a solution of independent investigations. Because only 1% of all killings by police lead to an officer being charged with a crime, “independent investigations and prosecutions of police officers” must be mandated to eliminate biases. A broken system should not be evaluating itself. 3. Demilitarize the Police 3 Campaign Zero emphasizes that studies show how “more militarized police departments are significantly more likely to kill civilians.” Unfortunately, “the federal 1033 program transfers military weapons to police departments.” Campaign Zero continues that to demilitarize, we must “prohibit cities and counties from using federal funds to purchase military equipment.” California is not void of this indictment. In total, 41 MRAPs are in the possession of law enforcement agencies in California. All in all, California’s quantity of purchasing such outlandish and high-level military technology is unmatched: “In terms of cash value, California gets more 1033 gear than other states.” Even though the LAPD has refused to take on more military equipment, they stated that “the department will replenish and replace” existing equipment. Such measures must be barred in an effort to eventually demilitarize the police force entirely in the long run. Police departments should be restricted from using federal grant money to purchase military equipment, using the SWAT team, or conducting no-knock raids. Over-weaponized departments must reduce their use of weapon stockpiles, as “agencies should seek to return to the federal government the military equipment that has already been received” as places like San Jose already have. The warranting is simple: “Military equipment naturally increases military-style training for said equipment. That training can increase the other dimensions of militarization,” contributing to the war-like mentality implicitly enforced by the police, who have no place fighting wars against the most disenfranchised members of their communities. I hope that our legislators can take tangible, policy-level initiatives to defend Black lives, something they have failed to do so up until this point. Please listen to the pleas of the Black entities listed above and countless others, and help give rise to a future where Black folks do not have to fear for their lives on a daily basis. Sincerely but not silently, Saman Arzo 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:39 PM To: Subject:RE: Police Training and Discipline Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. Begin forwarded message: From: Allen Kugi < Date: June 2, 2020 at 2:15:58 PM PDT To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>, James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>, Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>, Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>, Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>, Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Subject: Police Training and Discipline I would like to see a message from the mayor and city council members on the Temecula Government Website explaining police training and police discipline procedures. In light of what has happened in Minneapolis recently, as well as evidence of systemic racism nationwide, what improvements can be made to assure police will do their duty without racial profiling or discrimination? I don’t want to hear that no changes need to be made because everything is working just fine in Temecula. I want to know what new additional training and discipline procedures will be enacted now. Hopefully, this training will not be needed for most officers, but just to be safe, it’s time to double-down to root out any conscious or unconscious racism in our police. I’m a white retired senior and Temecula homeowner since 1994. I recall an incident back some ten or more years ago when I called the police to report a suspicious activity in my Temecula neighborhood. The first thing the 2 police man asked me over the phone was “Is he black?” When I said no, I was surprised to sense an immediate loss of interest in the seriousness of my call. I remember at the time thinking, this cop is a racist. Allen Kugi Temecula, CA 92592 Sent from The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been mov ed, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.Outlook 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:36 PM To:Amber Sosa Subject:RE: WE DEMAND JUSTICE NOW Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Amber Sosa < Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:41 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: WE DEMAND JUSTICE NOW To Whom It May Concern, My name is Amber Sosa and I am a resident of Temecula, California. I am writing to demand the following legislative changes you can make to eradicate the decimation of Black people at the hands of police officers. The following is a compilation of background information and implementation strategies for necessary legislative actions derived from collecting the pleas of Black organizers, activists, and journalists: 1. Redirect Police Funding Phillip McHarris (doctoral candidate focusing on race) and Thenjiwe McHarris (strategist with the Movement for Black Lives) explain the problem with current police reform efforts: “More training or diversity among police officers won’t end police brutality, nor will firing and charging individual officers. Look at the Minneapolis Police Department, which is held up as a model of progressive police reform. The department offers procedural justice as well as trainings for implicit bias, mindfulness and de-escalation. It embraces community policing and officer diversity, bans ‘warrior style’ policing, uses body cameras, implemented an early intervention system to identify problematic officers, receives training around mental health crisis intervention, and practices ‘reconciliation’ efforts in communities of color.” Evidently, that was not enough. Instead of heightening the resources that officers have, they advocate redirecting funds to alternative emergency response programs, which can also be fueled by state-level and local- level grants. The McHarris’ argument is that we should work towards a reality in which healthcare workers and emergency response teams should handle substance abuse, domestic violence, homelessness, or mental health cases, while rapid response social workers provide individuals with the care they need. Community organizers would be responsible for spearheading responses to the pandemic. “The average police recruit spends 58 hours 2 learning how to shoot and only 8 hours learning how to de-escalate .” Police officers are not trained nor necessary in reacting to such crises—specialized responders are. Most police funding is budgeted and taxed at the local level, with city-level and county-level votes periodically increasing budgets. In 2017, Oakland allocated the highest share of its general fund to policing nationwide, at 41 percent and $242.5 million. It is crucial to establish state-level and local-level bans on heightening police funds, while simultaneously redirecting budgets to the aforementioned alternatives. For-profit policing is a large culprit. Even though Governor Brown’s 2016 bill helped protect Californians from civil asset forfeitures, this is far from sufficient. As of 2020, 66.25% of forfeiture profits go to police—a C+ rating. The Black Lives Matter Movement demands “acknowledgment and accountability for the devaluation and dehumanization of Black life at the hands of the police… We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.” The McHarris’ conclusion states, “We need to reimagine public safety in ways that shrink and eventually abolish police and prisons while prioritizing education, housing, economic security, mental health and alternatives to conflict and violence.” A persistent, genuine, and well-thought-out legislative effort to redirect police funds and end for-profit policing is imperative. 2. Abolish Legislative Police Protections Murderers who wear a badge have consistently been given a free pass to decimate Black life. BLM “demand[s] accountability [for] those who are victims of police violence.” It is vital to ensure that police officers are met with precisely the same consequences as their badgeless counterparts. Accountability has been denied to Black people for centuries, and it is crucial to impose legislative confirmation that accountability is ensured. Campaign Zero is an organization dedicated to “limiting police interventions, improving community interactions, and ensuring accountability.” They propose a solution of independent investigations. Because only 1% of all killings by police lead to an officer being charged with a crime, “independent investigations and prosecutions of police officers” must be mandated to eliminate biases. A broken system should not be evaluating itself. 3. Demilitarize the Police Campaign Zero emphasizes that studies show how “more militarized police departments are significantly more likely to kill civilians.” Unfortunately, “the federal 1033 program transfers military weapons to police departments.” Campaign Zero continues that to demilitarize, we must “prohibit cities and counties from using federal funds to purchase military equipment.” California is not void of this indictment. In total, 41 MRAPs are in the possession of law enforcement agencies in California. All in all, California’s quantity of purchasing such outlandish and high-level military technology is unmatched: “In terms of cash value, California gets more 1033 gear than other states.” Even though the LAPD has refused to take on more military equipment, they stated that “the department will replenish and replace” existing equipment. Such measures must be barred in an effort to eventually demilitarize the police force entirely in the long run. Police departments should be restricted from using federal grant money to purchase military equipment, using the SWAT team, or conducting no-knock raids. Over-weaponized departments must reduce their use of weapon stockpiles, as “agencies should seek to return to the federal government the military equipment that has already been received” as places like San Jose already have. The warranting is simple: “Military equipment naturally increases military-style training for said equipment. That training can increase the other dimensions of militarization,” contributing to the war-like mentality implicitly enforced by the police, who have no place fighting wars against the most disenfranchised members of their communities. I hope that our legislators can take tangible, policy-level initiatives to defend Black lives, something they have failed to do so up until this point. Please listen to the pleas of the Black entities listed above and countless others, and help give rise to a future where Black folks do not have to fear for their lives on a daily basis. 3 Sincerely but not silently, Amber Sosa 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 4:08 PM To: Subject:RE: To the Mayor, Council Members, & Police Chief Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ricky Denham < Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 2:56 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Zachary Hall <zachary.hall@temeculaca.gov> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: To the Mayor, Council Members, & Police Chief Dear Mayor Stewart, Council Members, Captain Hall, and Temecula Police Department, I am a resident of Temecula and I am getting in touch because I am deeply troubled by what I have seen recently of the treatment of Black Americans by police in police departments nationwide. I would like to know what kinds of safeguards our town's police department has in place to prevent police brutality and incidents of racism by police. Does Temecula PD perform any kind of anti-racism training for officers? Are Temecula PD officers required to wear body cameras to record their responses to calls on video? Does Temecula PD train its officers in de-escalation? Are new recruits screened in any way to prevent the hiring of racists, for instance by looking at social media posts? How does internal affairs investigate and respond to reports of discrimination by officers? Do Black Lives Matter to you? If these safeguards are not in place, and they certainly should be, I would support my local taxes paying to fund these interventions. Additional, tangible policy recommendations can be found here: https://static1.squarespace.com/…/1590859294859/CampaignZer… Thank you for your attention to my concerns. These are very literally matters of life and death. I hope to hear back from you soon. 2 Sincerely, Fredrick "Ricky" Denham II 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 2, 2020 4:11 PM To: Subject:RE: Systemic Reform Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Alyssa Garcia < Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:48 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Systemic Reform Dear Temecula City Council Members, My name is Alyssa Garcia and I am a 25 year resident of Temecula, CA. Today I am writing to you in an attempt to understand how my local government is planning on protecting its members of color from racial injustice. In light of recent events, it is clear that there is no longer an “if” when it comes to the presence of racial bias in the police force and local governments. I urge you to understand that although racism by police officers and officials is not always recorded in our community, it does exist. Please take the time to speak and listen to the black residents that you vow to serve and protect and they will tell you that they experience racial discrimination every day. You are in a great position of power and with that comes the responsibility to do everything you can to protect people of all races, ethnicities, and walks of life. I am ultimately writing to you today to ask what you specifically are doing to ensure that lives like that of George Floyd are no longer taken by the hand (or knee) of the corrupt. The Minnesota Department of Human Rights is currently doing an in-depth investigation of the Minneapolis Police Department over the course of the past ten years. What is California Legislation doing to hold our police departments accountable? Are the police who are being dispatched to local protests wearing functioning body cameras? Perhaps review of these videos are a good place to start. Lastly, I would like to thank you, the political leaders, and police officers who are genuinely doing their part to create safety and peace in an overwhelming time of crisis. In this time, I urge you to really empathize with those who are crying out for their governments to show that every life has value. There are currently two deadly diseases taking the lives of thousands everyday: COVID-19 and racism. Perhaps if our government treated both as such, we would not still be in this position. 2 Thank you for your time, Alyssa Garcia Temecula CA 92591 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:04 PM To:Rainer Rosilez Subject:RE: On May 30th at the Duck Pond Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Rainer Rosilez < Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 9:05 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: On May 30th at the Duck Pond Greetings, I'm writing in regards to the happenings of the peaceful protest at the duck pond on May 30th. I was there from approximately 3 PM to 5:45 PM, and what I saw was a prime example of why these sorts of protests need to happen. While I understand that some individuals did cross into illegal territory when they began to protest in the street, the vast majority stayed within the permitted territory (including myself.) The county's officers came in with the goal of showing strength and decided before those incidents started that they were going to make a show of those protesting. They decided that the group, composed of predominantly teens and young adults, we're thugs that needed to be policed and herded. It felt like officers wanted to intimidate protestors, instead of protecting and serving them. As a transgender, queer Chicano, I don't feel safe when the MAGA folks have their rallies at the duck pond. I don't see the county sending in officers to intimidate those folks, but they had no problem sending numerous officers there when we were peacefully protesting injustice. Who is Riverside County really protecting? The City of Temecula needs to speak out about the blatant injustice that is the policing in our county and our country; the first step needs to be calling out the problematic approach the officers took on May 30th. You want the people of Temecula to respect the police presence? Then make the police presence respectable. If you have any questions about my experience, feel free to reach out to me. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Rain Rosilez He/They 2 BA, Sociology (Law & Society) University of California, Davis - 2018 JD Candidate, Matriculating 2020 University of Wisconsin Law School 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:03 PM To: Subject:RE: 21st Century policing Report Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Judy Torres < Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 3:29 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: 21st Century policing Report Esteemed Mayor and Council. Members, I urge you to support and pledge to establish the foundation for policing policy that will eliminate the crime of police murder and brutality against people of color and the rest of society. Institute the principle s in the the 21st Century Policing as outlined in Obama.org. Join city government across the nation to make police work effective and morally correct to end crimes by police and the keep the public safe. Pledge to implement 21st Policing. Prevent other person's of color suffering and death due to brutal police abuse. This problem of exteme police Abuse can occur in the future In Temecula. I implore you to act now Sincerely, Judy C. Torres 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:59 AM To: Subject:RE: James Stewart; Comments and Resignation Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Karleigh Shepard < Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 8:01 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: James Stewart; Comments and Resignation To Whom It May Concern: My name is Karleigh Shepard and I am a concerned citizen of Temecula who believes that James Stewart should resign as Mayor. Tonight I came across a screenshot of an email shared between another constituent and Stewart on social media (see: attached) and was disappointed in the city government as a whole. Within the message Stewart states “I don’t believe there’s ever been a good person of color killed by a police officer,” an ignorant, short-sighted comment that suggests extra-judicial killings of people of color are justified based on their skin color and the white perception of African Americans as “dangerous”. People of color are people too, however it seems that James Stewart doesn’t understand this given the callous unthinking comments he made. Furthermore, Stewart’s rhetoric effectively criminalizes George Floyd, Sandra Bland, Trayvon Martin, and the long list of other African Americans who’ve been brutally murdered by the police. Not only does this statement directly contradict Stewart’s comment that “racism is not excepted [sic] or tolerated in the City of Temecula, but alienates a large swath of the population. Given the protests spreading across all fifty states and several countries including France, Germany, and South Korea, these comments are insensitive at best and carry tones of white supremacy at worse. I am deeply disappointed with the city government and will be taking further action to make this exchange known by all. Therefore, I am formally calling for the resignation of James Stewart as Mayor of Temecula effective immediately. Karleigh Shepard 2 3 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:02 PM To: Subject:RE: Concerned families in Temecula Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Victoria Serrano < Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 11:07 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Concerned families in Temecula Hello, My family, friends, and I have seen your email reply to a concerned family in regards to what you and your team is doing to end police brutality in our community, your response was ignorant and undeniably uneducated. You obviously don’t know anything about what happens in “your city” since you’re unaware of an innocent black man being beaten by police officers here in Temecula, an officer instigating violence at last weeks first BLM protest, and racist high school students that will grow up to be those same authorities. Saying “I have African-American friends” proves nothing other than show how absolutely ignorant you are to racism in America. Do better. Educate yourself because we can vote you out. Sincerely, Victoria Serrano 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 12:01 PM To: Subject:RE: Police Reform Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ginger Hitzke < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 7:52 AM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov > Subject: Police Reform Hello Mayor Stewart, I am writing to you today to ask that you consider making police reform in Temecula a priority in 2020. I want to know what you plan to do to prevent a murder by a police officer like so many that have occurred in our lifetime. Thank you. - Ginger - Ginger Hitzke Temecula, CA 92592 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:58 AM To: Subject:RE: JAME STEWART Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 -----Original Message----- From: sarah velotta < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 9:10 AM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: JAME STEWART Hello, My name is Sarah Velotta and I am a resident of Hemet, California. I would like to voice how utterly disgusted with the city of Temecula and the mayor. As an educator to children of all races, I would like to say that by the mayor stating, “And I don’t believe there’s ever been a good person of color killed by a police officer”, this is allowing all children and adults of color to believe that your mayor has qualifications for which people of color should be brutally murdered by police. You should be ashamed that this is the face of your city. I do hope you consider the feelings and safety of the brown and black folks in the community. Please reconsider who you choose to represent that city of Temecula. Kind regards, Sarah Velotta Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:27 AM To: Subject:RE: FW: 💬Citizen Note -Temecula-#311741 City Manager's Office [05696] Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Abram Cerda < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 3:29 PM To: Luisa Tovar <luisa.tovar@temeculaca.gov> Cc: Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Re: FW: 💬 Citizen Note -Temecula-#311741 City Manager's Office [05696] Good Afternoon, Thank you for your response. I am a bit confused as to why a complaint against the Mayor would be forward to the mayor himself for review? It would seem more appropriate for the city council to review complaints against the Mayor, and grossly biased for someone to review a complaint against themselves. Can you please explain and/or make sure this gets forwarded to the city council? Actually, I found their emails and CC'd them here. Dearest City Council members, I am born/raised in Temecula. This complaint is with regards to the Email and "facebook apology" from the Mayor I have attached to this email thread. I am sure you have all read the article from the Press Enterprise posted just hours ago as well which addresses his racist email. In my time living here, I have witnessed countless anti-Black racism against Black folks by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, as well as by private security across the city. Again, being a non-Black person myself, you really need to hold space for Black residents to come forward with their experiences. Your negligence to do so at this time contributes to these cycles of system racism. 2 Action Item For The Council - Can you please respond with regards to hosting a virtual town hall meeting and issue a statement that addresses the Mayor's egregious racist comment, repercussions for his actions (this is arguably an ethics violation) AND addressing reform for the Riverside County Sheriff's Department's presence in Temecula? Before you jump on board and echo the Mayor's denial of racism or police brutality being experienced by folks in the community, please host a town hall where you actually listen to Black folks in our community... Do your research & listen to the community. https://frenchvalleypress.com/matthew-tucker-update-teen-fatally-shot-by-riverside-county- police/?fbclid=IwAR1Ad_ZcxXXW70nCPBHMzttT0woWN7BYHio_IF8wRMnLwgV9wfm0jaDc4ck https://www.pe.com/2018/12/27/20-years-after-tyisha-miller-was-killed-by-riverside-police-what-is-her- legacy/ Thank you. Abram Abram Cerda | Documentary Filmmaker Pronouns: he/him/his ___________________________________ W: www.abramcerda.com E: C: ( On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 3:10 PM Luisa Tovar <luisa.tovar@temeculaca.gov> wrote: Good afternoon Mr. Abram, I have forwarded your email inquiry via the CivicApp to the Mayor directly for his review. The CivicApp inquiry was forwarded to me and I made sure to forward it to him directly so he can read it. That is the reason the “resolved” appeared on your end via the CivicApp. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to email me. Luisa Tovar Executive Assistant City of Temecula (951) 694-6416 luisa.tovar@temeculaca.gov TemeculaCA.gov Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. 3 From: Temecula <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 2:58 PM To: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: 💬 Citizen Note -Temecula-#311741 City Manager's Office [05696] Temecula Notes Added By Citizen - #311741 Citizen Note: Hi, How is this resolved? Sincerely, Abram Status resolved Work Order #311741 Issue Type City Manager's Office Staff Member(s) Luisa Tovar Notes Hello, The mayor of Temecula, Stew James Stewart, on June 3rd, posted the below email and "apology" for what is an egregiously racist response to a citizen's request for information on the City of Temecula's response to national demand for reform to address police brutality on a local level. These actions and this inappropriate response from the mayor merit a review of his position in power for this city. Stating you “don’t know” if anyone in Temecula has had issues with police brutality is not an appropriate response to addressing the National conversation and movement for reform with the residents of the city you were elected to govern. Do better. This is not ok. And coming onto a Facebook group to save face for a lackluster response, mentioning your “African- American” friends is absolutely inappropriate and demonstrates what real disregard and lack of care you have for these issues. Some action items for the mayor...1) Issue an apology 2) do research on these issues and 3) Acknowledge that systemic racism and police brutality exist and the need for reform and consequence & 4) hold a virtual town hall where you listen to Temecula residents concerns. Sincerely, Abram Cerda Image 4 Reporter Name Abram Cerda Email Phone Report Submitted JUN 04, 2020 - 1:12 PM Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:25 AM To: Subject:RE: Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Mina m < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:00 PM To: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Dear local government official, I am Mia Michael, a constituent raised in Menifee, and I am calling on you to denounce Temecula Mayor James Stewart’s recent words and actions. When asked about police brutality by his constituent, he responded with a poorly written paragraph including word-for-word statements like “i don’t believe there’s ever been a good person of color killed by a police officer”, “I’m kind of confuse what you’re looking for”, and “racism is not tolerated or excepted in the city of temecula. Or any surrounding areas I know for sure”. Now, let’s break down each of these statements. For the first statement, he later claimed, only after being publicly held accountable, that he did not mean to say “good”, that it was a simple typo. However there are many holes in this statement. Firstly, he made that claim after this email became public and he began receiving backlash. It truly seems to be a lazy excuse, as he did not say this privately to the person he was conversing with once he realized his mistake. Secondly, the content of the entire email aligns with that perspective. In addition, if this claim about it being a typo is true, that means the mayor of the city would recklessly send out an email in response to the serious question of police brutality and murder without care, without proof-reading, and without truly answering any questions and instead deflecting responsibility to others. This is not how any public official should act. He claims no people of color have been killed by police in Temecula, but Matthew Tucker was murdered on May 4th, 2016, after he called the police for suicide intervention. The fact that the mayor of this city had no idea of this young man’s tragic death is disgusting. Moreover, on May 30th, a peaceful protest in Temecula was 2 deemed an “unlawful gathering” and six people were arrested for practicing their first amendment right. It’s clear through his actions that he does not care for his people he is supposed to represent. For the second statement, the original email sent to mayor Stewart was quite clear as to what they wanted. We want public officials who don’t hide behind excuses and claim that its someone else’s job to govern and care for their city. Yes Temecula and the surrounding area is policed by Riverside county police, but as mayor you still have the power and capability to make change. We constituents want elected officials who do everything in their power to stop unjust murder. Even though you might not have full autonomous control of the police, you still can make statements, call for action, educate people, and denounce police brutality. This is not a controversial topic anymore, as all 50 states have had protests and so have many other countries. We are asking on you and all other officials to use your platform for good. Lastly, he claims that surrounding areas are not racist. This is where you come into play. If this statement is truthful, then you will do everything in your power to put a stop for this. In case you don’t know how to start with that, here are a few ideas: -Denounce mayor Stewart’s bigoted words. •this is by far the easiest action you could take to support your black constituents. -Educate yourself about this issue: •By watching documentaries like 13th, Time: the Kalief Browder story, and Crime + Punishment. •By reading books like me and white supremacy, the new Jim Crow, and women, race, and class. -Publicly advocate for police reform by: •joining campaigns like #8cantwait (the 8 policies that have been shown to reduce police brutality by 72%) •holding the officers in your city publicly accountable when they use extreme force •push for social workers or mental health professionals to be sent out along with police to 911 calls for suicide intervention. This is what caused the death of Matthew Tucker. •denouncing the polices’ use of teargas, a substance banned in war (by the Geneva protocol of 1925), against American citizens, especially during a respiratory pandemic. •push for a smaller portion of budget to go to police. The US spends over 100 billion annually on police. To put that in perspective, it’s been estimated to cost only 20 billion to effectively eliminate homelessness in to US, and it would cost 34 billion to ensure free college for each American. Thank you for your time. 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:22 AM To: Subject:RE: Mayor Stewart’s recents comments about African-Americans Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Annabelle Fletcher < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:15 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org> Cc: Council Assistant <council.assistant@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Mayor Stewart’s recents comments about African-Americans To the Temecula City Council - I am writing with concern regarding Mayor Stewart’s recent comments about police violence in Riverside County. My name is Annabelle Fletcher and I have been living in Temecula for 3½ years. While blaming voice to text and lack of proofreading for the statement, “I don’t believe there’s ever been a good person of color killed by a police officer,” the rest of the e-mail reads as tone deaf and divisive. While important conversations and dialogues are happening all across our nation, the mayor sends a half-hearted email about a heavy subject without proofreading it when corresponding with people he is supposed to represent. The response posted on My Valley News is even more appalling, saying that someone just “literally did it to bait me and set me up.” We are your constituents and just because our concerns don’t go along with your narrative doesn’t mean that we are “baiting.” The original email was supposedly about sensitivity training for the Riverside Police Department, but I ask the city council to educate and get sensitivity training for themselves. Mayor Stewart claims he is not a racist, but this type of defensiveness instead of listening to your citizens shows that there is work to be done. I humbly ask city council to please take a good look at what’s happening around the nation and to examine the systemic problems at play and ensure that our citizens from the beautiful city of Temecula doesn’t suffer from any injustices. Thank you for your time, Annabelle Fletcher 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 9:01 AM To:Delainey Pack Subject:RE: Temecula Protest Comment Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Delainey Pack < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 8:31 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Temecula Protest Comment Dear Temecula City Council, Thank you for allowing me to have the opportunity to share my experience at one of the Temecula Duck Pond protests. I was born in Fallbrook and raised in Temecula. When I heard about the protest happening, to be honest, I was both proud and surprised that my hometown was holdimg a peaceful protest about social inequities and police brutality with a large turnout. I arrived at about 3 pm. When I got there, by then it was definitely intense. When I saw how many police officers were there in riot gear — it was frightening, honestly, I couldn't understand why that was necessary, but I was able to join the protest and I was near the front for the entire two hours I was there. You all see the huge protests and how wild it gets in our major cities. That was not Temecula. We were a very small group, very contained. But we were all forced back inside the fences of the duck pond. There were a few protesters that were louder than others, for sure, using their right to expressing themselves with their opinions on oppression and racism. About an hour into my time there, Riverside Sheriff's put on their gas masks. I couldn't understand why, since at that moment, the group was very peaceful but vocal. 2 We all understood that they were trying to intimidate us, but why? Why were they inciting violence against a crowd like that considering the majority of protesters were high schoolers and young adults? I am 23, the two people beside me were in high school. These are your children — we know your children. Since the protest, I have been online talking about it, and along with a lot of support, there are residents that have promoted and threatened to bring their own guns and shooting these protesters. I have attached screenshots of these threats. The Sheriff's Department said the protest was an "unlawful gathering" and threatened arrests and tear gas — and a day later — Sheriff Bianco posted on social media that it was a "peaceful gathering." Which is it? If either of those scenarios was the case, the fact that Riverside Sheriff's had tear gas and rubber bullets ready to go at any point was patently unnecessary. I ask you, please protect your protesters, your children, your citizens from this terrorism, and actively do something about these threats instead of ignoring it. Turning a human rights issue into a political issue is just totally WRONG. Temecula needs to own up to its faults — as well as its great qualities — and protect every citizen's rights. Delainey Pack 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:07 AM To:Mackenzie Orr Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Mackenzie Orr < Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 9:23 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Mackenzie Orr. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation 2 Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mackenzie Orr 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:06 AM To:Emily Kim Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Emily Kim < Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:12 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Emily Kim. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation 2 Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily Kim Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:06 AM To:Gabby Waltz Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Gabby Waltz < Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:57 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Gabriella. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation 2 Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Gabriella Thank you, Gabriella 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:05 AM To:Mahmud Penjwini Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Mahmud Penjwini < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:08 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chris Mitchell. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation 2 Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chris Mitchell Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:05 AM To:Nicolo Villasis Subject:RE: We Need a Budget That Represents US Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Nicolo Villasis < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:53 PM To: James Stewart <James.Stewart@TemeculaCA.gov>; Maryann Edwards <Maryann.Edwards@citycouncil.org>; Mike Naggar <mnaggar@citycouncil.org>; Matt Rahn <matt.rahn@TemeculaCA.gov>; Zak Schwank <Zak.Schwank@temeculaca.gov>; Aaron Adams <aaron.adams@temeculaca.gov>; Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov>; Jennifer Hennessy <jennifer.hennessy@temeculaca.gov> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Nicolo Villasis. I am a resident of Temecula and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation 2 Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Nicolo Villasis 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:40 AM To:Kirk Lentz Subject:RE: Citizen Concern- Temecula Police Department Reforms Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Kirk Lentz < Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 6:44 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Citizen Concern- Temecula Police Department Reforms Hello Randi, In these chaotic times, I know the talking points are to 'defund the police'. This is not only unreasonable, but dangerous for our community and the recruitment of police. I am neither an activist or police hater, just very concerned with the tactics and training of all police. However, as a concerned citizen who has no record at all-I have had several run-ins with police who always want to use a militaristic approach to dealing with me-the average citizen. Simply questioning an officer,has lead to backup being called-even with small children in the car. And I am a white guy. I would like the following to be added and or discussed at the next council meeting: First- one systemic cancer within the police force-is the police union. The unions only goal is to keep all officers employed-regardless of what offence they have committed. This type of third party collusion adds a layer of protection that no other citizen enjoys. It also gives the police that 'above the law' attitude even when police are off the clock. I am requesting that there be a de-certification discussion of the police union. I can assist at the next union meeting and or help any officer who wants to initiate. The recent Supreme Court decision allows officers to stop paying union dues- time to start now. Second-I need someone to explain to me why motorcycle police officers 'lay and wait' ( many times on the sidewalk or the median-which no citizen on a motorcycle can do), and only at certain intersections, to trap speeders and or traffic light infractions. I have lived in many cities, and don't understand why this has not been challenged in court on its merits alone. We do not live in a police state-yet their presence just waiting for someone to break the law, is unacceptable and adds to the distrust of police. I have no problem holding up a sign warning drivers of impending police traps a block or two before the position of the police officer should I see in the future. 2 Third-The immunity clause that will change all legal aspects of how police conduct themselves going forward, needs to be discussed. When the Democrats agree with the Republicans-its only a matter of time before this becomes law- a law that is long overdue. I would like to know if the Temecula Council is being proactive on the issue, as this will impact new recruits and the liability of current officers. Lastly, I have criticized the LAPD for other actions prior to the current chaos, and was amazed to see an LAPD cruiser drive by my home soon afterwards. Way out of jurisdiction and not a resident of where I live. I hope there is not this type of intimidation from the Temecula police department with my comments and concerns. Times-they-are-a-changing. I hope the Temecula City Council is being proactive and are addressing the issues with the police and how they deal with the public going forward. Thank you- -- Kirk Lentz Temecula, CA. 92591 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:39 AM To:Jon C Subject:RE: Remarks for 9 June Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at the Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Jon C < Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 7:18 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Remarks for 9 June To whom it may concern, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. Data proves that together when these nine policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%  Ban chokeholds & Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require warning before shooting  Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting  Duty to intervene  Ban shooting at moving vehicles  Require use of force continuum  Require comprehensive reporting  Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side. 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. Require officers to exhaust all other alternatives, including non-force and less lethal force options, prior to resorting to deadly force. Require officers to give a verbal warning in all situations before using deadly force. Require officers to intervene and stop excessive force used by other officers and report these incidents immediately to a supervisor. Ban officers from shooting at moving vehicles in all cases, which is regarded as a particularly dangerous and ineffective tactic. While some departments may they restrict shooting at vehicles to particular situations, these loopholes allow for police to continue killing in situations that are all too common. 62 people were killed by police last year in these situations. This must be categorically banned. Establish a Force Continuum that restricts the most severe types of force to the most extreme situations and creates clear policy restrictions on the use of each police weapon and tactic. Require officers to report each time they use force or threaten to use force against civilians. Comprehensive reporting includes requiring officers to report whenever they point a firearm at someone, in addition to all other types of force. By placing less than lethal weapons on the officers’/ deputies’ strongside and repositioning lethal weapons to an alternate, less convenient location, less than lethal weapons will be the primary weapon system, saving countless lives each year. Having served in an active war zone, and multiple deployments. We had strict rules of engagement before we could engage the enemy even while we were under direct enemy fire. I am appalled those same standards, at a MI NIMUM do not apply to our law enforcement agencies who are here to serve and protect. Additionally, we had strict escalation of force procedures we were required to follow before we could use deadly force. 3 I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Jonathan Chang 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:39 AM To:Emily Carian Subject:RE: Public comment for Temecula City Council meeting 6/9/20 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Randi Johl Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:33 AM To: Emily Carian < Subject: RE: Public comment for Temecula City Council meeting 6/9/20 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at next week’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at next week's meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Emily Carian < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:21 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public comment for Temecula City Council meeting 6/9/20 2 Please submit to and read the following comment at today's (6/9/20) City Council meeting. "My name is Emily Carian, and I am a resident of Temecula. Like many other Americans, I am concerned about police violence against Black Americans and the militarization of police. In the 2019-2020 fiscal year, the city of Temecula spent 44% of its general fund on police: nearly $35 million dollars, a 6.8% increase from the previous year. The city of Temecula spent an additional $3.7 million on police from the Measure S fund. This totals to $38.5 million this year alone. As the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and so many more illustrate, police presence makes Black Americans and people of color less safe. Yet the city of Temecula has continued to spend an inordinate amount of money contracting with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, which has a history of using excessive force against people of color in our county. As one example, Riverside County sheriffs slammed Joaquina Valencia to the ground in 2017 because they assumed she was an undocumented immigrant. She is a citizen and has lived in the US for over 4 decades. I asked City Council members via email on June 4, 2020, what they would do to advocate for change among the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. I have received no response. Today, I demand that our City Council members release a plan to ensure the Riverside County Sheriff's Department make sweeping changes. One immediate change is to put out of commission the military-style equipment they have received from the Department of Defense since 1990. This tactical equipment is excessive and unnecessary for local law enforcement. Second, I demand that our City Council members reduce our city's police budget for the following fiscal year, and instead reinvest that money in Temecula residents, specifically residents of color. Black Americans are asking us to affirm that their lives matter. What is the city of Temecula's response?" 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:15 AM To:Randi Johl Subject:FW: City Council meeting Attachments:Dear City Council.pdf From: Randi Johl Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:59 AM To: Stephanie Tabares < Subject: RE: City Council meeting Thank you for engaging. I will absolutely read the whole thing into the record. 😊 Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Stephanie Tabares < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:56 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Re: City Council meeting Here is my attached letter...I read it in under 30 seconds (enough time to read all other letters)...Thank you! We'll be viewing the meeting tonight! On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:23 PM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote: Yes, I will forward it to them right now. From: Stephanie Tabares < Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 1:47 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Re: City Council meeting Hi Randi, Can you please share this to the board? Thank you On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:50 AM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote: 2 You can hear me read it, along with the many others by listening to or viewing the City Council meeting on Channel 3 or online live here: https://temeculaca.gov/tv From: Stephanie Tabares < Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 11:42 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Re: City Council meeting How will I know if my message will get read? On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:33 AM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote: Hi Stephanie – our Council meetings are currently being held virtually and not in-person because of the COVID pandemic and the prohibition on mass gatherings. As such, all you have to do is send me an email and I will read it into the record under public comments. Hope that helps. From: Stephanie Tabares < Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 2:32 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: City Council meeting Good evening, My name is Stephanie and I am a concerned citizen. How do I go about speaking at Tuesdays council meeting? Thank you -- Stephanie Tabares Psychological Science Major | California State University San Marcos 3 -- Dear City Council, Please take a moment and stare at the color of your hands….what do you see? Now imagine you were reborn into a lower-income Black or Brown family….……your family decides to move to Temecula because it’s safer and affordable…..Now imagine going to a school where you are made fun of because of the color of your skin and a certain teacher (Mrs. Puorroy) tells you that you don’t belong here…the school system doesn’t do anything about the incident so you continue your years…the police tend to pull you and your friends over more than your white friends because quote “you didn’t turn your signal light” which then turns to an angry “DON’T MOVE!!!-LICENSE & REGISTRATION”….you then again continue with your life with these built-in microaggressions….Could you honestly say if you really were that imaginary person that the city council has made any movement towards racial equity in this city? What have you done? What can you do? And what are you going to do? Your family and generations down will learn about George Floyd’s historic movement just like how I learned about Rodney King. You have the privilege and power to make an impact and tell your family that you made a difference for the community in the city of Temecula. Two racial attacks happened in one week and none of you made a statement……….Now, remember your imaginary person? That person was me…the city of Temecula failed me and it’s failing others. This new generation was asleep but now it’s awake and ready to be heard. Racism will always exist in this city. We are realizing that it’s community folks but also those in power like yourself and anyone who see’s injustice but doesn’t say anything. Now tell me City Council- are you a board that looks out for only Whites like previous boards have done in the past….or you are a board that embodies inclusivity?­­­…I would like for you to do a full investigation on Josam and Mychal Ashley Santana for the May 30th, 2020 assault…As well as a full investigation for the second assault that happened June 6th, 2020…the abuser in the back seat has been identified as Brianna Starbuck, we still need the identity of the passenger. Their plate number is 7MXT235. Also, take another look at Mathew Tucker's case where a police officer killed him in our own soil. Videos are uploaded on YouTube and Twitter. I hope to see a pride festival soon, monthly food pantries held by the city, mandatory sensitivity and cultural training for all public employees, celebration of Black History Month in Oldtown, Senior Awareness Day, and well you get the idea. Thank you 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:51 PM To:Christopher Bout Subject:RE: Public Comment for Tonight's Meeting Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Christopher Bout < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:49 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for Tonight's Meeting Randi, hello I would like this to be read at the public comments tonight. Good Evening Acting Mayor Edwards, Council and Staff, my name is Christopher Bout and I am a 21 year resident of the City of Temecula. I am deeply saddened and disappointed by the recent events taking place around the resignation and the City's acceptance of said resignation, from then-Mayor James Stewart. Stew's comments do not bother me in that it was, and should have remained, a harmless error compounded by a "not-always-accurate" voice-to-text technology, Stew's dyslexic affliction and a nationwide, pervasive "outrage-culture" fueled by media glorification of all things even remotely perceived to be racist. YOU, Acting Mayor Edwards, bought into the outrage culture and showed a glaring weakness in the strength of your backbone and your shameful lack of resolve by accepting the resignation so effortlessly. The community would have rallied around him, never got the chance. The City lost a perfect opportunity to rally around its leader and unify the city against the shameless fingerpointing and thin-skinned holier-than-thou cultural elitists. We lost an opportunity to be a voice of reason in a sea of chaos, and stand on conviction and values; but you chose to appease the mob and sacrificed Stew. You threw him to the wolves, and you know it. Stew is a pillar of the community, and a kind and thoughtful human being. Stew placed the people of Temecula first, before his own interests, and stepped down to avoid the inevitable scrutiny the City would face, and even possible mayhem coming from the anarchists and outrage-culture currently being espoused by leftist media elitists. You underestimated Temecula in a reprehensible and embarrassing way. When is your term up, Ms. Edwards? That day can't come any sooner. 1 Erika Ramirez From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 PM To:Ana M Subject:RE: Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members-Meeting June 9, 2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ana M < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:02 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members-Meeting June 9, 2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 10 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together when these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Ana L. Moreno 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 PM To:Courtney Sheehan Subject:RE: Public comment for council meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Courtney Sheehan < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:09 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public comment for council meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a six year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%  Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds  Require De-escalation  Require warning before shooting  Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting  Duty to intervene  Ban shooting at moving vehicles  Require use of force continuum  Require comprehensive reporting  Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side  End qualified immunity  Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, un affiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif  Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.  Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Courtney Sheehan 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 PM To:Charity Barczyszyn Subject:RE: Policy reform Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Charity Barczyszyn < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:25 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Policy reform Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been ann8 year resident of Temecula Valley and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. 2 * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Charity Barczyszyn 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:51 PM To:Karen Wilson-Bonnar Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Karen Wilson-Bonnar < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:46 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 4 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Karen Wilson-Bonnar 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM To:Laurel LaMont Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Laurel LaMont < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:21 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 12 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Laurel LaMont Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM To:Sherry Bondy Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Bondy < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:37 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have only been a resident of Temecula for one year and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, YOUR NAME Sherry Bondy 1 Erika Ramirez From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM To:Riley Wold Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Riley Wold < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:36 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a six year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Riley Wold 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:47 PM To: Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:27 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 25 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, S. Fairchild Sent from my iPad 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:09 PM To:Abraham Tehrani Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Abraham Tehrani < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:04 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 17 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to 2 accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Abraham Tehrani 1 Erika Ramirez From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:38 PM To: Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:23 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I was raised in Temecula, and my husband and I have chosen to build our own life here as adults, now residents of Temecula for the past six years. I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherriff’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherriff 2 * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are s imply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Kathryn Wright 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM To:Terry Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council m eeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Terry < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:37 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a XXX year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Teresa Dugan Mansfield Fallbrook resident for 36 years Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM To:Sally Jacobson Price Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Sally Jacobson Price < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:37 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 7 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Sally Price 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM To:Ashley Clingingsmith Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ashley Clingingsmith < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:35 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Re: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you. I have also lived here 27 years if that is needed... On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:32 PM Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> wrote: Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 2 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ashley Clingingsmith < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:21 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a XXX year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, YOUR NAME 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:37 PM To:REINA DIAZ Subject:RE: Police Reform Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: REINA DIAZ < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:54 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Police Reform Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards, and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been resident of Temecula for 6 months, and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72%  Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds  Require De-escalation  Require warning before shooting  Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting  Duty to intervene  Ban shooting at moving vehicles  Require use of force continuum  Require comprehensive reporting  Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side  End qualified immunity 2  Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif  Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc.  Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Reina Diaz 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:32 PM To:Tim McDonald Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Tim McDonald < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:18 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 30 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Cheers, 2 Tim McDonald 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:31 PM To:Tami Simms Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Tami Simms < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:31 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 32 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sheriff * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to 2 accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Tami Sims 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:47 PM To:Fredric Ball Subject:RE: Tonight's Meeting Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Fredric Ball < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Tonight's Meeting Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 15- year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif 2 * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Fredric Ball 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:50 PM To:Nathan Price Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Nathan Price < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:48 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 7 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Nathan Price 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:46 PM To:Ira Robinson Subject:RE: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ira Robinson < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: RE: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Thanks Randi. Please read this one aloud. 😊 Ira From: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:32 PM To: Ira Robinson < Subject: RE: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 2 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Ira Robinson < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:22 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Comments for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Randi, Below are my comments for presentation during the PUBLIC COMMENTS portion of tonight’s Council meeting – about two minutes and 45 seconds worth. Please acknowledge receipt if you have time. Thanks. Ira ********************************************************** Mayor Pro Tem Edwards and members of Council: I am sending this message primarily to register my disappointment at the City’s response to protests at the Duck Pond and at City Hall on May 30, 2020. I was disappointed primarily because the City and its leadership team authorized an overwhelming show of force by the Sheriff’s Department in response to essentially peaceful protests by a multiracial, multigenerational – and largely local – group of youngsters who saw what happened to Mr. George Floyd and decided to organize and say “No More”. I was disappointed because the City appears to have simply assumed – as indicated by the Mayor - that the protesters were not Temecula area residents, and that they were “ just trying to cause issues just like they did in LA and other cities around us”. I am certain beyond doubt that the show of force decision was made by the City, but only after consultation with every reachable member of the City’s leadership team. 3 Perhaps a more diverse group would have made a different and better decision. I was disappointed because according to one officer on the scene, the decision to declare the Duck Pond protest an “unlawful assembly” was prompted by the presence of a number of protesters in the street. One would think that with an area overflowing with officers, a handful of them could easily have addressed that concern I was disappointed because the unlawful assembly order interrupted and had a chilling effect on what was otherwise an essentially peaceful exercise of the First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly. In the evening, some of the protesters – AND I -- moved from the Duck Pond to City Hall, a location which, like the Duck Pond, has been designated by the City as being among the “good facilities for persons to gather for expressive activities”. Once there, I was disappointed to find all access to the City Hall courtyard blocked off by police cars and officers. I believe this denial of access was a clear violation of the First Amendment. More than anything, I was disappointed to learn that not a single member of the City’s management team was present at any of the May 30 events. I believe we can do better. [RANDI: DROP THE BELOW TWO SENTENCES IF YOU MUST.] Finally, much has been said recently about the idea of reducing police funding, and redirecting funds to things that are in short supply but badly needed – including things like mental health services, job training programs, school counselors and nurses, computer equipment for needy students, affordable housing, and homelessness. While it is too soon for anyone to have firm views on this subject, it is my hope that the City will at least be thinking along these lines – especially when it is considered that a whopping 44% of the City’s annual operating budget is devoted to police services. Thank you. Ira L. Robinson Temecula 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:47 PM To:chris Smith Subject:RE: Public comment Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: chris Smith < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public comment As a resident of Temecula and registered voter, I urge the four remaining council members to take concrete and demonstrable action to help make Temecula a truly inclusive city that welcomes individuals of all faiths, races, ethnicities, orientations, and abilities. The former Mayor’s initial comments and later apologies may have been the most dramatic episode in the City’s problematic approach to race, but it was far from the first. Council member Naggar declared himself the City’s first African-American Council member, a statement which may be technically accurate but grossly appropriates the experiences of black Americans. Other Council members have made many “jokes” about race and ethnicity. And then there’s the constant dog-whistling to nationalists and xenophobes, like the pointless resolution to uphold the constitution. Our council members are elected to be non-partisan, and to represent the interests of the community. Political posturing and well intentioned but ill informed statements do real damage to real people. They incite opposition to a mosque, protests against marriage equality, and racist firestorms defending a former mayor on social media. It’s time to change. Affirm that Black Lives Matter (without qualification). Fight against racism—not just the overt individual racism that wears a hood or swastika, but the less obvious, even more dangerous structural, institutional, and cultural racism. Seek experts to help identify and unlearn your own implicit biases. Reject the divisive, partisan rhetoric that is tearing our country apart. Be the leaders the community needs. Be the leaders you were elected to be. 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:34 AM To:Alicia Rosenthal Subject:RE: Public Safety Concerns - Public Comment for City Council Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Alicia Rosenthal < Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 7:35 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Safety Concerns - Public Comment for City Council Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have lived in Menifee my whole life and just became a resident of Temecula. I moved here because I thought it was safer than Menifee, but now I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blo od chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I also believe there needs to be mandatory training on handling situations with people with mental health issues, such as depression and suicidal ideation. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Respectfully, Alicia Rosenthal Sent from my iPhone 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1:28 PM To:Anonymous Temecula Resident Cc:All Executive Staff Subject:RE: Pubic Comment, June 9 Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. By way of this response I am also sharing with the City Council and Executive staff. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Anonymous Temecula Resident < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:02 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Pubic Comment, June 9 As a resident of this community, I have two items I would like to address, anonymously. I write anonymously today because of the hateful comments I have read on social media directed towards those with similar opinions to myself. First, I would like to thank the City for the swift and responsible response to the controversial and hurtful statement former Mayor James Stewart made this past week. I understand many believe his comments were truly made in error, and that may be true, but I believe we all (but especially elected’s and public servants) should be held accountable not only for the intentions of our actions but the impact they have. I also believe anyone holding the position of mayor should be held to a professional standard of communication, especially in written statements, and especially when the subject matter is as important as what was being discussed. I also believe even if his phone inserted the word “good” on its own accord, Mr. Stewart’s statement was flippant, condescending, and insensitive. I would have understood his potential continued service had he owned his mistake, but he did not. I can only imagine how people of color in this community must have felt hearing his words. To not have the care to proofread in this situation (best case scenario), shows his absolute lack of understanding of the oppression people of color have endured in this country as well as his lack of minimal professional competency. I am grateful for his resignation, thank you. Second, I humbly beg everyone listening tonight to take a moment to consider the following: Why is it controversial to state that black lives matter? Why do some of us pause or contest? Why do some respond defensively that, “all lives matter?” Can you not state that BLACK LIVES matter? Matter, as a verb, can be defined to “be of importance; have significance.” Are black lives not of importance? Do they not have significance? Aside from any political issues or differing opinions on the appropriate role of policing, how can we not recognize the enormous significance of our collective reluctance to state that the lives of a group in our community matter, that they’re important, and that they have significance? I ask the following of city leaders: Lead your community and officially state that black lives matter. State it proudly and without apology. 2 Commit to anti-racist policies and the continued conversation surrounding their implementation and include people of color in the discussion. In the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “there comes a time when silence is betrayal.” 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:37 AM To:Ronald Prentice Cc:All Executive Staff Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. By way of this response I am also sharing with the City Council and Executive staff. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. -----Original Message----- From: Ronald Prentice < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:34 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 17 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls 2 Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Ronald L. Prentice 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:37 AM To:Shire . Cc:All Executive Staff Subject:RE: Council Meeting Comments Thank you for your email. It was received and will be made a part of the record. By way of this response I am also sharing with the City Council and Executive staff. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Shire . < Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 12:46 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Council Meeting Comments Hello, I am emailing the city council to call for defunding the Temecula police department. Riverside county is second highest in California in police shootings (Source: California Department of Justice URSUS Database), and Temecula plays a role in these statistics. The police as an institution have historically been used to protect property and catch slaves, rather than having any interest in protecting the people. Although we say that these intentions have changed, the mindset and prioritization of land over people is still seen today. One example may be seen in the homeless than have been forced to leave and arrested over camping out in the washouts, simply because they are considered "private property" ,despite never being used and the homeless individuals harming or harassing no-one. This is not to mention the racism prevalent throughout the police forces, or the immense problem of police brutality seen both across the nation and in our own home. As city council members, I trust that you have the ability to do research yourselves as to the statistics of these statements rather than me taking more of your time. Rather than continuing to support such an institution, we need to pour more money into education, into healthcare and public works, to mental health services, and to aiding those in poverty. When these aspects are not properly managed, it is this that leads to higher rates of crime. If you want a safer city, stop fueling an outdated police system and instead work to help the community itself. Additionally, we can begin training individuals in unarmed mediation to handle tense situations. Many careers require handling violent or dangerous individuals and manage to successfully do so without harming or killing those they are trained to manage. I hope that you will please give what I have said some thought. Thank you. 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:11 PM To:Leanne Gaffney Subject:RE: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Leanne Gaffney < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:02 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting 6/9/2020 Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 10- year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sherrif’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to 2 accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Leanne Gaffney 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:51 PM To:Sarah Peyton Subject:RE: public comment city council meeting Thank you for your email. It is received and will be read into the record at today’s Council meeting. If you do not wish for your email to be read aloud into the record at the meeting, please let me know. Thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Sarah Peyton < Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:32 PM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: public comment city council meeting Dear Mayor Pro Tem Maryann Edwards and City Council Members, I am writing like so many others to address the issue of systemic police violence. I have been a 7.5 year resident of Temecula and I am concerned about our public safety contract with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. I’d like to help propose some solutions to common policing issues, like excessive force. Data proves that together these policies can decrease police violence by more than 72% * Ban chokeholds, Strangleholds AND carotid holds * Require De-escalation * Require warning before shooting * Requires exhaust all alternatives before shooting * Duty to intervene * Ban shooting at moving vehicles * Require use of force continuum * Require comprehensive reporting * Require less than lethal weapons to be positioned on the dominant side * End qualified immunity * Create an independent, third party investigative authority to look into all complains of excessive force against officers, unaffiliated with the RSO or County Sherrif * Analyze the types of calls into 911 for services and make sure that each category receives proper funding I.e. if 20% of all calls are for EMS, allocate 20% of funding to EMS, etc. 2 * Allocate funds for a permanent PERT (Psychological Emergency Response Team) of board-certified psychologists to accompany law enforcement on ALL mental health calls Chokeholds and strangleholds are inherently dangerous. Carotid holds are simply blood chokes; the RSO currently allows carotid holds. Allowing officers to choke or strangle civilians results in the unnecessary death or serious injury of civilians. Both chokeholds and all other neck restraints must be banned in all cases. Require officers to de-escalate situations, where possible, by communicating with subjects, maintaining distance, and otherwise eliminating the need to use force. I understand we do not have our own police force and we contract with Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and we have little say to their policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. This obstacle can be easily overcome with a simple Memorandum of Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding for operating within city limits. I urge each of you to use the influence each of you have to demand these life saving policies be enacted for all law enforcement officials operating within Temecula City Limits. Very Respectfully, Sarah Peyton 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:00 AM To:Al Rubio Subject:RE: Public Comment at June 9th Council meeting Received and thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Al Rubio < Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 8:34 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment at June 9th Council meeting Dear Honorable City Council, The economic impacts of COVID19 on our local restaurant community and our local business districts has been devastating. Business owners have been forced limiting the scope & service of their operation. They've had to lay off staff, they've endured increasing costs due to supply chain issues, and they've incurred more costs in an effort to invest in hygiene, sanitation, and risk mitigation efforts to comply with State and County mandatory guidelines. The State's approval to re-open dine-in services at restaurants is exciting news, but it leaves restauranteurs with increasing costs and a limitation to how much revenue they can generate out of limited dining space. The City of Temecula's proposal to temporarily provide old town Temecula restaurants with outdoor, space so that the restaurants can expand their dining areas is good. I fully support this effort because it makes operating a business a bit more feasible, serves more patrons within our community, and creatively protects the interest of public health considerations with economic progress. That said, I believe this proposal will promote a fun and pleasant dining experience. We encourage you to give Old Town Temecula businesses this opportunity. Sincerely, Al Rubio | Chairman of the Board Chairman's Choice Recipient 2019 Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce 2 Temecula, CA 92591 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:55 AM To:Connors, Brian Subject:RE: Public comment for June 9th Received and thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Connors, Brian < Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 9:46 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public comment for June 9th Thank you, Randi for reading this during the public comment section, June 9 th: My name is Brian Connors and I currently serve as the Past Chair of the TVCC Board of Directors. Please accept this note as my support for the temporary expanded space for old town businesses to effectively operate and garner critically needed business. When the citizens of this great country, region and city are in the hour of need, this can be one example of how we can become united to overcome the greatest of challenges. Brian Connors | Director of Marketing | SWHS - Rancho Springs & Inland Valley Medical Centers | Phone ( Your Choice for Healthcare, Committed to Hope, Health, and Healing Building Relationships that Touch the Heart Integrity • Compassion • Respect UHS of Delaware, Inc. Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited, and may be punishable by law. If this was sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:40 AM To:Cherise Manning Subject:RE: Public Comment June 9th Meeting Received and thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Cherise Manning < Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 9:37 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment June 9th Meeting To whom it may concern: In this time of economic uncertainty, is imperative that businesses and Government think outside of the box in creative ways to increase revenue and balance public safety. The City of Temecula's proposal to temporarily provide old town Temecula restaurants with outdoor, space so that the restaurants can expand their dining areas is an example of forward thinking. This model has been successful in other communities and I fully support this effort because it makes operating a business a bit more feasible, serves more patrons within our community, and creatively protects the interest of public health considerations with economic progress. I encourage you to give Old Town Temecula businesses this opportunity. Sincerely, Cherise Manning Board Member Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Owner A Grape Escape Balloon Adventure Facebook Instagram Twitter Experience, Safety and Professionalism make the difference! 1 From:Randi Johl Sent:Monday, June 1, 2020 9:40 AM To:Kim Kelliher Subject:RE: Public Comment for June 9 Meeting Received and thank you. Randi Johl, JD, MMC Legislative Director / City Clerk randi.johl@temeculaca.gov 41000 Main St, Temecula, CA 92590 Please note that email correspondence with the City of Temecula, along with attachments, may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise exempt. From: Kim Kelliher < Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 9:37 AM To: Randi Johl <randi.johl@temeculaca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for June 9 Meeting To the Honorable Members of the Temecula City Council: As a member of TVCC's Board of Directors and the founder of a tourism-related business in Temecula, I would like to support the City's efforts to provide Old Town Temecula restaurants with additional outdoor space for expanding their dining areas. I see this as a creative solution to help struggling restaurants in a time of dire need. They have suffered enough, and it is time to do everything we can to support the hard-working entrepreneurs of Old Town. Temporary outdoor dining is a solution that is working well in other areas such as Long Beach and Santa Barbara. And I personally think it is a worthwhile experiment to see if a walking district in Old Town might be preferable to drive-through access at some point in the future. Thank you for thinking outside the bo x during this difficult time for small businesses and supporting Old Town restaurateurs. Cheers! Kim Kelliher Founder/President 2 | GoGrape.com GoStryder.com Follow Us: