HomeMy Public PortalAbout1984BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL,
MINUTES OF
FEBRUARY 14, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday,
February 14, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand Cliff Howrey, lst Southern Baptist
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of January 23, 1984 and Adjourned
Meeting of January 30, 1984, were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning Commis-
sion Meetings of January 3 and January 17, 1984 were accepted for
filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of February 14, 1984, in the amount
of $134,252.01; and Payroll of January 26, 1984, in the amount
of $25,753.50 were approved for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
There were no requests for oral communication.
5. ORDINANCE NO. 591 - An Urgency Ordinance to Amend Ordinance 490
to Provide Pre - Zoning to Property Requesting Annexation to the
City of Beaumont (Annexation No. 32) and Repealing Ordinance No.
586.
<" On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, Ordinance
.,,591 to be considered for adoption by reading of the title only.
-JA-),',.AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
`NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF 4/5 MAJORITY.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Ordinance 591 as an Urgency Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
table consideration of this Ordinance until such time as a map
is provided with all properties identified by parcel number and
ownership, with the interim zoning indicated, died for lack of a
second.
The Ordinance was read in its entirety by the City Clerk.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 1
�b io
MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF 4/5 MAJORITY.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 592 - FIRST READING. Adding to the Beaumont Municipal
Code a Chapter 2.14 Creating a Code Enforcement Officer.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont passes Ordinance 592 at its first
reading by title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
v
J_ AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
. Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -04 - Endorsing the Court Reform Initiative.
On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, the City
Councilman Lowry left the chamber at 7:58, returned at 8:01.
j On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
1715"
7 City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -05.
,` AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Vj,,n NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -06 - Authorizing the Signing and Execution of
The Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Beaumont and
General Employees Unit Represented by the Public Employees Asso-
ciation of Riverside County, Inc.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -06.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
10. Consideration of Claim Filed by William Jones Against the City of
Beaumont.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the City Manager
to Negotiate with Mr. Jones for a Figure not to exceed $125.00.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 2
Council of
the City
of Beaumont adopts Resolution-No. 1984 -04.
FAYES:
Councilmen
Lowry, May and Mitchell.
,i
NOES:
Councilman
Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
8.
RESOLUTION
NO. 1984 -05
- Amending Resolution No. 1983 -34 and all
Other Resolutions in
Conflict Herewith to Provide for Updated
Collection
Costs for
Residential Users and Commercial Bin Users.
Councilman Lowry left the chamber at 7:58, returned at 8:01.
j On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
1715"
7 City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -05.
,` AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Vj,,n NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -06 - Authorizing the Signing and Execution of
The Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Beaumont and
General Employees Unit Represented by the Public Employees Asso-
ciation of Riverside County, Inc.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -06.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
10. Consideration of Claim Filed by William Jones Against the City of
Beaumont.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the City Manager
to Negotiate with Mr. Jones for a Figure not to exceed $125.00.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 2
11. Exchange of Properties with Beaumont Unified School District.
(Continued from January 23, 1984).
J Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
!' accept the lease agreement as submitted.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to amend
1 Councilman Russo's motion by extending the lease agreement from
E 36 months to 60 months.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED.
12. Adoption of Form Conforming to Government Code, Section 911.3,
Regarding Late Claims.
Councilman Mitchell left the Chamber at 8:24, returning at 8:25 P.M.
\On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, the City
r 4 %Council of the City of Beaumont adopts the proposed "Notice of Late
Filing of Claim" as submitted by the City Attorney.
?jCj AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Mitchell.
13. Request from Field Cablevision for Adoption of Resolutions Pertain-
ing to Transfer of Franchise.
r
This agenda item was referred to the City Manager for a report and
return to the Council.
14. Request of Councilman Mitchell for Policy Discussion re Use of
Ordinance 572 (Establishing Minimum Property Maintenance Require-
ments to Control Nuisances).
Although there was discussion, no action was taken on this agenda
item.
15. Authorization to Enter Interagency Agreement with State of California
for Water Service Feasibility Study.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to table until Finance Director can
- furnish an updated report of the anticipated deficit at the end
V5 1 of this fiscal year, died for lack of a second.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont denies the request for authorization
to enter an interagency agreement with the State of California for
Water Service Feasibility Study.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 3
16.
17.
Aa
19.
Request to Proceed with Construction of Maintenance Yard Office.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the expenditure
of funds to proceed with construction of the Maintenance Yard
Office pending a determination of the law concerning Planning
Commission review of this project.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Request for Budget Adjustment to Purchase Public Works Equipment.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves budget adjustment
as requested.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of February 7, 1984
was ordered filed.
The City Council adjourned to Executive Session for Personnel
Discussion at 9:00 P.M.
The City Council reconvened to Regular Session at 9:35 P.M.
Let the record show no definitive action was taken in Executive
Session. The discussion was pertaining to personnel.
There being no further business to come before the Council, on Motion by
Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the meeting was adjourned
at 9:37 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
IRENE �7c# SWEENEY, CI Y CLERK
Page 4
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
FEBRUARY 27, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:32 P.M., Monday,
February 27, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Russo.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Lowry.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of February 14, 1984, were approved
as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning
Commission meeting of February 7, 1984, were accepted for filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
warrants as audited per Warrant List of February 27, 1984, in the
amount of $38,346.79; and Payroll of February 9, 1984, in the
amount of $25,387.95 were approved as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4.
r.
5.
Presentation by City Auditors, Ernst and Whinney, of City Audit for
Year Ended June 30, 1983.
Mr. Jerry Berg, representative of Ernst and Whinney, gave an over-
view of the audit report and then answered questions from the
Council. It was clarified that the City ended the year $9,546 in
the black.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the audit report for year
ended June 30, 1983, as submitted by Ernst and Whinney.
AYES:
Councilmen
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
a. Request from Noble Creek Associates Ltd for Support of Housing
Project at Xenia and 8th Street.
Mr. Bill Martin, representing Noble Creek Associates Ltd. ex-
plained to the Council that he needed Council action stating
their support of his housing project as a requirement for
his financing package with Farmers Home Administration.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont directs the City Manager
to issue a letter of support for rental housing within the
City of Beaumont; desirable rental housing would include
rentals offering l'ow market rents.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Paae 1
b. Mr. L. W. Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania Avenue, addressed the
Council asking a question concerning a memorandum written
to the City Council by the City Attorney on February 14,
1984, stating there appears to be an omission in line four.
The City Attorney said the word should be "utilized it ".
Mr. Gordon asked if he would confirm this by checking the
original.
6. Request for Citizen Input - Use of 10th Year Entitlement Funds,
Fiscal Year 1984 -85.
The City Manager briefly outlined what these funds could basically
be used for.
Jennifer Blakely, representing Riverside County Community Develop -
ment, addressed the Council giving specific information concerning
x CDBG Entitlement Funds and their use, and further advising the
j. City of Beaumont will receive $54,677.00 as their 10th Year
t Entitlement Funds.
City Engineer, Gary Phelps, addressed the Council presenting his
recommendation for use of the funds for a storm drain project on
the north side of Sixth Street between Highland Springs Road and
Xenia Avenue.
There were no citizens present offering input as to the use of 10th
Year Entitlement Funds.
Mayor Thompson stated that written comments or suggestions regarding
the use of these funds will continue to be accepted until March 12.
No action was taken on this agenda item at this time.
7. ; PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Negative Declaration for Proposed San
Timoteo Wastewater Treatment Plant.
.. r
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:25 P.M., with the hearing being
turned over to the Planning Director.
Alan Manee, Planning Director: Mr. Chairman, members of the Council,
I am the Planning Director for the City of Beaumont. I would like
to begin a non - discretionary CEQA hearing on 84 -ND -1, which is a
proposed Negative Declaration on the San Timoteo Sewage Treatment
facilities.
Briefly, so that the audience, members of staff and Council will
understand the method or procedure that I am to follow, I would
like to go over some understandings. Council will have the option
to step down and speak as private citizens in this hearing, or if
they wish they can wait until I turn the hearing back over to the
Council with my recommendation.
The only comments that we are receiving tonight are statements of
fact; your opinion on issues connected with the processing of this
document as to whether it is processed correctly; whether you feel
it is the correct type of document, that is, EIR, ND; or whether
there are statements of mis -fact or areas that need clarification.
I will ask for your cooperation that these are the only issues
brought up. Please do not repeat statements of concern that a pre-
vious speaker may have made. That is to say, get up and try to say
only new statements and acknowledge your feelings of the previous
speaker. If there is a concern about a flooding problem, simply
say, I acknowledge that flooding problem and wish to voice that
concern, and I have a new issue.
Also, please try to stay on the topic and make your statements
brief. All your comments in this type of a hearing are recorded
and made a part of the record, and it is mandatory that we respond
to each of those statements. They will be made a printed part of
the final environmental document, and that document will be given
to the decision maker, at which time a discretionary hearing will
be heard on whether to approve, modify or deny the project. Please
begin by stating your name, and where possible make reference co
the page and paragraph number in the document that you specifically
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
feel is inadequate, or in some way needs to be commented on. The
way this hearing will proceed is I will make some brief statements
of introduction. I would at this time like to introduce, from
J. F. Davidson Engineering, Vince Frasca and Jim Sims. They will
assist me greatly in attempting to answer your questions. I want
it made absolutely clear that it is not the responsibility of this
hearing tonight to make full, explicit explanation of every ques-
tion that you have. We will attempt to make short responses where
it is possible. But if it is something we tell you it will need
to be addressed in full in the document, please understand that.
Those people that have concerns will want to see the final environ-
mental document. At that time we will put a notice in that you
can come and see the final environmental document prior to be
issued to the Council.
At this time I would like to make a quick introduction by telling
you that the project description is a proposed wastewater treat-
ment plant. It is to be a secondary treatment facility with a
capacity of .5 to 1 million gallons per day, or MGD. Utilizing
the following structures, raw, wastewater, pumping station, pri-
mary treatment, secondary treatment, secondary clarifier, affluent
flow with chlorination, primary and secondary waste sludge and a
building for laboratory and office, etc. In terms of the location
let me briefly point it out on the map. In terms of reference,
San Timoteo Canyon Road, the proposed site across from Jack Rabbit
Trail, Highway 60, existing sewer plant. This is the proposed
future sewer line, which is not a part of the project. This is a
phase project. We are considering all phases, however, the pro-
ject will be built in phases and this area in yellow, again, Jack
Rabbit Trail, Highway 60, project site, in yellow highlight here,
is the first phase, which is .5 MGD, which could go to one without
further application for development. Each of these dotted line
areas are additions to the plan. All phases are being considered
in this environmental document.
With that I would like to read into the record those comments that
have been received. In some cases the speaker has asked to read
his own, or her own, comments into the record. In those cases I
will just acknowledge receipt of the document and call on the
speaker.
From the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District, the following statement:
Our office has reviewed the above - referenced document and
found that it recognizes the need to protect the plant
from off -site storm runoff. We have no further comments.
Questions regarding this matter may be directed to John
Kashuba.
I am acknowledging but not reading into the record a statement by
the Planning Commission of the City of Beaumont. Mr. Gene Thompson
will be speaking on behalf of the Commission.
Riverside County Planning Department:
This letter is in response to your request for comments
on the environmental assessment for the proposed sewage
treatment plant of the City of Beaumont. Since the time
of your request for comments on the preparation of the
environmental assessment, a significant development pro-
posal has been submitted to the County on a property
known as the Singleton Ranch. This project is comprised
of 690 acres and proposes 1,997 dwelling units, as well
as some commercial acreage. This project is also pro-
posing a sewage treatment plant to be located in San
Timoteo Canyon, only a short distance from the proposed
Beaumont treatment facility. In addition there is a
possibility of a new State prison locating in this same
area as well, which would also require substantial
sewage treatment facilities. It is clear that new sewage
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
treatment facilities will be needed in this area, however,
it is also very apparent that there is a need to coordin-
ate sewage treatment facilities to accommodate the City,
Singleton Ranch and possibly a State prison, as well as
future development in this area.
We feel that this environmental should consider the Single-
ton Ranch project as a part of the analysis as a first step
in recognizing the need to coordinate the provision of
sewage treatment facilities.
Our second comment would be that the growth inducing impact
of this and other treatment facilities would have a signi-
ficant impact on the San Timoteo Canyon and the Calimesa
area. While the EA, or environmental assessment document,
in Chapter 3, focuses mainly on the growth inducement that
would occur in the City, it would also impact the surround-
ing unincorporated areas. In light of the potential
significant growth inducing impacts of this project, and
the resulting impacts of further development on traffic,
circulation, open space, air quality and public services,
it is our recommendation that the proposed treatment plant
be assessed in an environmental impact report. This E.I.R.
should be done with a broad scope and in conjunction with
other parties in order to assess the overall future needs
of this area with the objective of coordinating these
facilities.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments, etc.
Close.
From the Office of Resource and Energy and Permit Assistance, State
of California the following comment has been received from Cal - Trans:
We have reviewed the above referenced document and request
consideration of the following.
The report indicates that access to the site would be from
Route 60 at Jack Rabbit Trail Road. Due to operational
problems on this portion of Route 60, access at this point
will be denied. It should be noted that the project propon-
ent has already been in contact with our permit office
regarding an encroachment permit for this access. The
permit application included plans with several access
alternatives. We have recommended to the project proponent
that one of the other alternatives be considered, which
proposes access at other locations, and not off of Route
60. This environmental assessment should be revised with
the other access alternatives discussed in detail.
And then it closes.
The next comments are from a Mr. Tom Coulson. They represent two
separate letters, photographs and an article from the paper. I will
accept all of these documents into the record. I will read the one
that has to do with the article in the paper. I will let Mr. Coulson
speak after Mr. Thompson, as far as entering their comments into the
record. This is the Inland Empire paper, East Valley Edition, Sunday
February 26, 1984. I am taking only portions out:
They speak about a USGS study of the area and their concern
for liquefaction potential during earthquakes. They go on
to say that the USGS speculates that runoff and recharge
from streams boost the ground water levels during periods
of wet weather, and that areas of high ground water include,
and I am not going to go through the whole list, the one
that they include ds San Timoteo Canyon where wells show an
average depth at top of water at 24.9 feet.
At this point, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to call the first
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
speaker, which will be Mr. Thompson from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Gene Thompson, Member of the Planning commission: We received
the Negative Declaration a couple of months ago, probably around
the first of January, and after reviewing it we have found what we
feel are deficiencies, and they were voiced at the Planning Commis-
sion last week, and voted on by the Planning Commission to have me
represent their concerns in regard to this Negative Declaration, of
which you have a copy in the packet submitted to you at the end of
the week. I would like to read this into the record, however, my
second concern has apparently been answered having to do with the
road.
After reading 1984 -ND -1, I have found what I believe to be
are certain deficiencies regarding the proposed San Timoteo
Wastewater Treatment Plant. The General plan refers to a
total buildout of 77,142. Given that the current daily
average usage is approximately 105 gallons per day per per-
son, the City would need to realize a plant buildout of
approximately 6 -8 MGD. This may be planned, however, I
have a few concerns.
My first major concern has to do with the size of the par-
cel. Figure 2, Page 1 -3, shows the proposed site and the
proposed buildings. (digesters, clarifiers and rotating
biological contractors.) The diagram depicts a plant
capacity of .5 MGD now, with a 2 MGD capacity by the year
2005 if the diagram is extrapolated. Referring back to
the General Plan this would leave the City about 6 MGD
short of capacity. I refer to the State right -of -way line
(which I marked in my Negative Declaration in blue) The
State right -of -way line that is on your page travels di-
rectly beneath the proposed digesters, I believe. And it
is an active - Alan has told me it is indeed an active
State right -of -way line. I believe this is an active
line. As we all understand right -of -ways, we all know
that building activity is not permitted within an existing
right -of -way. This would not allow the City to build the
proposed 6 -8 MGD plant. The alternatives appear to be
a) enter into negotiations with the State for the parcel
directly to the south of our current parcel; b) attempt to
acquire a minimum of five acres directly to the west of
the proposed project site; or c) return to the current
alternative labeled No. 3. This refers to the creation
of another treatment plant, which is something that we
really don't want to get into in the respect that we have
double energy requirements, double employee requirements,
the logistics would be what we originally planned on
getting away from with the creation of this plant. I
personally would like to see the proposed treatment plant
enjoy the same life span as the residential units it is
supposed to support. This facility must not suffer from
the same malady as the current facility, which is the
lack of room to expand.
The second major concern which was addressed by Cal- Trans,
is the proposed access road. To any rational person, this
road represents an unacceptable liability for this City
and its employees who have to cross the intersection in
order to return to the City proper. The first day I was
at the site I had to wait approximately ten minutes just
to get to the center divider and a couple more minutes
just to drop into the flow of traffic heading east. The
second day I simply turned west and drove to the overpass.
Now that the concrete center divider project is almost
complete, the first opportunity to turn around is the
Hemet -San Jacinto offramp /overpass five miles away. The
alternatives appear to be a) the logical extension of
Western Knolls Road to the proposed site. Dedicated
easements could be traded for guaranteed hook -ups. I
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
realize crossing the freeway would still be required,
however the sight distance would be greatly enhanced at
this road; b) this alternative would be dependent upon
the siting of the correctional facility on either the
Haskell or the Danner site. The City would be able to
open an easement road to San Timoteo Canyon Road from
the proposed site. This would be in line with the
Sewer Master Plan, which was presented last year, calling
for a trunk line down 14th Street and down into that area.
The third major concern is the existing riparian environ-
ment. During a major part of the year this environment
effectively shields the proposed site from the freeway.
If and when construction commences, the growth should
remain intact and allowed to flourish, which was mentioned
in your Negative Declaration. Maintaining the growth in
its natural state would obviously not cost the City any
money and put them three or four years ahead in its pro-
gram of obscuring the site which is one of the major
concerns in the Negative Declaration.
Gentlemen, thank you very much.
Alan Manee: Very briefly, I would like to, before calling the next
speaker, try to respond to a couple of the statements that were
made. I am especially concerned with the comments that possibly we
designed or proposed a site that doesn't have adequate room for the
expansion of the facility. Could either Vince or Jim speak to that.
Vince Frasca, J. F. Davidson & Co.: This which was brought out
has to do with capacity. I think there is some clarification. The
- all of the facilities that you see here are designed for a build -
out of 6 million gallons a day. The ones that you see yellowed out
are the first stage development. So we are talking about a 6 MGD
facility capability at this particular location. That could be
very easily expanded another 2 MGD within the same site. The rea-
son I say that is because of the type of facility we are recommending.
These units you see in yellow are, so- called, RBC units, or the
rotating biological contractors, which is a method of treatment that
accomplishes a lot in a very small area. That is one of the reasons
we selected the process. With regards to capacity, when we were
involved in the preparation of the Master Plan accommodation was
made to serve not only the City of Beaumont, but its area of
influence, which puts us back a step further than the prior state-
ment was made about - by the Planning Commission that we did not
look at this from a regional standpoint. We did do just that. The
plant has been located and sized so that it will serve a regional
purpose. I think that is enough to say about that. (There is a
question from the audience at this point regarding the phasing out
of the existing sewer plant). Mr. Frasca answers: It will be
phased out, that is the concept. This plant will be the sole
treatment plant. (There is another question from the audience
asking if the City would still need to locate a primary clarifier
before they get to the rotating biological contractors to remove
the grease and the grit). Mr. Frasca answers: Yes. It is pretty
hard to tell from this, but we have shown in here a primary screen.
Those take the place of primary clarifiers you now have in your
existing plant. It is a system that has been used for many years,
in Europe for many years, they are called wire wedge screens and
they serve the same purpose as a primary clarifier. So the next
stage of development we would include the primary treatment aspect
of it. (Question from audience asking if he feels very positive
that this would be able to meet the MGD flow and the buildout as
contained in the General Plan). Mr. Frasca answers: On this site
we could build secondary capacity, and if they had to they could
put a tertiary plant there also. If it ever got to that point.
You have to realize that we have space in here and also we may
have to - see these digesters right over here - there is a possibi-
lity. . .(Question from audience, what you are going to say would
cause a lot of cutting). Mr. Frasca continues: It can be done so
the facility is essentially in the ground. In other words you are
in the side hill. (Additional comment from the audience. The pro-
posed facility is abutted right up against the proposed draws, if
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
you will. And that way, if you would put your tertiary or your
addition to that plant, that would require a lot of . . .) Mr.
Frasca: You would put them down in this area over here. You see
where the . . . (From audience - if I read this thing correctly
you are going to put your plant, and with your flood disc you are
going to be pretty close to the end of your western boundary).
Mr. Frasca: Well, that is true, but that doesn't. . .(From
audience - . . . give you enough room to build your )•
Mr. Frasca: I think there are over 50 foot setbacks on the digesters
here, and, the thing - this is conceptual - it shows that you can do
this, and this is a rather broad use of a piece of ground. I have
been involved with treatment plants in excess of 10 million gallons
a day and less land. (From audience. Well, I believe, after
reading this, it doesn't really give you that impression that it
would be able to meet that capacity). Mr. Frasca: That was the
planning goal, but the site selected so you could service a
regional need.
Alan Manee: Thanks very much Vince. I would like to begin with
the next individual, who we have already recognized their documents
as part of the record. Tom Coulson. And then after that I will
call for any other additional comments into the record. Would you
like to come up and speak Mr. Coulson.
Mr. Tom Coulson, Beaumont: It looks like a change on the access
road that probably makes some difference in the comments I have to
make, but regardless of where the road goes in, or even if there
is a road, I think the flood question is a problem. I will read my
letter.
Proposed culvert for passage of water from San Timoteo Creek
under gravel entrance road, Figures 2 and 3, is totally
inadequate. This culvert will have to carry not only the
daily tail water discharge from the present plant, but from
time to time will carry rainwater runoff from an area that
comprises - and here I used 1,000 to 2,000 acres. After
talking to soil conversation today, that figure is more in
somewhere between 10 and 13,000 acres. San Timoteo Creek
drains an area from the top of the pass, approximately
Beaumont Avenue, to the projected site, and on both sides
of the creek for one - quarter to one -half mile or more. This
area is approximately, and I said in the letter, three to
four sections of land, and again, after talking with soil
conversation, they say something on the order of 12 to 15
sections, much of which is steep slopes of very rapid run-
off. In addition, the creek carries a runoff from the
Highway 60 drainage system starting at approximately Oak
Knolls Road running down to the creek. The soil conversation
service has advised me that the runoff requirement for Highway
60 runoff alone would require a 72" culvert. I will skip a
little thing on here. The main channel of San Timoteo Creek
at a point of approximately 2,000 feet upstream of the pro-
posed site has been observed at least twice in the last three
years running well over the banks of the main stream bed.
There are a dozen or so photographs here that can tell the
story a lot better than any words can. At the point of
observation there is a dirt grade across the stream bed and
the main channel at this point is approximately 40 feet wide
and 5 to 6 feet deep. The bridge has four culvert pipes,
each 42" in diameter, or a total of 5,540 square inches
culvert cross - section. Compare this with 1,018 square inches
recommended for the entrance road. In spite of this, on at
least two occasions storm waters have overwhelmed the culvert
and spread over the banks for a total width of approximately
150 feet, and a depth in the main channel of 5 to 6 feet,
carrying away culverts and bridge. The metal culverts,
weighing many hundreds of pounds were carried downstream
down as much as 400 feet and buried in sand and silt. Over
the last six years the bridge has been washed out at least
Page 7
Heaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
eight times. Again, please note, that this bridge is up-
stream of the point where the Highway 60 runoff joins the
San Timoteo creek flow. In 1979 or 80 we had a flood where
San Timoteo Creek had almost washed out the Highway 60
bridge. At that time the water ran the full width and
height of the bridge opening, which is 32 feet by 10 feet.
I had had it as 21 feet, that was an estimate. We actually
taped it today, it is 32 feet by 10 feet, or 320 square
feet of opening, about fifty times what they are suggesting
for this one culvert. An undermined bridge requires
several weeks of repair, and it would seem to me that if
the entrance road was constructed to plan you could expect
to rebuild the road at least three to four times per year.
Although the profile in Figure 3 does not show a raised
roadbed, any type of road construction would necessarily
result in some increase of elevation at the top of the road-
bed and thus would become a several hundred foot dam, which
would impound storm water for some period before blow out.
The resulting surge would obviously do damage to anything
on the downstream side, such as dikes, as they are suggesting
for use in the report here, ponds - the same thing - any
type of equipment. Depending on the height of the roadbed
and thus the volume of water impounded, the surge could
conceivably do damage as far down as San Timoteo Canyon,
and in particular to improvements in the proposed cycle park.
Practical experience has shown the engineering estimates of
percolation to be incorrect. I do not know what difference
it makes other than that the co- mingling of water from the
two sources, but the tail water from the new site will ex-
tend much beyond the concourse of San Timoteo Creek and
Noble Creek, not the 2,000 feet below the site as stated.
The tail water of the present Beaumont site runs through
my property approximately 10,000 feet from the old plant on
• practically continuous basis. That is twenty -four hours
• day. Granted there is some difference in topography from
Beaumont to Highway 60 as opposed from Highway 60 downstream.
There is not that much difference. The soils are the same,
only the width of the canyon varies, and since the water
course is well channeled the width of the canyon makes little
difference. Simple extrapolation, as also stated in the
associated soils engineering report, put the tail water flow
at somewhere around 10,000 feet downstream. Also, use of
dikes in or near the streambed to prevent surface flow
across the channel surface to the watercourse would be ex-
tremely questionable because of the heavy storm runoff.
It would appear to me that the liquefaction studies should
be made before any further consideration of this area for
a sewage disposal site. According to the report, observations
of water flow in the channel were confined to two days, Octo-
ber 12 and 13, 1983. I have observed it there on a daily
basis for approximately six years, and can say that water
flows through the area on a daily basis year round. The
stream bed is composed of materials which when wet are
extremely susceptible to liquefaction under load. The next
part of it is not nearly as important. The only thing that
kind of got me. I am not sure what noise sensitive receptors
are. I presume that is human ears. The report says, quote,
"no noise sensitive receptors exist in the immediate vicinity
of the proposed facility." Well I know of forty -four of
them down there. Twenty -two people and eight habitations in
the immediate vicinity. Also, it has to do with the - having
to do with the odor. Once in a while you can actually, in
our area now, you can smell the present plant, which is
approximately two miles away. I don't know whether this one
is one is going to be any better, and it may just be that
our odor sensitive receptors are too good. I don't know.
Page 8
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
I have had, by the way, since this time, I have had a chance
to get ahold of Mr. Ron Moore, District Conservationist, U.S.
Soil Conservation Service, and asked him - he has given me
some answers about what he feels about this document. No. 1
he says, on a tentative basis, prior to further hydrological
studies, his recommendation on the size of the culvert under
the access road of the sewage treatment plant, Figures 2 and
3, would be, quote, "no smaller than the present San Timoteo
Creek bridge under Highway 60 "., which is 10 feet by 32 feet
instead of 36 inches. No. 2, he stated that the proposed
site was probably in a flood plain, and I have been told
later that it is definitely in a flood plain, and it is cer-
tainly in a, quote " flood prone area ", per U. S. Geological
Survey of 1976. And he says the technical definition of a
flood prone area is one which has a one in a hundred chance
of being inundated once every year. Three, he stated he
would like to be at the meeting - tonight - and had he been
aware of it would have been here. He, unfortunately had a
prior commitment for an evening meeting, but suggested that
I request an extension of the public comment period on this
assessment so that his recommendations could be heard. I
had a number about the Sun article on liquefaction, which
has already been mentioned. The only thing I want to add
to that is that they say that anything under fifty feet to
the top level of the ground water, if put together with a
sandy soil, will result in liquefaction problems. They
state that one well showed an average depth in the San
Timoteo Canyon of 24.9 feet. I can say from seven years
now - six years of experience with three wells on our pro-
perty that producing now, and another probably six that we
have started and not finished, that the average water table
on our property is 13 feet. There are some that are con-
siderably less than that. In fact, in the past year my
brother tells me his wells are around eight or nine feet.
As for the liquefaction potential, I would just like to tell
you what my well drillers -I have a rather large well, 200
foot plus well, 12 inch, and during the time he kept a log
of course when he was drilling. The driller's log shows
"brown, sandy silt, or silty clay, with some sharp gravel"
down to 122 feet. That is generally the type of soil. With
an area from 28 feet, 35 feet, which is "very soft, almost
fluid ". The geology at these wells is almost certainly
identical to that of the proposed site, and it - this is not
in my letter, but it really snows me how it is going to be
possible to either build substantial buildings, with a
foundation on very soft, almost fluid material. Or other
material, at 122 feet, we finally get into what might be
called bed material, solid clay. It would appear to me that
it would be only sensible that a detailed liquefaction study
be undertaken before any further consideration of this site.
The results of such a study could tell if the site is entirely
unsuitable , or the roads and buildings which would reduce
or eliminate the flood liquefaction means it would be cost
prohibitive.
Alan Manee: Thank you very much, Mr. Coulson, for a very
excellent bit of information you have brought to us. The
- I am going to ask that both of the engineers assist me in
answering. I want to answer a few things. I want us to,
basically, talk a little bit in response to the flooding issue
that Mr. Coulson brought up. A little bit of discussion about
downstream tail waters and the 2,000 versus the 10,000. Lique-
faction and what I would like to do, Vince, is just mention
a few comments about liquefaction, about noise and about odor,
and then, let you, if you wish, respond to the other two items
which I won't comment on, downstream tail waters and flooding
in the new main. Also go over the same issues that I commented
on. And then, after that point, we will call for additional
comments.
Page 9
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
On the liquefaction issue, I want the public,staff and Council to
know that we were concerned also because the geologist used by J. F.
Davidson identified this as a liquefaction prone area. One of the
mitigation measures on roman numeral III -IV, the number one miti-
gation measure is that a liquefaction study will be prepared prior
to final site design due to the presence of high ground water. Such
a study will indicate design parameter of necessary structures.
Also - which helped me clarify my concerns - was a fact that it is
the nature of these structures, and their in -the- ground development,
and how they are constructed, which makes them unique. Unique from
the standpoint of stability that they can more cope with the lique-
faction problem than other structures, and that the hazards that
might be relative for a housing project are not subject for such a
facility, and that in no way does the development of such a series
of structures in an area such as this indicate that there would be
premature degradation or . . .
(End of tape, discussion continues as follows)
.I think we will expand on that in terms of the fact that, I
guess if you can smell the one that is further away, there may
be occasion - there may be that opportunity for this project.
Other than that I will turn it over to the engineers.
Vince Frasca: First of all, take flooding. When the Regional Board
issued waste discharge requirements, and in the requirement it is
stated the facility shall be designed in such a way to protect from
that one in a hundred situation that you mentioned. It is actually
a requirement of design to protect it from that flood. We use a
combination of things to determine that. One is information such
as Mr. Coulson provided. The other is flood routing that has been
done by the Federal Flood Insurance Program. They actually map
the potential flood areas. And then we do our own hydrology to
make sure that the facility to be constructed will be protected on
the hundred year event. They don't take our word for that because
at the time the design is completed, the plans are sent to the
Regional Board. They, in turn, send them to the flood control
district. They, in turn, review our information to ascertain that,
in fact, that protection has been afforded. Maps are very deceiving.
Distances - things look very close. You talk about channel width
of 100 and 200 feet, that is a very - relatively narrow band to the
site here. We feel there is no problem in providing protection for
the site. It will have to be taken into account. That is one of
the reasons we do a soil survey as we have done at this point in time.
The soils engineer says it is a highly erodible soil. When you have
that situation you make the type of design that eliminates or
alleviates that situation. When we showed the crossing from Highway
60 to the Treatment Plant, the idea there was to have a dip section.
The pipe that we showed across were conceptual because they had not
gone through the entire hydrology. However, they are intended to
carry the normal flows through the channel. In that same dip section
you have a concreted area that acts somewhat as a spillway does in
a dam. And, when properly designed, they would stand flood after
flood, and there are many evidences of this type of construction
throughout California, throughout Texas, throughout the nation.
So, the points are very well taken. We are bound by law to make
provisions to avoid those disasters from happening. Liquefaction
has become a buzz word in San Bernardino County since we had the
high water table, and the impression everybody gets is that as soon
as we have the ground shake around here we are all going to fall,
and find ourselves fifty feet underground. Well that really isn't
going to happen. A perfect example of this - I don't know of any
case, and if anybody knows of any I would like them to bring it to
me, of a wastewater facility that suffered because of liquefaction,
even in techtonic or seismic areas that are more severe than we
have here. When we say, because of the type of structure, most
seismic criteria are set for buildings, and they are set to pre-
serve life and limb so that objects do not fall on people, buildings
don't collapse. Most of the buildings and structures in the treat-
ment plant are in the ground, and normally in constructing them you
Page 10
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
excavate and you over - excavate and you recompact material. Which
is exactly what they do in buildings that are protected against
liquefaction. So, we recognize the problem. We see no problem
because we encounter it all the time in the design of treatment
plants. Just think about it. A treatment plant is normally put
at the low end of the community, and most communities - the low
end is where a river or a natural drainage course is. So most
treatment plants are built where liquefaction occurs. San
Bernardino, Rialto, City of Riverside, Terminal Island, Ventura,
all of those plants are all in very high potential liquefaction
areas. So, your point is well taken. Liquefaction will occur,
but it can be accommodated in the design. So, we have no fear with
it. We have dealt with it for centuries. Actually, there are some
structures today that are in areas considered high liquefaction
potential areas that really have been there without any problems.
Odor. Odors, I don't know the exact source of the odors that you
are witnessing. There are two treatment facilities upstream. One
is the treatment plant itself for the City of Beaumont and the
other is the chicken farm. So I don't know what you are smelling,
but what we are planning to do in this treatment plant is not use
the same process. One of the things that you have at the existing
treatment plant are trickling filters. These are facilities where
wastewater is sprayed over rock, and it is open up to the air. Every
time you splash water in the atmosphere, there is a potential for
odors to be created. This facility - rotating biological contractors
the treatment is actually done in an enclosed igloo type structure
where it is actually covered, so the possibility of odor is really
minimized tremendously. I could cite examples of treatment plants
of this type - or the same type of process - it is called extended
air or an aerobic process, where they are right up next to existing
developments and there have been no complaints of odor. So, if
properly designed, this type of plant does not stink.
So far as noise is concerned, we are getting into environmentalist
and EIR terminology when they talk about ear receptors. When you
talk about noise levels often times you are talking about back-
ground noise, and when you talk about immediate and far, it gets
to be a very nebulous word. When I talk about immediate surroundings
their talking about several hundred feet, not one -half mile. The
background noise that is created by the Highway itself, would far
exceed any noise that would be created by the treatment plant. I
can say that without batting an eye because you just listen to an
eighteen wheeler coming up the road and you will never hear any-
thing like that in a treatment plant.
Insofar as the remarks about the wells, or the ground water, I think
we recognize that. We see it. We know how to deal with it. We
don't think there is an engineering problem there. As far as the
drainage, as I mentioned earlier, here again we don't see a problem,
because we are required to design a facility that is protected from
a hundred year flood.
Question from audience (unidentified speaker). Downstream, the
2,000 versus the 10,000. Do you want to make a comment.
Mr. Frasca: Well I might say this. One of the reasons a study
was prepared, the geological and the study that we had was by
request of the Regional Quality Control Board. When we - see an
EIR was done on the Master Plan, and this treatment plant was shown
on that when the EIR was approved in January of 1983. That is
better than a year ago. And one of the comments by the Regional
Quality Control Board was that before you sited a treatment plant
there that you had to address the water quality issue. And, also,
what the nature of the discharge would be from this facility. So
the report was expressly prepared for that purpose. And they have
received the information. They are now in the process of preparing
the discharge requirements and they will take the geological study
into account in establishing those discharge requirements. They
Page 11
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
are generally very rigid in their approach to this, and the discharge
requirements are offered for public comment, and the public has an
opportunity to comment that they are brought up to the Regional
Quality Control Board. And the best I know at this time the hearing
on that will be some time - I think the first meeting in May, at
which time the discharge requirements themselves of the treatment
plant will be addressed.
Mr. Tom Coulson: I really would just like to say that I am very
glad that you are not afraid. You are not afraid of the engineering.
Neither am I afraid of the engineering. Talking down is kind of
silly. You can engineer anything. You know that and I know that,
the only difference is money. All I am saying is is that place
down there, if you looked and tried to find a place that would
cost the most money to put in, the kind of thing that you are talking
about, you would have to go quite a ways to find a better one.
I believe Mr. Frasca is replying to the above comment, but is speaking
away from the mike and is unintelligible
Mr. Frasca: The point I was trying to make Mr. Coulson was that in
designing a treatment plant, the footing and everything
are small as compared to a high building. And in normally designing
just by virtue of what the facility is you can accommodate what
could happen in a liquefaction state, so, therefore, even if lique-
faction potential were not. . .
Mr. Coulson: Okay, let's talk about the water flow, the flooding.
Don't talk down so far as to tell me that you have established a
drawing of what you want. You say you want a 32" culvert, and now
you are saying, oh, well, actually we are going to put in five or
six concrete dams that we can drive over. It is either one way
or the other.
Mr. Frasca: The dip section was designed into to it. We actually
did. . .
Mr. Coulson: The dip section . . .
Mr. Frasca: Yes, the dip section.
Mr. Coulson: That shows so far as I can see approximately a 40 inch
dip that contains a 32 inch culvert, so it is probably a 50 inch
dip at the top. And that is supposed to carry - it will carry - the
tail water from the present plant. It will not carry a drop more
of rain water in addition to it. You have water coming down there,
like I said, a couple of years ago, now we are not really talking
about once every hundred years, because I have seen it at least
twice where this 320 square foot culvert down there was filled.
Totally. If that is once in a hundred years, I would hate to see
that hundred year job because that is going to be a real booger.
Alan Manee: What we will do Tom, if it is okay with you Vince, is
possibly when we address that issue in the final environmental
document, is possibly give a cross - section or design criteria, at
least nominal. I don't believe, Mr.. Coulson, that our problem is
necessarily that severe because you weren't privy to some of the
design criteria. So we will try to make that available to you.
And, remember, some of the final design criteria can't be completed
if will refer back to roman numeral III, Page IV, we have to com-
lete a liquefaction study prior to final design. What I would like
to do at this time is call, one at a time, anyone from the public
that would wish to either simply to say they agree, or have similar
concerns, or any new issues they have found with the document.
Donald B. Houston: I grew up on this site down there. I know that
that site is subject to being flooded, and I am not a hundred years
old either. There is one other item that I haven't heard addressed
this evening is the fact that the SP high pressure refipetroleum ( ?)
Page 12
Beaumont City Council
bruary 27, 1984
pipeline goes across that site. You are aware of that? Okay. If
you want to look at that land down there some time you will find
that most of that site has been flooded, and in my lifetime too.
Alan Manee: Are there any other additional comments.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Manee, may I speak as a citizen.
Alan Manee: Yes Sir. Please step down so there is no confusion
about how you are speaking. If there is anyone else, please move
up so that we can get along with the proceedings, because after
this gentlemen speaks, if you would like to speak, please come
up right away.
Irish Mitchell, 402 E. 6th Street: I have heard both sides of this
for some time. I was on record as being opposed to this site as
far back as 1982 when I was removed from one of the meetings citing
my opposition. The entire point that I was getting was that I
believe we were being a bit premature without going into a complete
study of the State water project, San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency,
of whom Mr. Houston is the . . . he has charge of the office, I
don't know exactly what his title is. The fees have been discussed
before, they have money available, and with a broad drainage basin
we are going to be faced, before the year 2,000, I believe that all
of those groups should get together and decide if we should or
should not have a district sewer plant that could accommodate not
only ourselves, but Cherry Avenue, the Singleton Ranch, Calimesa,
etc. There are three or four excellent sites downstream. The
site of your plant would be fine for either one of those, but we
should pick a location that would have a minimum necessity of
pumping. With this location most of the drainage that we will have
from the areas that will be developed will have to have lines that
are going underneath the railroad track or over the top of the
railroad track, excepting for the drainage that we are pulling off
of our own plant down there on that site. Everything else will
come across the railroad. I don't know how you are going to avoid
it. And when you go across the railroad you are lower than the
plant and you will have to pump everything into the plant. I am
not trying to speak as an engineer, I am only saying that why move
into something premature that is not of such an expedient nature
that the world would collapse. We have, in addition thereto, a
potential possibility of a prison site. They will have their ideas,
they will have discharge, and I am sure that some other location
would better serve the benefits of all the people of all the areas
rather than pinpoint one because we were donated fifteen acres at
$5,000 an acre that was probably worth a thousand bucks a piece.
Alan Manee: If there is anyone else, please step forward. If there
is no other testimony, I would like to summarize briefly that text
and grammer changes identified in this proposed Negative Declaration
now, and as we prepare the final will be made. All oral, written
and public hearing testimony shall be entered and responded to. The
minutes of the City Council and the Planning Commission shall be
included in the final document. My recommendation to the Council
which they can amend or reject, would be that with the material I
have mentioned included and responded to in the final document,
that we close the public hearing, and that we close the written
comment portion of this hearing to March 9, 1984. The reason for
that is is I have an oral request, telephone request, by Mr. Ron
Moore of the U. S. Soils Service, Division of U. S. Forestry, for
a copy of the document and an opportunity to respond. We have made
arrangements to deliver to Mr. Moore a copy tomorrow, and it would
give Mr. Moore approximately two weeks to respond. When we do open
a written record, that means that anyone that wishes to make addi-
tional comments could make them and we would be obligated to respond,
so the recommendation for this hearing, and for this document, is
to find it a complete and adequate Negative Declaration with text
and grammer changes, all comments responded to, and all minutes
included, until a date of March 9, 1984, at which time no more
written comments can be added to the record, and final preparation
of the ND will be completed and forwarded to the decision makers
for their action.
Page 13
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
Councilman Lowry: Mr. Manee, do I understand that the Council will
not have any input unless we come out there as citizens.
Alan Manee: No sir. What I have done is attempt to now turn over
the recommendation to you. Your options are to solicit additional
testimony, make statements yourself into the record, amend my
recommendation, or reject it based on the testimony and the re-
commendations that you have received.
Mayor Thompson: Alan, would you go through that again. Your
recommendations are 1) . . .
Alan Manee: My recommendations are to, as of this evening, close
the public hearing record and in preparation of the final EIR, 1)
make any text or grammer changes to the final EIR; 2) add all oral
and written comments into the record and respond to them; and 3)
add the minutes of the City Council (this meeting) and the Planning
Commission to the final Negative Declaration, and on March 9, 1984
close the written record and finalize those comments and respond to
them as well.
One brief note, Mr. Chairman, I would like to let the public know
that due to an error in interpretation or communication with staff,
that persons wishing to purchase their own copy of this document
could do so - the draft copy - for $22.50.
City Manager: On that score, Mr. Mayor, it was indicated to the
citizens last week that anybody that did request a copy would have
it made available to them for that cost; whereas, the printed
documents that were received cost the City $25.00, so it was
indicated to the office staff that anybody who came in after, and
I believe it was last Thursday, would be able to receive a copy for
$22.50.
Mayor Thompson: The Public Hearing will be closed at 9:25 P.M. As
previously stated the period for submission of written testimony
will be closed on March 9, 1984.
Councilman Lowry: No, absolutely not, because I think we need more
input into this thing, and we are not going to be able to have it
between now and March 9.
Mayor Thompson: You may reject the recommendation of the Planning
Director. What would you like to do with it.
Councilman Lowry: Well, to begin with, we just got these things the
middle of last week, whereas the Planning Commission had them since
January, early in January, and I have many questions. I would like
to set up an appointment with the engineers to go over these things
with the Council Members. We should have preliminary conference
with them before this meeting so far as I am concerned. I have
many questions, and it is getting late and we have an agenda here,
and I don't want to get into them tonight. So I would like to
request that we . . .
Mayor Thompson: Well then perhaps we can adjourn the Public Hearing.
Councilman Lowry: If that is part of the Public Hearing, the Council
input, I was going to just say we sit down in the conference room
with the engineers and let them . . . show them our concerns and let
them answer them, because in the final analysis we are the ones who
have to be responsible whether this goes or doesn't go, and for the
future of the entire program, and I am not sure enough in my mind
that all the possibilities have been researched.
Councilman Mitchell:
Mayor Thompson: Just
a problem with having
far as a meeting like
City Attorney: If thi
meet one on one, no.
Mr. Mayor.
a minute Mr. Mitchell. George, would there be
the Council sit down with the Engineers so
that. Would that violate the Brown Act.
meeting is open to the public, no. Oh, to
I misunderstood the question.
Page 14
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1994
Councilman Lowry:
I mean
to meet with the
Council as a whole and
we bring out the
points. .
.
City Attorney: To meet with
the Council as
a whole,
my understanding
would be that it
would be
necessary that it
be open
to the public.
Councilman Lowry:
We can't
receive public
input while
we are having
our discussion.
City Attorney: Only
when
there is a public
hearing.
You are having
a public hearing
tonight.
It would be necessary
. .
.
Councilman Lowry:
Just like
a study session. That
is what I am
asking for.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Mayor, if it would not be out of order, I
would like to serve on a committee with Mr. Lowry to be able to go
with the engineers and report back to the City Council of what we
can determine.
Councilman Lowry: Well I think that is a little premature, I would
rather as a group talk together and then maybe have a committee to
develop things further. I would like to get some answers.
Councilman Mitchell: This is why I would like to have a committee
and then bring back the basic things of understanding and mis-
understanding to the general Council, or to continue a public
hearing after we have gotten into the specific data. In other words
I am quite sure the engineers don't want to sit down with a complete
Council in open meetings over and over again. I think if we just
had a committee we could get together maybe in three and four hours
maybe settle a number of our differences. Or at least find out a
number of answers to the questions that have arisen tonight. You
are a learned engineer, and I am much of a novice but I have a good
listening ear.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, what do you want to do with this, close the
public hearing or continue it.
Councilman Lowry: I thought you already. . . does it have to be
adjourned? We closed the public hearing so far as the public is
concerned. Our next action is for the Council to act, and on this
phase of the Council acting is where I would like some time to
spend with the engineers.
Mayor Thompson: What is the time frame for deciding on this - the
testimony of the public hearing.
Alan Manee: I don't think we have a time frame problem per se.
Certainly we could take more of the month of March if it was in the
best interests of the City. I just wanted to reiterate that one
method was to adjourn this meeting, and would also maybe provide
enough time for a written outline of your questions, because it is
very important, at least to me, to advise you that we are only
talking right now about questions of fact that relate to the signi-
ficant or insignificant impacts and the appropriateness of the
document. That we shouldn't go into areas of being for or against
the project, per se. We want to just get an adequate environmental
document because once we do that then we are going to come back to
you again for the discretionary act.
Mayor Thompson: Do you want to adjourn this public hearing or do
you want to . . .
Councilman Lowry: I heard you say you closed it at 9:25 P.M. What
I want to do is adjourn the portion in which the Council takes part
until we have more input from the engineers; if it has to be in a
study session open to the public, fine. I think then if we decide
at that time that we have to go out in the field and make a further
study with the engineers as a committee we could then do so. Maybe
we can get all the answers in just a few hours of a study session,
two or three hours at the most.
Page 15
a xy
t t,.
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adjourns further consideration
of this Agenda item until Monday, March 5, 1984, at 6:30 P.M.,
with written comments to be accepted until March 9, 1984.
AYES:
Councilmen
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
8. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00
dential /Mobile Home to
Plan). Location: 6th
Wischan.
Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
P.M. - Change of Zone 83 -RZ -3. (From Resi-
General Commercial to Conform with General
and American Avenue. Applicant: Cleve
The Public Hearing was opened at 9:36 P.M.
Alan Manee, Planning Director: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council,
this project was reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved
with two minor modifications of the conditions. They had to do with,
on Page 3, 13.32, that on -site sewage disposal, until such time as
sewer line is in within 125 feet of parcel, at which time the appli-
cant would be required to hook up to the sewer. But not immediately
as I had originally proposed in the staff report. Also that land-
scaping, 13.31, the developer shall install low landscaping and
that the landscaping be within the right -of -way, the City right -of-
way. The added comment is City right -of -way. Other than that the
Commission and staff report are recommending approval of this rezone
and site plan for a used car lot on Sixth Street in the location
described.
Mayor Thompson: I have a question that doesn't affect it right now,
but on your map that you have supplied us, and this big one here
with more detail. There is a flood control thing out there. Would
that in any way interfer with the curb line or anything like this
that is coming up.
Alan Manee: The development of this project would not, in our
opinion adversely affect this channel.
Mayor Thompson: What would be the alignment along Sixth Street of
curb and gutter in relation to that flood control.
Alan Manee: I would like Mr. Phelps to respond to that. He has
been working with the applicant who has already come in with some
design plans.
City Engineer: The applicant would not be affected by the area
where the flood control channel crosses over the street, or under
the street in this case.
Mayor Thompson: Let me stop you there for just a minute. I am not
thinking so much of the applicant per se. I was asked the question
and I don't know the answer exactly. I am not sure of the answer.
So I am asking now for future reference. Let me ask the question
this way. The intake area to that channel that goes under the
highway on the north side - right down in the lower right hand
corner - that intake mechanism there for that flood control
channel, when the curb alignment on down, up and down Sixth Street,
is finally done, will that headwall project into the normal parking
area of the roadway in the future as it develops for a full width
use of Sixth Street. I don't say it will affect Mr. Wischan at
this time. But future alignment of curb on down Sixth Street, would
that . . .
City Engineer: I can't quote the exact distance of that headwall
from the right -of -way line to tell you that is going to mesh with
a twelve foot parkway that is typical section of Sixth Street uses.
It will have to be accommodated probably by the City at some point
in the future because the Flood Control District is currently
Page 16
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
working on a design for improvements in that area. The problem
being that they don't do improvements on City right -of -way. So
the City will be, probably, in charge of fixing that problem if
it is to be fixed. If there is a problem with the headwall and
I would anticipate there would probably have to be some adjustment
made. To accommodate a sidewalk.
Mayor Thompson: When I was asked the question it had relevance
down in the future and the Flood Control District should be noti-
fied of the potential intrusion into the City parkway or right -of-
way or street in the future as that right -of -way is completely
utilized. They should be notified of the potential there. If it
happens. That is why I am asking that question. I am not sure
you are following me.
City Engineer: I am not sure of the last question.
Mayor Thompson: If this headwall
into the traffic right -of -way whe
the whole width of the street, if
area will it not have to be moved
doing it. You said City. Okay.
anything to do with that?
and appurtenant structures moves
n Sixth Street is fully utilized,
this protrudes into the traffic
back, and if so who would be
Does not the Flood Control have
City Engineer: Yes sir. They would be reviewing. . .
Mayor Thompson: They would be notified.
City Engineer: We would be in full coordination. When they get to
the point where they have got the design to a point where we can
review it, then we will be reviewing it. I have been in contact
within the last three or four weeks with the design people, and
they are currently on hold. They do not currently plan any
construction until next fall, and when it is at a point when they
feel that we should get involved with it, they will be getting in
contact with us. I urged them to do so at the first possible time
they could do that and be able to show us something significant.
They are going to have to review the drain under the street to
reveal if it has sufficient capacity for the improvements that
they are projecting, and they have not done that specific study
yet.
Councilman Mitchell: I brought the point in the study session
relative to the septic tank on this particular property. I have
yet to get my mind clear. The proposed major apartment development
on the five acres at Fight and Xenia are going to have to have a
sewer line coming down Xenia to cross in. Is that going to be
served by the lift station. Can anyone answer me that question.
Councilman Lowry: I would say yes from what I know of it.
Councilman Mitchell: Now if that is going to be served by the lift
station would it not be feasible to extend a line on the north side
of Sixth Street up to and including American Avenue to carry on
down into the same interceptor so we are not putting more septic
tanks into that particular area of soil.
City Manager: That developer will be paying the cost of extending
that line from his property down to Xenia, yes.
Councilman Lowry: Down to Sixth and Xenia. He will run it down
Xenia Avenue and put that line in.
Councilman Mitchell: I understand that but
ble by using some of the construction money
fund to .possibly utilize that $380,000 lift
people an opportunity to have sewage on the
Street. That was the purpose of getting thi
place.
would it not seem feasi-
we have in the sewer
station and give those
north side of Sixth
E? grants in the first
Councilman Lowry: I believe the City Manager can answer whether
we have the funds available for that with the other things that
are in the works.
Page 17
Councilman Mitchell: There is $800 and some
before we build a sewer plant. And then you
This gentlemen would be a hook -up instead of
amount on a septic tank. And I am sure that
to get off their septic tanks. Because some
being flooded out there right now.
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
odd thousand in there
will have hook -ups.
spending the same
others would join in
septic tanks are
City Engineer: The City's sewer funds are designed primarily to
build truck sewers and plant capacity, and they are not for the
purpose primarily of collection sewers, which this would be. This
development certainly does not have the financial capability to
put the front money to build a sewer a quarter mile or so upstream,
and at such time as a sewer does go - when we do come to a place
where development is such that we can arrange. . .
(End of tape, discussion continues as follows)
. . . use that to accumulate money that could be used for this pur-
pose. Right now we would have to start out with zero, but we
could develop something like that.
Councilman Mitchell: The juggling act has been going on for years
I don't believe that fifteen thousand will make much difference if
we use it for sewer purposes.
Mayor Thompson: Let us go back to this item here. It is a public
hearing on the recommendations of the Planning Commission that this
project be approved. Is there anything on the conditions of
approval that you would like to talk about.
Alan Manee: Pardon me for interrupting. Mr. Chairman, Members of
the Council, I want to - Mr. Davis has pointed out something that
is important in terms of clarity - you are being asked this evening
at this public hearing - noticed public hearing - to approve,
modify or deny the rezone. The technicality is this. The site
plan, since it was not appealed, with its conditions is approved.
It would die if you did not approve the rezone, but technically,
we really can't speak to the conditions now. There was no appeal,
It has been more than ten consecutive days. So what would happen
is, is if you denied, or made a modification that was great enough
so that they couldn't build with their approved site plan, the
whole project would die. The site plan itself is approved.
Mayor Thompson: All we are talking about is zoning.
Alan Manee: Yes. I am sorry for the misunderstanding.
Mayor Thompson: The proposed use is compatible.
Alan Manee: The proposed use is compatible if you take the action
that was recommending a commercial general zone be applied to that
project.
Councilman Lowry: Has the public hearing been closed on this.
Alan Manee: No. Not on the rezone.
Councilman Lowry: You have to close that before you can make a
motion to rezone it. I would like to make a motion to close the
public hearing.
City Manager: May I suggest Mr. Mayor you call anyone to be heard
from the audience.
Mayor Thompson: Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to
speak on this rezoning. Is there anyone in the audience that
wishes to speak, have input in the consideration of this rezoning
item.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
public hearing was closed at 9:53 P.M.
Page 18
1Ab.
M
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves the Change of Zone
as requested.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 591 - An Urgency Ordinance to Provide Pre - Zoning to
Property Requesting Annexation to the City of Beaumont. (Annexa-
tion No. 32). (Continued from February 14, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to consider
Ordinance No. 591 as an urgency ordinance by reading of the title
only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to pass
Ordinance No. 591 as an-urgency ordinance.
The Ordinance was read in its entirety by Councilman Mitchell.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
state that all of the Salinger property be designated as agricul-
tural instead of open space.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF' 415 MAJORITY.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to pass
• Ordinance No. 591 at its first reading by title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
state that all the Salinger and Frank property be designated as
agriculture rather than open space.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
state all of the Lothar property to read PUD rather than open
space.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 19
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
10. ORDINANCE NO. 592 - SECOND READING - Creating a Code Enforcement
Officer.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Ir Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 592 at its
f`• V second reading by title only.
�V The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
� ,? AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -01 - Establishing a Schedule of Fees to be
Charged by the Planning and Public Works Departments for Various
f, Services and Rescinding all Previous Resolutions in Conflict
Herewith. (Continued from February 14, 1984).
This agenda item was continued until March 12, 1984.
12.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -07 - Consenting and Authorizing Submittal of
Annexation Application of Uninhabited Territory (Beaumont Annexa-
tion No.
84- ANX- 3 -34).
On Motion
by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
1"
Council of
the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -07.
j`
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
13.
Consideration
of Offer from Rancho Paving to Purchase Layton Paver.
On Motion
by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont declares the Layton Paver as
surplus.
4
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
This equipment now being declared surplus, will be advertised for
bid, with
a report to be returned to the City Council on March 12.
14.
SUBMITTAL
OF REPORTS FOR FILING:
Report of
Planning Commission Action at Meeting of February 21,
1984 and Financial Statements for Period Ending January 31, 1984,
were ordered filed.
15.
Request from City Attorney for Consideration of Suggestions Con-
cerning Use
of Beaumont Municipal Code.
On Motion
by Mayor Thomppon, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council of
the City of Beaumont authorizes the City Attorney to
�
codify the
ordinances that have been adopted since April 1, 1983,
Ordinances
571 -592, thereby incorporating them in the Municipal
Code.
�l
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Page 20
Beaumont City Council
February 27, 1984
16. Executive Session for Personnel Discussion.
The Executive Session was continued to the adjourned meeting to
be held on March 5, 1984.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned to Monday, March 5, 1984, at 6:30 P.M., in the City Mana-
ger's Conference Room, at 11:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
CITY CLERK:r
Page 21
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF MARCH 5, 1984
(Adjourned from February 27, 1984)
The Beaumont City Council adjourned their meeting of February 27, 1984 to
Monday, March 5, 1984, at 6:30 P.M., in the City Manager's Conference
Room.
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 P.M. by the Deputy City Clerk.
On roll call there were no Council Members present having previously
decided to hold the meeting on Tuesday, March 6, 1984.
There being no quorum present, the meeting was adjourned by the Deputy
City Clerk to Tuesday, March 6, 1984, at 6:30 P.M., in the City
Manager's Conference Room.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 P.M.
Resp *ctfully submitted,
,-7 L
Deputy City Clerk
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED MEETING OF
MARCH 6, 1984
(Adjourned from March 5, 1984)
The Beaumont City Council met in an Adjourned Meeting at 6:33 P.M., on
Tuesday, March 6, 1984, in the City Manager's Conference Room, with
Mayor Thompson presiding.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May arrived at 6:35 P.M.
1. The meeting was adjourned to a study session for the purpose of
discussion with the engineers on the proposed Negative Declaration
for the San Timoteo Wastewater Treatment Plant.
2. The meeting was reconvened to regular session at 7:55 P.M.
Written testimony from Mr. Harold Blackaby pertaining to the Nega-
tive Declaration on the wastewater treatment plant was accepted
into the record and referred to the Planning Department.
No action was taken at this meeting, with this agenda item to be
continued to the regular meeting of March 12, 1984.
3. On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
meeting was adjourned to Executive Session for personnel discussion
at 8:00 P.M.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. The meeting was reconvened to regular session at 8:58 P.M.
Let the record show no action was taken in Executive Session. Dis-
cussion included strategy guidelines for upcoming labor negotiations
and tentative discussion concerning the City Manager contract.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, for adjourn-
ment of the meeting.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:59 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
ne 7fiy* SXeeney, Citfy Clerk
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
MARCH 12, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:40 P.M., Monday,
March 12, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Lowry.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of February 27, 1984, Adjourned
Meeting of March 5, 1984 and Adjourned Meeting of March 6, 1984
were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning Com-
mission Meeting of February 21, 1984 were accepted for filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of March 12, 1984, in the amount of
$109,332.34; and Payroll of February 23, 1984, in the amount of
$25,795.06, were approved as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Albert Hershey regarding Building Permit.
Mr. Albert Hershey, 1055 E1 Monte, Cherry Valley, addressed
the Council concerning his application for a building per-
mit to add an additional building on his property, stating
this permit had been denied.
It was determined the building permit was not issued because
of an existing easement, and that no building permit could
be issued until some action is taken to eliminate the ease-
ment.
Mr. Hershey was asked to make a formal application for aban-
donment of the easement.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell that Mr. Hershey be allowed
to have a permit to eliminate the necessity of additional
legal fees and the potential of a costly lawsuit over
something that, at the present, does not amount to anything
at all except a personal vendetta.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell that a special meeting be
set up not later than Thursday of this week to get a
specific determination to allow Mr. Hershey to put his
application in to the Planning Department, and the Planning
Department send in their recommendation either for or
against the release of the easement.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Page 1
T zmont City Council
Much 12, 1984
5. Consideration of Proposed Negative Declaration Regarding 84 -ANX-
2-32. (Bar- Beau).
This agenda item was continued to an adjourned meeting to be set
for Thursday, March 15, 1984.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 591 - SECOND READING - To Amend Ordinance 490 to
Provide Pre - Zoning to Property Requesting Annexation to the City
of Beaumont. (84- ANX -2 -32 - Bar - Beau).
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 591
at its second reading by title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the Deputy City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
.�' NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
7. Consideration of Proposed Negative Declaration Regarding 84 -ANX-
3-34. (Westinghouse).
This agenda item was continued to an adjourned meeting to be set
for Thursday, March 15, 1984.
8. ORDINANCE NO. 593 - An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of
the City of Beaumont, to Amend Ordinance 490 to Provide Pre - Zoning
to Property Requesting Annexation to the City of Beaumont.
(84- ANX -3 -34 - Westinghouse)
This agenda item was continued to an adjourned meeting to be set
for Thursday, March 15, 1985.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 592 - FIRST READING - Creating a Code Enforcement
Officer.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
-City Council of the City of Beaumont passes Ordinance No. 592 at
;j its first reading by title only with modification to Section 2.
14.030 deleting the words "for review
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
10. ORDINANCE NO. 594 - FIRST READING - Amending Title 17 of the
Beaumont Municipal Code by Amending the Land Use Zoning Map
for the City of Beaumont to Provide for General Commercial
y�x;a'$ Zone. (Change of Zone 83 -RZ -3 - Wischan) .
. i.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont passes Ordinance No. 594 at its
first reading by title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the Deputy City Clerk.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
11.
RESOLUTION
NO. 1984 -01
- Establishing a
Schedule of Fees to be
Charged by
the Planning
and Public Works
Departments for Various
Services and Rescinding
all Previous Resolutions
in Conflict
(�'
Herewith.
(Continued from February 27,
1984).
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
March 12, 1984
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -01
with the following amendments:
1. Items 2 and 3 under Section IV shall be moved to
Section III.
2. The Basic Services Facility Fees shall be modified
as follows:
Single Family Residence
Condominium Residence
Multiple Family Residence
Mobile Home Rental Park Space
Recreational Vehicle Parks
Motels or Hotels
$500.00
$350.00
$250.00 /living
space
$250.00 /space
$250.00 /space
$100.00 /unit
3. Pre - Zoning fee shall exempt annexations.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to state that all Ordinances controlling fees that do not allow
modification by Resolution be changed to allow modification by
Resolution so entire fee schedule could be changed by Resolution
in any area, was withdrawn by Councilman Mitchell.
The City Manager was directed to bring a report of all Ordin-
ances that control fees which should be amended to provide
for change by Resolution.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,'May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
12. Recommendation of Planning Director Regarding Negative Declaration
for San Timoteo Wastewater Treatment Plant. (Continued from
March 6, 1984).
This agenda item was continued to the regular meeting of March
26, 1984. Dr. Kaplan's comments were directed to be made an
attachment to the final document.
13. Decision Concerning Use of 10th Year CDBG Entitlement Funds for
Year 1984 -85 (Continued from February 27, 1984).
4 On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont finds that a storm drainage pro -
ject to serve the 6th Street area between Xenia and Highland
Springs Road is a necessity, and directs and authorizes the City
Manager to file an application with the Office of Community
Development for a grant in the amount of $54,677 for 10th Year
CDBG Funds to design and construct approximately 1,250 lineal
�jfeet of storm drain, including pour -in -place pipe and allied
appurtenances.
14.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Report Relative to Bids Received for Sale of Layton Paver.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont approves the sale of
the Layton Paver to Rancho Paving for $2,500.00.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Paste 3
15.
1
16.
I imont City Council
March 12, 1984
Councilman Lowry left his chair at 9:29, returning at 9:34.
Councilman Mitchell left his chair at 9:28, returning at
9:50.
Consideration of Approvalfor Senior Center to Submit Application
for One Time Only Title III Funding, FY 1983 -84.
On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves submittal by
the Senior Center of application for one time only Title III
Funding, FY 1983 -84.
AYES:
Councilmen May,
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
Councilmen Lowry
Russo and Mayor Thompson.
and Mitchell.
Consideration of Approval of Master Drainage Plan for the Beaumont
Area as Approved by Riverside County Board of Supervisors.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves the Master
Drainage Plan for the Beaumont Area as approved by Riverside
` % County Board of Supervisors and concur on the environmental
% assessment.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry and Mitchell.
17. Appointment of Commissioner to Fill Vacancy on Planning Commission.
This agenda item was continued to the regular meeting of March
26, 1984, with the City Clerk directed to contact all applicants
requesting them to attend the meeting.
18. Endorsement of Application for Third District Supervisorial En-
titlement Funds.
,f
.*/ On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the
r City Council of the City of Beaumont approves the application
for an allocation of CDBG funds with the expectation of the
., receipt of $90,000, and pledge the balance of the project will
be paid for from sewer construction funds and /or force account
funds, per the attached application.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None..
19. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -08 - Approving the Assignment of the Franchise
for the Construction, Operation and Maintenance of a Community
Television System Within the City of Beaumont.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No.
1984 -08.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
20. Request For Council Decision on Book Publishing Company Billing
for Codification of City Ordinances.
1�
Page 4
E unont City Council
March 12, 1984
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the Book
Publishing Company invoice be paid with the exception of the
payment for 364 pages at $18.00 per page which is not included
in the agreed contract amount.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
Councilman May.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
21. Report and Recommendation from City Attorney Concerning Abate-
ment of Xenia Mini Warehouses.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the City Mana-
ger to hire a competent structural engineer to determine
ether or not the Nottingham Mini Warehouses are substandard,
and if he finds them to be substandard is there a way to bring
` them up to code.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
✓/ Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
22.
MV
23.
ADD
ITEM
25.
Authorization to Transfer Funds for Additional Employment Time
of Planning Consultant with Appropriate Budget Adjustment
Approval.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the transfer
of funds from 1- 215 -252 to 1- 135 -252 in the amount of $800.00
to make possible the additional employment of the Planning
Consultant for an additional two weeks of his current time.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
The report of Planning Commission action at meeting of March 6,
1984 was ordered filed.
Request from Councilman Russo to be absent from the State for
Ninety Days.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the
r City Council of the City of Beaumont grants permission for
Councilman Russo to be absent from the State for ninety days
it6 beginning March 26, 1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
24. The Meeting was adjourned to Executive Session for Personnel
Discussion at 11:05 P.M.
The Meeting was reconvened to Regular Session at 11:26 P.M.
Let the record show no definitive action was taken in Executive
Session in regard to personnel discussion.
Page 5
bcaumont City Council
March 12, 1984
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned to 11:30 A.M., on Thursday, March 15,
1984, in the City Manager's conference room.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M.
ectfully submitted,
a L
uty City Clerk
Page 6
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF MARCH 15, 1984
(Adjourned from March 12, 1984)
The Beaumont City Council met in an adjourned meeting at 11:35 A.M., on
Thursday, March 15, 1984, in the City Manager's Conference Room, with
Mayor Thompson presiding.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May was excused.
1. Consideration of Proposed Negative Declaration Regarding 84 -ANX-
,. 2 -32 (Bar -Beau) .
�. On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the Negative De-
claration regarding 84- ANX -2 -32 as complete and adequate.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
2. consideration of Proposed Negative Declaration Regarding 84 -ANX-
3-34 (Westinghouse).
The following statement from Westinghouse was read into the
record by the City Manager:
t "Plant systems will allow monitoring and control of gaseous and
liquid effluents so that any releases to the environment are
less than the limits established in the appropriate California
Radiation Control Regulation.
For example, based on experience at other similar facilities,
water that has been processed through the water treatment
system (a combination of multiple filtration and ion exchange)
is cleaner than the water that entered the facility."
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves the Negative
Declaration regarding 84- ANX -3 -34 (Westinghouse) as complete
and adequate.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
3. ORDINANCE NO. 593 - An Urgency Ordinance Amending Title 17 of the
,Beaumont Municipal Code by Amending the Land Use Zoning Map of
the City of Beaumont to Provide Pre- Zoning to Property Requesting
Annexation to the City of Beaumont. (84- ANX- 3 -34).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to con-
sider adoption of Urgency Ordinance No. 593 by reading of the
title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Page 1
F umont City Council
M,_..:ch 15, 1984
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Urgency Ordinance
No. 593 by title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the Deputy City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:50 A.M.
Respectfully submitted,
If i v•
y City Clerk
Page 2
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
MARCH 26, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
March 26, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Lowry.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman May.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman Russo was excused.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of March 12, 1984 and Adjourned
Meeting of March 15, 1984, were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning
Commission meeting of March 6, 1984, were accepted for filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
warrants as audited per Warrant List of March 26, 1984, in the
amount of $134,375.62; and Payroll of March 8, 1984, in the
amount of $24,837.14, were approved for payment as audited..
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Mr. Lymon Burhop addressed the Council stating his concern for
the cost to purchase a copy of the Beaumont Municipal Code, and
was informed the charge reflect our actual costs for the Code.
A discussion followed concerning a means by which these documents
could be made available to the public for duplication without
having to charge the full cost.
On Motion by
City Council
document may
a deposit of
-' return of th,
61P
Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
of the City of Beaumont directs that any major City
be removed for one day for duplication purposes for
$100.00, with a full refund of the deposit upon
document.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ORDINANCE NO. 592 - SECOND READING - Adding to the City of Beaumont
Municipal Code a Chapter 2.14 Creating a Code Enforcement Officer.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 592 at its
second reading by title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
March 26, 1984
6. ORDINANCE NO. 594 - SECOND READING - Amending Title 17 of the
Beaumont Municipal Code by Amending the Land Use Zoning Map of
the City of Beaumont to Provide for General Commercial Zone.
(Change of Zone 83 -RZ -3 - Wischan).
k F�1
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No.
594 at its second reading by title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES:. None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
7.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -09 -
Requesting
the California Department of
Transportation to Support
the Budgeting
of Funds to Upgrade and
Widen Highway 79 Between
Interstate
10 and the Hemet Valley.
On Motion of Councilman May,
second
by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City
of Beaumont
adopts Resolution No. 1984-
09.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
8. Request for Authorization to Purchase Computer System and To Go To
Bid for Computer Hardware.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -10 - Waiving the Bidding Requirement on Com-
puter Software Per Section 3.04.070 of the Municipal Code.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the purchase of
a computer data processing system as requested; adopts the pro -
'`I posed payment plan; authorizes the Purchasing Officer to submit
the hardware package to bid; waives the bidding requirements on
computer software by adoption of Resolution No. 1984 -10; and
authorizes the allocation of funds per the Cost Analysis submitted.
10.
low
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -11 - Amending Resolution No. 1984 -01 to Provide
for Lot Line Adjustment Fee, Public Project Fee, Planned Unit De-
velopment Review and the Repealing of Environmental Assessment/
Negative Declaration Fee.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -11.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Appointment of Commissioner To Fill Vacancy on Planning Commission.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to appoint Mr. Fred Shaw died for
lack of a second.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to appoint no one to a Commission
or Committee without a full Council being seated died for lack
of a second.
This agenda item was continued until April 9, 1984 when a full
Council will be seated.
Page 2
Becsmont City Council
March 26, 1984
12. Request from Modular Transport, Inc. for Reduction of Current Over-
size Wide Load Permit Fee Currently Charged by the City of Beaumont.
The request from Modular Transport was continued until the regular
meeting of April 9, 1984 with the appropriate Resolution to set
the permit fee to be presented at that time.
13. Request from Two Separate Applicants (Madam Ann and Donna Brackman)
for Reduction of Business License Fee Presently Charged for Astro-
logy Businesses.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont denies the request for reduction
n� of business license fee presently charged for astrology businesses.
7'
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
On Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont will reconsider Agenda Item
No. 13 at their regular meeting of April 9, 1984.
J
AYES: Councilmen May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
14. Acceptance of Final Negative Declaration - 84 -ND -1. San Timoteo
Canyon Wastewater Treatment Plant.
\\
,0\; On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont accepts Negative Declaration 84-
ND -1 for the San Timoteo Wastewater Treatment Plant as final.
15.
16.
{,_it
17.
t�Q
u
is
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
Request of Councilman May for Report on No Parking Zone at Xenia
Avenue and 6th Street.
This request was referred to the Police Department for a report.
Consideration of Acceptance of Proposal of Structural Engineer for
Report on Mini - Warehouse Facility.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont - accepts theNproposal of the
structural engineers, Knapp & Associates,\for the mini - warehouse
facility on Xenia, to determine the structural deficiencies of
the said facility and make recommendation for the proper rehabi-
litation of same, and further authorizes the Mayor to sign the
proposal.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Request for Secretary Position to Serve Planning, Public Works,
and Building Departments.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept
the recommendation concerning the secretary position in the
Planning, Public Works and Building Departments.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry and May.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
Page 3
LW
19.
r,
20.
Bea ont City Council
March 26, 1984
MOTION FAILED. Return to City Council on April 9, 1984.
Consideration of Proposal for Bond Counsel Services.
This agenda item was continued until the regular meeting of
April 9, 1984.
Request to Authorize Initiation of Annexation to the City.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont approves the initiation of an
application to include the Highland Springs Village development
and intervening lands as an annexation to the City with the costs
borne by the City.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Acceptance of Report of Examination of Special Gas Tax Street
Improvement Funds for Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 1982 and June
30, 1983, as submitted by State Controller's Office.
On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the Report of Exam-
ination of Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Funds for Fiscal
Years Ending June 30, 1982 and June 30, 1983, as submitted by
the State Controller's Office.
AYES: Councilmen May,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
and Russo.
21. Request for Budget Adjustments:
�a! $45.00 from Account 01 -140 -230 to 01 -140 -229 to Cover Costs
of Unbudgeted Census Data Information.
-700-225 from Accounts 40
-7 - 2 n 40-700-230
t� $ 00 2 5 and to Account
` 40- 700 -252 for Radio Installation in New Transit Vehicle.
e-.-'_'$350.00 from Account 01 -115 -225 to -1 -115 -229 to cover
/f " Supplemental Inserts or Code Books.
$500.00 from Account 01 -135 -254 to Account 01 -135 -226 to
Cover Current and Proposed Office Supply Needs.
'e_�$106.00 from Account 10- 405 -230 to 10- 405 -229 for Publications
Originally Budgeted Under 405 -230.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves all requests for
budget adjustments as submitted.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Russo.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
22. Request of Councilman Mitchell for Clarification of Minutes of
July 12, 1982, Ordinance No. 363 and Contract of Employment for
City Manager dated July 26, 1982.
No action was taken on this agenda item.
23. SUBMITTAL OF REPORTS FOR FILING:
a. Financial Reports for Period Ending February 29, 1984.
Page 4
Bea )nt City Council
March 26, 1984
b. Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of March 20,
1984.
C. Report Concerning Purchase of Recording System for Council.
All reports submitted were accepted for filing.
ADD
ITEM
24. Executive Session for Legal Discussions.
The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session for legal discussion
at 11:46 P.M.
The meeting was reconvened to regular session at 12:05 P.M.
Let the record show no action was taken in Executive Session,
only discussion pertaining to certain legal matters.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 12:07 P.M.
I, Irish D. Mitchell, City Clerk Pro.Tem, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a full, true and correct record of the minutes of the
Beaumont City Council meeting of March 26, 1984.
4,-a /). `t44'4'z �
IRISH D. MITCHELL
City Clerk Pro Tem
Page 5
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF
APRIL 2, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a Special Meeting at 7:30 P.M., on Mon-
day, April 2, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson
presiding.
Let the record show all members of the City Council were present.
City Attorney: At last week's meeting, which was properly called to
order, the City Clerk was not present. The Mayor then directed the City
Manager to work the tape machine and take minutes until she arrived,
which proceeded for the next four and one -half hours. Under that type
of interim situation we then finished up the meeting.
The Government Code Section dealing with the absence of the City Clerk
is explicit that if the City Clerk or one of her deputies is not avail-
able, it doesn't define available, and in this case I think we can feel
fairly safe in saying she was not present - could not have been present
due to weather problems - and we did not have a deputy present. The
proper action would have been for the chair to appoint one of the City
Councilmen as City Clerk Pro Tem for that meeting. That action did not
take place. Norm was not designated to fulfill that capacity. He
merely operated the tape and took the minutes of the meeting, but was
not chosen for that reason. We do have the question who can certify
the meeting. The City Clerk was not present and she is not about to
certify the minutes, and properly so. For that reason, we need to have
someone who has that ability to legally do that. I have checked - there
is practically no law in the books on the matter. There has never been
a Court case, and I definitely would hate to see us start a precedent.
I checked with the attorney for the League of California Cities, who has
a pretty good feeling for these types of problems, and the recommendation
from that office was that one of your number be appointed this evening
by the Chair to serve as the City Clerk Pro Tem for last week's meeting.
That person then could certify the minutes and to further make it clear
that there be a ratification, preferably a unanimous ratification,
although, as I indicated we are not in a position where there has been
anything charted legally to tell us it has to be unanimous, that would
then ratify the actions that were taken at that meeting, and would direct
the Clerk Pro Tem appointed for that meeting this evening in this Special
Meeting to then certify those minutes and certify any resolusions or
anything else that ordinarily would be certified by the City Clerk.
In some of my private discussions with some members, there was some con-
cern on the part of Mr. Russo concerning a couple of the items - he was
not present and was not able to vote - as you will recall there were a
couple of close decisions. In addition, Mr. Mitchell, when I talked
with him, expressed some concern about three particular items. My
recommendation to you, gentlemen, so that we have unanimous in an area
that is not charted, and I cannot give you specific legal direction -
yes this is it and no this is not it - that it would be proper to have
the Clerk Pro Tem certify, and that, definitely, I believe, would be
sufficient. But it would be preferable if the resolution ratifying
that which took place at the meeting was unanimous that the minutes do
in fact reflect the actions taken at the meeting, and that perhaps, in
recognition of Mr. Russo's position, that those items that anyone
requests be reconsidered - Mr. Mitchell indicated to me today there
were three - I believe Mr. Russo had two, or at least one, that he
expressed concern about.
Mayor Thompson: Should they be brought back to our next meeting for a
motion to reconsider.
City Attorney: I would make the recommendation that there be a motion
to reconsider those items, and that they be treated as the other motions
to reconsider were from the last meeting. That this Special Meeting
Page 1
Bea -,aont City Council
April 2, 1984
be attached as an addendum to the last meeting because that is going to
be crucial in appointing a City Clerk Pro Tem, and that in doing that
we also then add the additional motion to reconsider without discussion
and without the need that they be placed on a regular agenda to give
all of you an opportunity to think through positions, etc., as you would
normally have for a meeting. I think that would be the appropriate
thing.
That would also keep the meeting this evening short unless Mr. Rooney
has arrived, or other representatives of the press - when they checked
with our office we indicated we hoped that would be the case. I think
that would be the best procedure to take for everyone's benefit, parti-
cularly the publics.
Mayor Thompson: One, you certify - you appoint a City Clerk Pro Tem.
City Attorney: You appoint a City Clerk Pro Tem - one of the Councilmen.
Mayor Thompson: Then we have a motion, basically, to certify . . .
City Attorney: You have a motion to ratify the action that was taken
without the presence of the City Clerk, and a direction to your City
Clerk Pro Tem to certify those minutes and any other actions that need
to be certified.
Councilman Russo: Before ratification, do we address those issues that
we want to reconsider.
City Attorney: I would recommend that motion be laid on the table,
gentlemen, not that it is legally required, but out of courtesy and
the spirit of compromise and unity that we list those items and
recognize there will be a vote for reconsideration. That motion would
have to come - I think when I look down - it would have to come from Mr.
Lowry. I may be wrong, but I think he voted on the winning side every
time last time, and, therefore, a motion for reconsideration from him
would apply to anything that might be reconsidered.
Councilman Lowry: What are the items.
City Attorney: The three items . . .
Councilman Russo: May we number those items just briefly, identify them
and number them on the agenda.
City Attorney: Why don't we do that and see if there are any others.
I didn't have the opportunity to discuss this with Mr. Lowry and Mr. May,
or in great depth with . . .
Councilman Russo: May I go through and do mine, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Thompson: What are the ones you want to reconsider.
Councilman Russo: Items No. 14, 17 and 19 - excuse me, 14 and 17.
Mayor Thompson: 14 and 17. And that will be for our next regularly
scheduled meeting. The motion to reconsider at our next regularly
scheduled meeting - is that the way you want it. What were the other
items.
City Attorney: Mr. Mitchell, do you want to speak to the other items,
or do you want me to identify them.
Councilman Mitchell: I will just mention for reconsideration No. 7, No.
14 and No. 19.
City Attorney: I didn't hear the last one.
Councilman Mitchell: 14, 17 and 19. No, not 17. 17 was set over.
City Attorney: 17 was set over?
Councilman Mitchell: No. 7, No. 14 and No. 19
Mayor Thompson: Okay, then we have a total of four items No. 7, 14, 17
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
April 2, 1984
and 19.
City Attorney: I believe 17 was already set over.
Councilman Mitchell: 17 was set over.
City Attorney: Right, so there is no need to make a motion to reconsider
it. It went over as part of the ratification. The only ones we are
going to reconsider are 7, 14 and 19. I believe the motion for a Law
Review Commission was also put over. That will automatically come back.
Mr. Mitchell, I believe you put that forward. Our office had reviewed
that and made some suggestions.
Councilman Mitchell: I discussed it with you and mentioned
City Attorney: We will substitute our resolution, a redraft version for
this meeting . . .
Councilman Mitchell: And I took it up with Mr. Zahner. I just slightly
mentioned it to Mr. Russo, and we all more or less concur with your
opinion.
City Attorney: That was the very last item and that has nothing to do
with this. It just makes a difference. Then we won't have two resolutions
sitting out before you.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, I will go through this one more time. Appoint a
City Clerk Pro Tem for the meeting of March 26, 1984.
Councilman Lowry: I was going to make a motion. . .
Mayor Thompson: Just a minute, Bill. I am just trying to get the steps
in order. Then we - a motion to ratify the minutes of March 26, 1984.
City Attorney: Ratify the actions taken.
Mayor Thompson: Actions taken. And then the Clerk Pro Tem will then
certify those minutes.
City Attorney: You will direct the Clerk Pro Tem to certify those minutes.
Mayor Thompson: Then we will have Mr. Lowry to make the motion for recon-
sideration on Items 7, 14 and 19.
Councilman Lowry: I will make it on 7, 14 and 17. I don't think 19,
because there were four - a unanimous vote Aye on that. I don't see any
reasons for reconsideration on that.
City Attorney: Mr. Russo was not present, although he didn't request it
either.
Councilman Russo: It was on my original request.
Councilman Mitchell: There was some misinformation in the staff report
on 19, and I want it reconsidered based upon information that came on
later.
Councilman Lowry: Okay, I will include 19.
City Manager: Before you
your action in holding 14
Director indicate to you
well let me ask the attor:
then to ask that they not
but that they direct that
given to them.
take an action there could I ask that part of
over, that you - can we have the Planning
- well, alright, rather than bringing in --
aey, is it legitimate for them at this point
only bring it back at a subsequent meeting,
the matter be reheard and a further report
City Attorney: I believe that - let me check - did you ask that it be
readvertised for public hearing.
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
April 2, 1984
City Manager: Readvertised. . .
City Attorney: The last portion in requesting an affirmative report you
mean requesting an additional report, not necessarily affirmative or
negative.
City Manager: Just that it be readvertised for hearing, and that a re-
commendation come forward to them.
City Attorney: That was the word affirmative I was requesting. I
believe that can be included without any problem, as part of the motion
to reconsider. In effect you are going to be moving to reconsider all
of the items and to request that there be readvertising and an additional
public hearing on the Negative Declaration.
Councilman Mitchell: Readvertising and so forth to comply with the law.
The others weren't a public hearing.
City Attorney: Correct, although a motion to reconsider wouldn't auto-
matically bring in a public hearing even on the Negative Declaration
because we already had a public hearing.
Councilman Mitchell: Would it necessitate a new notice of public hearing.
City Attorney: No it wouldn't. This would necessitate it. That is what
is being suggested. That there be a new notice of public hearing and an
additional public hearing. The motion to reconsider itself would not
necessitate the public hearing if that had been closed properly so in a
previous meeting, and this last meeting was only a vote of you gentlemen.
There were some courtesies extended to the public, but it was not actually
a public hearing. I believe the motion would be in order to include a
direction that additional advertising - I am not certain then that that
can be reconsidered at the next meeting. I am quite certain there is not.
I don't remember the time limit, but it would have to be in three weeks
to get time to publish proper notice for a public hearing. So then that
- item . . .
Councilman Mitchell: So that would not come up for reconsideration. It
would just be completely voided and come up for a new hearing two weeks
from the 9th.
Mayor Thompson: If you make the motion to include it for reconsideration
and it comes up at our next meeting and the legal process hasn't been
adhered to or completed, we would hold it over until the next meeting
anyway.
City Attorney: Or a motion to reconsider at the following meeting and a
request that a public hearing be included in the advertising direction.
You do it tonight it is taken care of and it is not on next week's agenda,
it is on the agenda where it belongs and that takes care of it. Take it
as a separate item - a motion to reconsider the other three at the next
meeting and that fourth item, No. 17, direct that public hearings be
reopened, that advertising of that public hearing be had. . .
Councilman Lowry: 14.
City Attorney: Did I say 17, excuse me, 14, not 17 -'and that there be
a motion to reconsider it at that time. Technically the issue has been
decided by this Council. There has to be a motion to reconsider. But
with that you are also following the direction in opening back up the
public hearing.
Councilman Mitchell: It would be April 23 then where it can be heard.
City Attorney: April 23, correct.
Mayor Thompson: We will appoint a City Clerk Pro Tem for March 26, 1984,
and - so, since Mr. Mitchell is the one discussing quite in depth, I
will appoint Mr. Mitchell as Clerk Pro Tem for March 26, 1984, and then
Page 4
Bea, inont City Council
April 2, 1984
he can ratify the minutes.
City Attorney: We need a motion now to ratify the . . .
Mayor Thompson: We need a motion to ratify the minutes.
City Attorney: And direct him to certify those minutes and certify any-
thing else that is necessary.
Councilman Lowry: And a motion deleting these at the same time.
City Attorney: No. Make that a separate
not being deleted. The meeting stands as
doing is adding to that as if it happened
of Mr. Mitchell as City Clerk Pro Tem for
to reconsider those items as if it had to
meeting. Make it two separate motions.
motion at the end. They are
it was held. All you are
at the end. The appointment
the meeting and the motion
ken place at the end of that
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont directs the City Clerk
Pro Tem to ratify the minutes of March 26, 1984, and further
directs that he certify the same.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont will reconsider
Items No. 7 and 19 at regular meeting of April 9, 1984,
T and will reconsider Item No. 14 on April 23, 1984, with
T further direction that the Planning Department adver-
tise by public notice of a public hearing on April 19,
1984, at 7:30 P.M.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion
by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the meeting was ad-
journed at 8:05 P.M.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
NOES:
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion
by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the meeting was ad-
journed at 8:05 P.M.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
I, Irish D. Mitchell, City Clerk Pro Tem, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a full, true and correct record of the minutes of the
Beaumont City Council Special Meeting of April 2, 1984.
IRISH D. MITCHELL,
City Clerk Pro Tem
Page 5
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
APRIL 9, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
April 9, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Pro Tem Russo
presiding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand Frank Mecklenberg, Calvery Baptist
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Mitchell.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo. Mayor Thompson was excused.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of March 26, 1984 and Special Meeting
of April 2, 1984, were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning
Commission meeting of March 20, 1984, were accepted for filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
warrants as audited per Warrant List of April 9, 1984, in the
amount of $106,825.63; and Payroll of March 22, 1984, in the
amount of $26,337.91, were approved for payment as audited.
AYES! Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
4. ORDINANCE NO. 595 - An Urgency Ordinance Repealing Section 2.04.040
Through 2.04.300 AND Adding a New Section 2.04.040 Regarding Rules
of Order for City Council Meetings.
�J Motion by Councilman Lowry to adopt Ordinance No. 595 as an Urgency
Ordinance DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
\-
IN, Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Mayor Pro Tem Russo, to pass
Ordinance No. 595 at its first reading by title only.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Mayor Pro Tem Russo, to
amend Councilman Lowry's motion to not repeal Sections 2.04.080,
2.04.100, 2.04.110, 2,04.130, 2.04.220, 2.04.230, 2.04.270 and 2.04.280, and to add a Section 2.04.210.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to amend
Councilman Mitchell's motion to divide the motion and vote on
each individual section.
VOTE TAKEN ON SECOND AMENDMENT:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
SECOND AMENDMENT TO MOTION CARRIED.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.080:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
Beaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.100:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.210:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.220:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.230:
AYES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry and May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson
MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.260:
AYES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry and May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson
MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.270:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
Page 2
Russo.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN
ON NOT TO REPEAL
SECTION 2.04.110:
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN
ON NOT TO REPEAL
SECTION 2.04.130:
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.210:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.220:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.230:
AYES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry and May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson
MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.260:
AYES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry and May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson
MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.270:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
VOTE TAKEN ON NOT TO REPEAL SECTION 2.04.280:
AYES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry and May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson
MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Mayor Pro Tem Russo, to
reconsider Ordinance No. 595 as an Urgency Ordinance as origin-
ally written by reading of title only.
VOTE TAKEN ON READING BY TITLE ONLY:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
VOTE TAKEN ON ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 595 AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE
AS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
8. OUT OF SEQUENCE.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Lot Line Adjustment 84- LLA -1. Loca-
tion: Proposed San Timoteo Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:55 P.M.
Mr. Alan Manee, Planning Director, addressed the Council presenting
his staff report concerning this proposed lot line adjustment.
Mr. Manee then informed the Council that the Planning Commission
had approved this lot line adjustment, with conditions as recom-
mended, with no one speaking either in favor or opposing.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Manee, this is nothing more than a lot
line adjustment to accommodate the location of the new sewer plant,
is that correct? The new proposed sewer plant?
Mr. Manee: The first part of this is so that we get a proper con-
veyance of real property from a private citizen to the City of
Beaumont. The intended purpose, as I know it, is for a specific
purpose and that is the location of a sewage treatment facility.
Councilman Mitchell: I wanted that as a point so that people
wouldn't have any misunderstanding what the lot adjustment was.
Mr. Manee: The recommendation that I gave previously was that it
be approved with the conditions as stated.
Mayor Pro Tem Russo: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes
to address this item before we close the public hearing.
Page 3
eaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
There was no response from the audience.
The Public Hearing was closed at 9:05 P.M.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves Lot Line Adjustment
. 84 -LLA -1 as recommended.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mrs. Ann Conners, 813 Elm, addressed the Council, asking
why the Christmas lights were still up at the intersection
of Beaumont and Sixth, and why they_were on tonight.
The City Manager explained that Beaumont does not have a
lift of any kind and must borrow one from the City of
Banning when we can get it. To date we have not been
able to borrow Banning's unit in order to take the lights
down.
6.,/ ORDINANCE NO. 596 - An Urgency Ordinance adding Section 15.04.020
to the Beaumont Municipal Code Setting Forth the Penalty for Vio-
lation of the Uniform Building Code and Amending Section 1.16.030
of the Beaumont Municipal Code Increasing the Fines for Infractions.
/ This agenda item was continued until the end of the agenda.
7. ORDINANCE NO. 597 - An Urgency Ordinance Designating the Planning
Director as the Environmental Hearing Officer On All Discretionary
Projects Involving CEQA Mandated Environmental Review Pursuant to
California State Administrative Code §15022 (a) (9) .
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Ordinance No. 597 as an Urgency Ordinance by reading of the title
only.
VOTE TAKEN ON READING BY TITLE ONLY:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
VOTE TAKEN ON ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 597 AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -09 - RECONSIDERATION - Requesting the California
Department of Transportation to Support the Budgeting of Funds to
Upgrade and Widen Highway 79 Between Interstate 10 and the Hemet
r_041 d Valley.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -09.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
Page 4
I
7
Beaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
10. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -12 - Regarding the Formation and Conduct of
Business of the Law Review Commission of the City of Beaumont.
s' On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
!'Y Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -12 as
corrected.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry.,
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
11. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -13 - Amending Resolution No. 1976 -11, which
amended Ordinance No. 474 (Municipal Code No. 10.32.150) To Adjust
Permit Fees for Class "A" and "B" Buildings, Structures and Loads
Which Would Include Mobile and Modular Homes Up to Sixteen (16)
/ Feet in Width. (Continued from March 26, 1984).
-- On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -13.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -14 - Approving the County of Riverside Solid
Waste Management Plan.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
�t`�j City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -
A4 14.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
✓ NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
13. Request from Two Applicants (Madam Ann and Donna Brackman) for
Reduction of Business License Fee Presently Charged for Astrology
Businesses. RECONSIDERATION.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, this
genda item will be held over to the regular meeting of April
23, 1984, pending recommendation of the City Attorney.
�i
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
14. Appointment of Commissioner to Fill Vacancy on Planning Commission.
(Continued from March 26, 1984).
This agenda item was continued until the adjourned meeting of
April 16, 1984.
15. Request to Authorize Initiation of Annexation to the City.
RECONSIDERATION.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to authorize
the City Manager to proceed with the initiation of the annexation
application to include the Highland Springs Village development
and intervening lands as an annexation to the City with the costs
borne by the City.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to exclude Paragraph No. 5 in the staff report dated March 26.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Page 5
P,
.jaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
amend Councilman Lowry's motion to provide that no fees will be
expended until there have been meetings with the 90% of the
people who voted no on the last annexation for the sole purpose
of throwing -good money after bad,
OTE TAKEN
ES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
VOTE TAKEN
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
Councilman Lowry, May,
Pro Tem Russo.
None.
None.
Mayor Thompson.
ON MAIN MOTION:
Councilmen Lowry,
Russo.
None.
None.
Mayor Thompson.
Councilman Mitchell, Mayor
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
16. Request for Secretary Position to Serve Planning, Public Works and
Building Departments. (Continued from March 26, 1984).
01- On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont approves a secretarial posi-
tion to serve the general needs of the City as a Secretary.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
Xf NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
17. Consideration of Proposal for Bond Counsel Services. (Continued
from March 26, 1984).
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, this
agenda item was continued until the regular meeting of April 23,
1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
18. Request for Approval of Draft Short Range Transit Plan for Fiscal
Years 1985 -89.
,On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont approves the Draft
Short Range Transit Plan for Fiscal Years 1985 -89 as presented.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson..
19. Request for City to Provide Defense in Lawsuit.
This agenda item was continued until the regular meeting of April
23, 1984.
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
20. Endorsement of Existing Policy Concerning Erasure of Tape Recordings
of City Council Meetings.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont directs the tapes of
City Council meetings be held for a period of five years.
YES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
21. Acceptance of Project 8307, Michigan Avenue and Authorization for
Recordation of Notice of Completion.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the work on
Project 8307, Michigan Avenue, and further authorizes the
recordation of Notice of Completion with the County Recorder.
}LNf AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
+ Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
22. Request from Beaumont Cemetary District for Waiver of Fees.
On Motion of Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont waives the
Planning Department fees as requested by the Beaumont Cemetary
District.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
23. Request from Planning Director for Additional Funds to Complete
Three Critical Elements of the Planning Process for the City of
Beaumont.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to
/o continue this agenda item until the regular meeting of April 23,
1984.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend his previous motion to
include that a fund of $2,000 shall be made available to our
contract planner for the purposes of working out all of the
details necessary to give us a workable zoning plan that will
be in conformity with the General Plan. DIED FOR LACK OF A
SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
24. Request for Budget Adjustment for Street Related Maintenance and
Construction Activities.
n Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell,
the City Council of the City of Beaumont approves bud et
y r PP g
adjustment for street related maintenance and construction
activities as requested.
Page 7
Beaumont City Council
April 9, 1984
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
25. The report of Planning Commission action at meeting of April 3,
1984 was accepted for filing.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 596 - An Urgency
to the Beaumont Municipal Code
lation of the Uniform Building
of the Beaumont Municipal Code
This agenda item was continued
23, 1984.
Ordinance Adding Section 15.04.020
Setting Forth the Penalty for Vio-
Code and Amending Section 1.16.030
Increasing the Fines for Infractions.
until the regular meeting of April
26. Permission for Mayor Thompson to be Out of the State for a
Period of Ninety Days.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont grants permission to
Mayor Thompson to be absent from the State for a period of
ninety days.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
27. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -15 - Extending the Period Set Forth in
Resolution No. 1984 -08 by which American Cable of Redlands
Joint Venture Must File Its Written Agreement to Comply with
C - "All the Provisions of the Franchise for the Construction,
Operation and Maintenance of a Community Antenna Television
System Within the City of Beaumont.
I On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -15.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
28. The Executive Session pertaining to legal matters was continued
until an adjourned meeting to be held on April 16, 1984.
29. On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, the
meeting was adjourned to Monday, April 16, 1984, at 7:OO.P.M.,
in the City Council Chambers.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 10:53 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
CITY CLERK v
Page 8
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF APRIL 16, 1984
(Adjourned from April 9, 1984)
1. The Beaumont City Council met in an adjourned meeting at 7:04 P.M.,
Monday, April 16, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor
Thompson presiding.
2. On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry,
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
3. Appointment of Commissioner to Fill Vacancy on Planning Commission.
(Continued from April 9, 1984).
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, this agenda
item was continued to the regular meeting of April 23, 1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session pertaining to legal
matters at 7:07 P.M.
5. The meeting was reconvened to-Regular Session at 8:15 P.M.
6. Let the record show action taken in Executive Session.
No definitive action was taken in Executive Session. The discussion
was in regard to a status report on pending litigation in the matter
of Castellini vs City of Beaumont
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 8:17 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
4v-t
Ci y Clerk
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
APRIL 23, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
April 23, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Russo.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Lowry.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May was excused.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of April 9, 1984 and Adjourned
Meeting of April 16, 1984, were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning
Commission meeting of April 3, 1984 and Adjourned Meeting
of April 10, 1984, were accepted for filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of April 23, 1984, in the amount of
$96,968.18; and Payroll of April 5, 1984, in the amount of
$26,358.79, were approved for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
bring Agenda Item No. 28 forward to be heard previously to
Agenda Item No. 5.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to move Agenda Item No. 28 to be
heard prior to Agenda Item No. 6 DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania:
Mr. Gordon stated he had asked Mayor Pro Tem Russo if the
Council could explain the procedure being used in issuing
business licenses, specifically businesses conducted in
homes.
Mr. Steve Oliveras, Code Enforcement Officer, explained to
Mr. Gordon the procedure followed from application through
processing of the application to final issuance of the
business license.
Mr. Gordon then stated his particular concern was whether
or not the City was concerned with and investigated zoning,
parking, building compliance with codes, etc., when someone
requests a business license.
Alan Manee, Planning Director, responded to Mr. Gordon's
Page 1
aumont City Council
April 23, 1984
question stating the requirements were very stringent, for
instance they cannot generate any foot traffic or traffic
that would be excessive to the neighborhood; cannot have
more than two vehicles there and they cannot be oversize
vehicles; they cannot store materials outside; they cannot
occupy more than one room of their home with the business;
in other words the permit for a home occupation is very
restrictive. Further, if the Council decided to let a
permit be drawn, that person would then be directed to the
Planning Department to fill out a Home Occupation Permit
application.
Replying to a question from the Council, Mr. Manee advised
the Ordinance governing this is Ordinance 490, although he
could not cite the exact section, and that upon a Home
Occupation Permit application being received, the applicant
has to provide the Planning Department with detail informa-
tion and he or a member of his staff would visit the site
to be certain it complies with the requirements, with an
annual review of the site also required. Answering a
further question from the Council, Mr. Manee stated that
under 490 a yearly renewal is not required, however, in 590
(the rewrite of 490 presently being reviewed at Planning
Commission level) an annual renewal is required. He
emphasized this is not a Conditional Use Permit. That a
Home Occupation Permit is an entirely separate permit.
b. Mr. Leroy Livingston, 1235 Massachusetts, read from a
Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition for Recall of
Councilman Mitchell, serving him with the same.
5. Request of Mr. Tom Parker for Consideration of Adoption of an
Ordinance to Establish a Mobile Home Rent Review Commission.
After hearing an oral presentation by Mr. Parker, this agenda
item was referred to the City Manager and City Attorney for
review with a report to be brought back to the Council at their
regular meeting of May 29, 1984.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 596 - An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of
the City of Beaumont, California, Adding Section 15.04.020 to
the Beaumont Municipal Code Setting Forth the Penalty for
1; Violations of the Uniform Codes, and Amending Section 1.16.030
of the Beaumont Municipal Code Increasing the Fines for
�1 Infractions. (Continued from April 9, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
consider Ordinance No. 596 as an Urgency Ordinance by reading
of the title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
} On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 596 as
an Urgency Ordinance with the following correcticns:
Line 3 of Section 1 shall be amended to read as follows:
. . of the requirements of the Uniform Code of the City
of. . . thereby deleting the word "Building ".
A new Section 3 shall be added to read as follows:
Section 15.16.130.0 of the Municipal Code is hereby
repealed.
The existing Section 3 shall be delineated as Section 4.
Page 2
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Beaumont City Council
April 23, 1984
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
7. ORDINANCE NO. 598 - FIRST READING - Repealing Sections 5.08.020,
Subsection "Astrology" Section 5.20.080 and Amending Sections
5.40.010 and 5.40.020 of the Beaumont Municipal Code.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
table Ordinance 598 until such time as Council can find specific
reasons for passing the Ordinance.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
B. Request from Two Applicants (Madam Ann and Donna Brackman) for
Reduction of Business License Fee Presently Charged for Astrology
Businesses. (Continued from April 9, 1984)
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to set the fee at $50.00 per annum
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to hold
this agenda item over in conjunction with Ordinance No. 598
prior to making any decision.
a
10.
11.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -16 - Supporting the Concept of Local Regulation
of Fireworks.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -16.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
RECONSIDERATION - Acceptance of Report and Action on Negative
Declaration 84 -ND -1 - San Timoteo Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Alan Manee requested continuance of this agenda item for two
weeks in order that it may be presented to the Council in its
proper format and to allow time for review.
Council concurred in continuing this agenda item until their
regular meeting of May 14, 1984.
Appointment of Commissioner to Fill Vacancy on Planning Commission.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
appoint Mr. Fred Shaw to fill the existing vacancy on the Planning
Commission.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Page 3
. : aumont City Council
April 23, 1984
12. Consideration of Proposal for Bond Counsel Services. (Continued
from April 9, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry to accept the proposal for bond counsel
services DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to table Agenda Item No. 12 pending
a determination what the bond issue will be used for DIED FOR
LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to accept
the proposal for bond counsel services with the understanding
f that no funds will be expended to the firm of Best, Best & Kreiger
in conjunction with bond counsel services until such time as a
bond issue or a project has been approved by the City Council.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
13. Request for City to Provide Defense in Lawsuit. (Continued from
April 9, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Russo to suspend the Conflict of Interest
Resolution for the purpose of voting on a request for the City
to provide the defense of a lawsuit was withdrawn by Councilman
A 1 Russo.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
authorize the City Attorney to sit in negotiation with the parties
defendant and see if they would care to make a settlement to save
the City a great deal of money.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
MOTION FAILED.
This agenda item was carried forward until the Executive Session.
14. Request from Planning Director for Additional Funds to Complete
Three Critical Elements of the Planning Process for the City of
Beaumont. (Continued from April 9, 1984).
Motion by Coun lman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
�� authorize appropriation with the deletion of Item No. 3 in the
amount of $2,000.00 pending verification from the Department
�� of Housing and Community Development; further authorizing the
� Planning Director to perform the listed tasks for the amounts
requested, with payment rendered when tasks are completed and
presented for Council action and /or State acceptance; further
authorizing that $6,000.00 be transferred from Budget Line Item
01- 205 -252 to 01 -135 -252.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
15. Report from Police Department Concerning Establishing of No Parking
Zone at Xenia and Sixth Street.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, that
r all changes requested and surveyed by Chief Justus be done as
on as possible, and that from 60 foot back of the radius turn
Page 4
.aumont City Council
April 23, 1984
at Xenia and 6th on the south side of Xenia 60 foot on east the
red curb be eliminated, with resolution to be redrafted to achieve
this change.
AYES: Councilmen Russo,
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
16. Authorization for Mayor to Sign Title III -B "One- Time -Only" Funding
Contract for Senior Center.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
authorize the Mayor to sign Contract Amendment FY 1983 -1984 for
One - Time -Only Title III -B Funding with County of Riverside Office
on Aging.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
17. Authorization for City Attorney to Attend City Attorney's Department
Spring Meeting Sponsored by League of California Cities.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
payment of the $75.00 seminar registration fee for the City Attorney.
-, AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
18. Report Concerning Expanded Transit Service.
Motion by Councilman Russo to accept report with direction to the
Transportation Superintendent to prepare some actual cost figures
-to the expansion of the service for noon hours, election days
and Saturdays, was withdrawn by Councilman Russo.
.v
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to accept
report with the expansion of service to include election days.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
amend Councilman Lowry's motion to include a cost breakdown on
actual costs to operate during the lunch hour by initiation of
lunch hour service for a period of thirty days, with a report
to the City Council.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
AMENDMENT FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
ORIGINAL MOTION CARRIED.
Page 5
�aumont City Council
1 _pril 23, 1984
19. Authorization to Declare Used Vehicles Surplus and to Advertise
for Bids or Negotiate Sale to School District.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to
declare two Dodge vehicles and one 1973 Chevrolet surplus, and
further authorizing the Purchasing Officer to advertise for
f4�FA bids or negotiate a sale with the school district.
AYES:
NOES:
` ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
20.
21.
22.
Councilmen Lowry,
None.
None.
Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Computer Hardware Bid Approval.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
accept the presentation and authorizing the purchase of the
computer hardware as presented.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Request from Mr. Donald T. Pope for Refund of Expenses Incurred
Due to Sewer Back -Up.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to grant
the request of Mr. Donald T. Pope for reimbursement of $105.00
as expenses incurred as a result of sewer back -up.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Consideration of Claim Filed Against City by Gregory L. Carnahan.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to reject
j the claim of Gregory Carnahan and directing the City Clerk to
forward Notice of Rejection.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
+ ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
23. Request from Councilman Mitchell for Hearing Relative to Arbitrary
Censorship by the City Manager.
No action was taken on this agenda item.
24. Consideration of Updated Fee Schedule for City Clerk Services.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to refund
Mr. Larry Gordon the $10.00 charge levied against him.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Consideration of the fee schedule itself was continued until the
next regular meeting:
Page 6
tumont City Council
April 23, 1984
25. Request for Budget Adjustment to Increase Account 01- 325 -302 to
Accommodate Insurance Payment for Street Striping Equipment.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
budget adjustment for street striping equipment as requested.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ROES: None.
ABSTAIN : None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
26. SUBMITTAL OF REPORTS FOR FILING:
The following reports were accepted for filing:
a. Financial Reports for Period Ending March 31, 1984.
4. Report of Revenues to Date for Fiscal Year 1983 -84.
C. Planning Commission Action at Meeting of April 17, 1984.
27. Executive Session for Personnel and Legal Discussion.
Meeting Adjourned to Executive Session at 11:00 P.M.
Meeting Reconvened to Regular Session at 12:04 A.M.
Let the record show there was no action taken in Executive Session.
There was discussion concerning various legal and personnel matters
in Executive Session. Action will now be taken as a result of
these discussions.
29. Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to reject
the application by Ray Lopez for PERS disability, and find there
0 is not a job related disability as a result of his employment with
the City of Beaumont.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
30. Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, authorizing
Self - Insurance Administrators to settle the Workers' Compensation
claim against the City brought by Deborah Cundiff with an uncondi-
tional compromise and release settling the case for a maximum
award plus associated fees as stipulated.
.13.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Request for City to Provide Defense in Lawsuit.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to extend defense with reservation of
rights was withdrawn by Councilman Lowry.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to repeal
Resolution No. 1983 -63.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to extend
defense to Norman Davis, L. W. May, James B. Thompson and Richard
Hammel, with reservation of rights.
Page 7
. _aumont City Council
April 23, 1984
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
31. Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to
authorize the City Attorney to meet with all defendants in
this case in an attempt to work out a settlement.
IGW-
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
28. Consideration of Renewal of City Manager Contract.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to continue Agenda Item No. 28 to
the next regular Council meeting DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to adjourn the meeting DIED FOR
LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, that
the contract for City Manager not be renewed, and that the City
advertise and take applications for the position of City Manager,
allowing the present City Manager to be included in that pool
of applicants, and that prior to July 1, 1984, the City Council
make a determination as to filling the position.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
MOTION FAILED.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 12:40 A.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Itene do
Page 8
Sweeney, Cit& /Cler
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
MAY 14, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
May 14, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Michael. Duersch, First Counselor in the
Bishopric of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of April 24, 1984, were approved as
submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning
Commission meeting of April 17, 1984 and Adjourned Planning
Commission meeting of April 24, 1984, were accepted for filing.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of May 14, 1984, in the amount of
$211,860.65; and Payroll of May 3, 1984, in the amount of
$25,327.55, were approved for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session for Personnel and
Legal Discussion at 7:50 P.M.
The meeting was reconvened to Regular Session at 9:46 P.M.
Let the record show action was taken in Executive Session as
follows:
5. Request of Councilman Russo for Executive Session for Personnel
Discussion Excluding City Manager.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
continue in Executive Session for the purpose of considering the
removal or renewal of the City Manager contract, excluding the
City Manager.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED
Let the record further show that as a result of discussion in Execu-
tive Session the following action will be taken:
27. Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
Parker and Dally to settle the Worker's Compensation claim of
Donald Tipton, and any other allied claims against the City and
its officers and employees, in an amount not to exceed in actual
costs to the City, the sum of $5,000.00 for a full and final
Tease of all claims against the City, its officers and employees.
,el J AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 1
' iumont City Council
May 14, 1984
6. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -18 - Approving the City Manager's Contract, and
Specifically Approving the Salary Provisions of the Contract.
The Deputy City Clerk read the proposed City Manager contract in
its entirety.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, that the
contract for employment of the City Manager for the City of
Beaumont, between Mr. Davis and the City of Beaumont, be executed
4 by the Mayor and the City Clerk; and further adopting Resolution
No. 1984 -18.
/ Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to amend
r� Councilman Lowry's motion to read that the term of the contract be
for a period of six months, and that all appropriate language in
the contract be changed to reflect a six month term.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
AMENDMENT FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
that the contract be in direct compliance with the Ordinance of
the City of Beaumont as it was drawn based upon the intent that
the term of the contract can be severed at the end of any thirty
days without cause. DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
The meeting adjourned for a recess at 9:10 P.M.
The meeting reconvened to regular session at 9:35 P.M.
7. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mrs. Ann Connors, 813 Elm, addressed the Council, asking various
questions concerning Alan Manee, the apparent problems existing
between the City Manager and certain employees, and inquiring
whether the Council planned to do anything about the situation(s).
r
There was lengthy discussion which is a matter of record on the
tape of the meeting.
b. Mrs. Donna Kyle, 40571 E. 8th Street, read a prepared statement
to the City Council requesting no more annexation meetings, and
stating when they are ready to join the City they will invite
the City to meet with them.
8. ORDINANCE
Municipal
Inspector
Motion by
Ordinance
only.
The Ordin�
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
NO. 599 - FIRST READING - Adding to the City of Beaumont
Code a Chapter 15.38 Authorizing the City Building
to Issue Citations for Certain Code Violations.
Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to pass
No. 599 at its first reading by reading of the title
ance was read by title only by the Deputy City Clerk.
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
None.
None.
None.
Page 2
aumont City Council
May 14, 1984
9. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -17 - Pertaining to Traffic Ordinance No. 369,
Amending Resolution No. 1972 -17, 1981 -49 and 1983 -27 by Adding
Sub - Section 27 of 13 -A to Prescribe Certain Additional No Parking
Zones to Promote the Public Safety and Welfare.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
the second version of Resolution No. 1984 -17 as it appears in
the agenda packet.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
1 NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
10.
Actions Necessary for Sewer Assessment District:
a. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -19 - Adopting Map Describing Proposed
Boundaries of Assessment District and Ordering Filing of
Map.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -19.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
b. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -20 - Resolution of Intention of the City
Council of the City of Beaumont.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -20.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
C. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -21 - Appointing Superintendent of Streets.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -21 with Gary Phelps being appointed as
Superintendent of Streets.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
y d. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -22 - Designating Newspaper to be Used for
Ar Assessment District Proceedings.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to adopt
l Resolution No. 1984 -22, with the Record - Gazette being designated
as the newspaper to be used for assessment district proceedings.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
11. Consideration of Updated Fee Schedule for City.Clerk Services.
(Continued from April 23, 1984).
This agenda item was continued to the regular meeting of May 29,
1984.
Page 3
12.
13.
Decision on Negative Declaration for Proposed San Timoteo Wastewater
Treatment Plant (84- ND -1). (Continued from April 23, 1984).
This agenda item was continued until the regular meeting of May
29, 1984.
Consideration of Renewal of Lease of City Property at 500 Grace
Street to Beaumont Unified School District.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
the proposal submitted to the school district.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
14. HEARING to Show Cause Why Certain Structure Shall Not Be Condemned
as a Public Nuisance and Said Nuisance be Abated by Reconstructing
or Proper Repair of Said Structure, or by Razing or Removing Same.
Location: 60 Michigan Avenue.
The Hearing was opened at 11:05 P.M.
Let the record show there was no one in the audience as either
proponents or opponents.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to continue
this hearing until May 29, 1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
15. Request of Mr. Raymond Berg for Investigation of Procedures Used
By Police Department.
After hearing Mr. Berg's verbal request, this matter was referred
to the Police Department for a report to be brought back to the
Council not later than the regular meeting of June 11, 1984.
16. Request from Richard Whitman dba Dick's Independent Volkswagen
Repair for Waiver of Conditions.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to refer
this application back to the Planning Commission for re- hearing
on the conditions, with no fee to be charged the applicant.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
17. Request for Reimbursemnt of Costs to Repair Door Broken by Police
Department.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to accept
the City Manager's recommendation for reimbursement to the
claimant of $100.00.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
May 14, 1984
18. Request for Reimbursement for Damages Due to Sewer Back -Up.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept
the recommendation of the Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor
to award damages as follows:
Carpet Cleaning: Reimbursement as requested contingent
upon claimants submitting to the City all insurance
monies collected for the damages.
Two Towels: Reimbursement as requested contingent upon
submittal of receipts by claimants.
Bleach: Reimbursement as requested contingent upon sub-
mittal of receipts by claimants.
Time and Labor: Award payment of $55.00 of the $100.00
claimed. The $55.00 price quote was received from
Servicemaster of the Inland Empire, the same company
who cleaned the Davis' carpet.
Plumber's Charge: Deny payment. According to Mrs.
Davis, she called the Police Department and reported
the sewer blockage, evidenced by sewage flowing down
the alley behind her home. There was no reason to call
a plumber after reporting the problem to the City,
because a plumber would not have the legal authority
(or equipment) to enter a city manhole to clear a blockage.
The plumber's report states he was called out for a main
line stoppage, not for a blockage in the resident's line.
Family Discomfort: Deny payment based on past precedents
and policy of City Administrations.
Award of any future claims from 1015 Chestnut Avenue will
be contingent upon the installation of an approved back -
flow prevention device in the resident's service lateral.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
19. Consideration of Amendment of Claim Filed by Leonard J. Howlett.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
allow the amendment to the claim filed by Leonard J. Howlett,
and to reconfirm the rejection of the original claim filed as
amended.
I AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
20.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Request from Rotary Club for City to Accept Ownership of Scoreboard
for Rangel Park as a Gift from the Rotary Club.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to accept
the gift of a scoreboard for Rangel Park from the Rotary Club,
contingent upon the obtaining of a construction permit with the
fee for such permit to be waived by the City.
AYES:
Councilmen
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Page 5
_- auoont City Council
May 14, 1984
21. Decision Regarding Weed Abatement Procedures.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to authorize
the use of City forces and equipment to abate weeds pursuant to
requests of the Fire Department, and direct the Finance Officer
to collect said charges.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
22. Authorization to Employ J. F. Davidson & Co. for First Street Lift
Station Project.
This agenda item was continued to the regular meeting of May 29,
1984.
23. Authorization to Purchase from Another Computer Supplier.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to authorize
Ak the purchase of the IBM computers from Businessland rather than
IBM as previously authorized.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
24. Request to Revoke Minute Order Approving Special Planning Services
in the Amount of $6,000.00
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to revoke
the Minute Order approving special planning services in the amount
of $6,000.00, and place the funds back in the General Fund.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
25. Request for Budget Adjustments:
a. Transfer necessary for City Attorney Budget.
b. Transfer to Cover Costs of Discipline & Grievance Report
Not Included in Original Budget.
C. Transfer Necessary for Purchase of Mower Due to Increase
in Price.
e. Transfer for Carpet in Senior Center.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to auth-
orize budget adjustments as requested.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
25. Submittal of Reports for Filing:
Report Concerning Necessity for Filing Amended Housing Element with
State by July 1, 1984; Report of Planning Commission Action at
Meeting of May 8, 1984; and Report Concerning Sale of 1954 GMC
Fire Truck were accepted for filing.
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by
Page 6
.3aumont City Council
May 14, 1984
Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the meeting was adjourned at
11:40 P.M.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Respectfully submitted,
Deputy City Clerk
page 7
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
MAY 29, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:36 P.M., Tuesday,
May 29, 1984 in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson presiding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand John Hall, Church of Religious
Science.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Thompson.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
and Mayor Thompson. Councilman Mitchell returned to his seat at 7:43
P.M. and Councilman Russo arrived at 7:48 P.M.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes of
Regular Council Meeting of May 14, 1984, were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of May 8, 1984, were accepted for filing.
�3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of May 29, 1984, in the amount of
$58,429.39; and Payroll of May 17, 1984, in the amount of $25,553.16,
were approved for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. James A. Griffin re Donation of Sidewalk and curb /gutter
to the City.
Mr. Griffin addressed the Council stating he lives at Magnolia
and 8th Street, and for the safety of children and pedestrians
he had a sidewalk and curb /gutter installed at a cost of
$2,000, and wishes to donate this sidewalk and curb /gutter to
the City at no cost.
b. Mr. Harold Blackaby asked that his oral communication item
concerning a reply to the City Attorney's remarks, be held
until such time as the City Attorney, Mr. George Ryskamp, is
present.
c. Mr. Robert Taylor, 1415 E. 6th, Beaumont, representing Robert
and Margaret Grundy, addressed the Council concerning the
installation of a manufactured home on a City lot, and asking
the Council to approve a variance to the City Ordinance
governing the roof pitch requirement.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, that
Mr. Taylor's request be referred to the Building and Engin-
eering Department for determination re State Codes and City
Ordinances.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
May 29, 1984
28. Out of Sequence.
Selection of Engineering Firm for First Street Lift Station Project.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to award J.F.
Davidson Associates the contract for $12,100.00, and authorizing
staff to negotiate an agreement for engineering services based
r upon the selected proposal; and further authorizing the Mayor to
execute same on behalf of the City, subject to approval of the
City Attorney and Community Development.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
5. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -7. Applicant: Westinghouse Electric
Corporation. Location: Highland Springs Road and 2nd Street.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to accept
and approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission to adopt
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -7.
. AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
6. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -8. Applicant: Beaumont Garden Apart-
ments. Location: 8th Street and Xenia.
,Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May to accept and
approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission to adopt a
.i
Negatve Declaration 84 -ND -8 for applicant Beaumont Garden Apart -
ments at 8th and Xenia.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
7. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -9. Applicant: City of Beaumont for
Sewer Assessment District No. 1983 -1. Location: East of Beaumont
Avenue, South of Brookside Avenue, North of Cougar Way and SE of
Beaumont /Cougar.
; Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept and
approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission to adopt a
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -9 for Sewer Assessment District No.
1983 -1.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
8. Decision on Negative Declaration for Proposed San Timoteo Wastewater
Treatment Plant 84 -ND -1.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, that Nega-
tive Declaration 84 -ND -1, for the proposed San Timoteo Wastewater
t Treatment Plant be accepted and approved, with one change to be
added as follows:
Page 2
a
f%
Bear. nt City Council
May 29, 1984
An Alternate No. 4 be added to continue the existing Plant
in conjunction with Alternate No. 1 and keep it in stand-
by condition for emergency use and possible expansion if
required in the future.
AYES: Councilman Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Request from Mr. Tom Arge for Transfer of Permit to Operate Beaumont
Taxi.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to grant
the transfer of the permit to operate Beaumont Taxi from Mr. Landy
Foster to Mr. Tom Arge, subject to all rules and regulations of
the State and City Ordinances governing such permits.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
10. Request from Mr. James Watson dba Watson Audio for Partial Refund
of Fees Charged for Sign Permit.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, to refund
$50.00 to Mr. Watson as an overcharge.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to include that any other sign ordinances that have been paid since
10 the last resolution be given a voluntary reduction by the same
amount, was withdrawn by Councilman Mitchell.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Councilman Lowry left the room at 8:45 P.M.
11. Authorization to Submit, and City Manager to Sign, Application for
Older Americans Act Funding, 1984 -85.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to authorize
the submittal of the application for Older American Act Funding
for 1984 -85, and further authorize the City Manager to sign the
application.
� Y
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
12. ORDINANCE NO. 599 - SECOND READING - Adding to the Beaumont Municipal
Code a Chapter 15.38 Authorizing the City Building Inspector to
Issue Citations for Certain Code Violations.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
x. Ordinance No. 599 at its second reading by reading of the title
only.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
Page 3
13.
14.
Beaumont City Council
May 29, 1984
Councilman Lowry returned to his seat at 8:50 P.M.
The report concerning proposed Mobile Home Rent Review Commission
Ordinance was continued to June 11, 1984.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -23 - Memorializing Smokey Bear.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -23.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
15. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -24 - Supporting Proposition 18 which Places
Before the Voters of California June 5, 1984 a Bond Measure to
Provide Funding for Parks and Recreational Land Acquisition,
Development and Other Related Purposes.
Zo
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt Reso-
lution No. 1984 -24 was withdrawn by Councilmen Lowry and May respec-
tively.
r
Resolution No. 1984 -24 was tabled.
16. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -25 - Approving Riverside Transit Agency Engaging
in,the Temporary Borrowing of Funds.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Ae Resolution No. 1984 -25.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
17. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -30 - Approving the Annexation to the City of
Beaumont of Certain Uninhabited Territory Without Notice or Hearing
Hereinafter Designated as Annexation No. 84 -3 -34 and Further
Designated as LAFCO No. 84 -32 -3 (Westinghouse).
P4? Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
,W" Resolution No. 1984 -30.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
18. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -29 - Accepting Title to Property and Providing
for Recordation of Deeds.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
�
.- -Resolution No. 1984 -29.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
21. Out of Sequence.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -28 - Directing that a Special Meeting be Held to
Hear Evidence Concerning the Construction of a Building Authorized
as Agenda Item No. 16 on the City Agenda dated February 14, 1984.
(Requested by Councilman Mitchell).
Page 4
Beau... -jnt City Council
May 29, 1984
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -28.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ter' NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
20. Out of Sequence.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -27 - Requiring the Production of Records Pertain-
ing to the Construction of a Building Authorized by the City on
February 14, 1984. (Requested by Councilman Mitchell).
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -27.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
19. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -26 - Altering Terms of the Employment Contract
Between Norman Davis as City Manager and the City of Beaumont.
_54,, (Requested by Councilman Mitchell) .
jay Motion by Councilman Mitchell to adopt Resolution No. 1984 -26.
f` DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend his previous motion to set
Resolution No. 1984 -26 over to a Special Meeting pending the receipt
of the public documents relative to the alleged illegal contract.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
22. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -32 - Amending Resolution No. 1984 -01, Section I
to Provide New Charges for Sign Permits.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -32.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
23. HEARING to Show Cause Why Certain Structure Shall not be Condemned as
a Public Nuisance. Location: 60 Michigan Avenue.
On recommendation of the City Attorney, this hearing was continued
until July 23, 1984.
24. Consideration of Claim Filed Against City by Leonard J. Howlett.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to reject the
claim filed against the City by Leonard J. Howlett.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and
25. Acceptance of Heater for Maintenance Yard Offices.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept the
donation of a heater for the Maintenance Yard Office as indicated on
the invoice as a gift to the employees of the City of Beaumont.
Page 5
Beau ,nt City Council
May 29, 1984
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion was
ruled out of order by the Mayor as it was not germaine to the main
motion.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
26. Recommendation to Develop Specs and Prepare for Bid on Fuel Dispensing
Operation at Public Works Yard.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to continue
this agenda item to June 11, 1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo and Mitchell.
27. Recommendation to Approve Construction of Automatic Security Gate
at Public Works Yard.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to authorize
the construction of an automated security gate at the Public Works
Yard; authorize the Purchasing Officer to purchase the materials
and the Vehicle Maintenance and Transit Superintendent to perform
the necessary work and supervision to achieve construction of the
project; further authorizing the transfer of funds to cover the
project as follows: $2,179.20 from Account 10- 405 -252 and $2,179.20
from Account 01- 325 -254 for a total of $4,358: 0 to Account No.
10 405 -301.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thomspon.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
29. Consideration of Updated Fee Schedule for City Clerk Services.
(Continued from May 14, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt the
City Clerk and Miscellaneous Services Fee Schedule as presented,
with the hourly costs prorated.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
delete the tape listening charge of $10..00.per hour.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion that
the $10.00 charge for hearing tapes be amended to $2.00 per quarter
hour.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
30. Request from City Attorney for Clearcut Direction as to the Response
to be Given by his Office to Request for Legal Research, Preparation
of Resolutions and Ordinances, et.
There being no objections, this agenda item was continued until the
meeting of June 11, 1984.
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
May 29, 1984
31. Receipt of 1984 -85 Proposed Budget and Set Date for Hearing.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, that the City
ncil receives the 1984 -85 proposed Budget and sets the date for
Hearing of June 11, 1984, at 8:30 P.M.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
32. REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS:
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to approve
udget adjustments as follows:
F
a) $106.00 from Account 01 -135 -254 to Account 01 -135 -251 for the
Purchase of Two Work Tables.
b) $595.00 from Account 01- 505 -221 to Account 01- 505 -260 for
cement replacement for the maintenance yard.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
33. SUBMITTAL OF REPORTS FOR FILING:
The following reports were ordered filed:
a) Financial Reports for Period Ending April 30, 1984
b) Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of May 22, 1984.
35. Out of Sequence.
Request for Approval to Bid on Personnel Boom at General Telephone
Co. Auction.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, to approve a
bid on the personnel boom at the General Telephone Company Auction
on June 3, at Pomona, in a maximum amount of up to $5,000.00.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
34. Adjourn to Executive Session for Legal and Personnel Discussion at
10:30 P.M.
Reconvene to Regular Session at 10:59 P.M.
Let the record show action taken in Executive Session:
No motions or actions were taken in Executive Session. The discussion
was in regard to legal matters previously filed and the recommendation
for settlement. Action as a result of this discussion will be taken
in regular session as follows:
36. Robert Bridges 4850 Time.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to award 4850
time for temporary disability to former Chief of Police Robert
Bridges.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 7
Bea ant City Council
May 29, 1984
37. Robert Bridges Permanent Disability.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to deny the
claim for permanent disability as a result of finding of no permanent
disability by the City Council arising out of his employment with the
City of Beaumont.
YES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and
Y Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
38. Settlement of Book Publishing Company Charge for Services.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, that in the
interest of maintaining a business relationship, and without
acknowledging any liability on the City, the City Council accepts
the proposed settlement offered by Book Publishing Company.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 11 :09 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
,I, ( " '4�
C TY CL K
Page 8
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
JUNE 11, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:33 P.M., Monday,
June 11, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Russo.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Lowry.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of May 29, 1984, were approved as
submitted.
2. Appeal by Councilman Lowry of Decision by Planning Commission on
Conditions of Approval 14.12 and 14.90 of Conditional Use Permit
80 -CUP -6 (Swap Meet).
Councilman Lowry presented his recommended changes to Conditions
of Approval 14.12 and 14.90.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept
Planning Commission minutes of May 22, 1984, with the revisions
to the Conditions of Approval on 80 -CUP -6 (Swap Meet) as follows:
14.12. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to
a one year review.
14.90. Dust Control Method shall be 3/4" crushed rock or
sprayed with a low specific gravity road oil which
shall be applied to the roadways of the parking
area, but may exclude parking stalls for striping
purposes.
The entire unpaved section of Xenia Avenue shall
be sprayed with the same low specific gravity
oil. The road oil shall be as specified by the
City Engineer. Dust control method to be com-
pleted within 21 calendar days after approval of
the Conditional Use Permit.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to amend
Councilman Lowry's motion to exclude the necessity of oiling of
Xenia Avenue by the applicant.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
3 ABSTAIN: None.
IZ� ABSENT: None.
ORIGINAL MOTION CARRIED WITHOUT AMENDMENT.
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
3. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting of
May 22, 1984.
The minutes of Planning Commission meeting of May 22, 1984 were
accepted with the changes to Conditions of Approval for 80 -CUP -6
as delineated in the previous motion on Agenda Item No. 2.
4. Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
approve warrants as audited per warrant list of June 11, 1984,
in the amount of $45,717.00 and payroll of May 31, 1984, in the
amount of $27,319.15, for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
8. OUT OF SEQUENCE.
PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Budget and Revenue Sharing Hearing.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:15 P.M.
City Manager: Gentlemen, let me very briefly make a statement
about the City budget. It is proposed that a total budget is sub-
mitted in the total amount of $2,544,452. $1,681,109 for the
General Fund. The difference between those two figures represents
the amount that would be spent in the sewer disposal collection
area, disbursement area as well as the transit area. Unless there
is anything specific that you would like to have discussed for the
public, I would at this time request that the Finance Director
make a simple statement to get into the record to meet the
necessities of the Federal Revenue Sharing Act. That he tell you
how this proposed budget plans to spend the Federal Revenue Sharing
money that is allocated to the City, and to tell you what that
dollar amount is since we just learned that last week after we had
made a projection on the income from that source. So, Ronney, if
you would do that quickly please.
Ronney Wong, Finance Director, City of Beaumont: As in past years,
gentlemen, the Revenue Sharing has been allocated entirely to the
Police Department. Again, this year we are proposing the same
spending. So, therefore, the $180,000 that we have budgeted in
the proposed budget is that amount. However, most currently we
have received from the Department of the Treasury that our estimated
allocation for the next fiscal year will be $163,746. That is
$16,000 below the projected proposal that we have of $180,000.
Mayor Thompson: What was the revenue sharing for last year.
Ronney Wong: $179,000. The biggest reason - I have been in con-
tact with other finance directors within the Riverside County area
trying to find out why our particular amount went down. There are
three big components that are put together for revenue sharing
distribution. One being population, which is the big key factor.
Even though our population has only increased 5 or 6 people per
capita , other large cities having a tremendous amount of increase
has absorbed that total allocation, so when they put this formula
together in allocating the revenue sharing, the amount that
Beaumont is receiving per capita now is about the same, but the
total in dollars is less, because our per capita increase has not
been on the same proportion as other cities. That is the major
reason why it has gone down.
Councilman Lowry: $163 thousand. . .?
Mr. Wong: $163,746.
Mayor Thompson: Any other problems that you see that is not on here?
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Mr. Wong: Yes. I have another - in fact I got a phone call today
from our insurance liability. It may be increasing in the neigh-
borhood of 15 %.
Mayor Thompson: Which one is this.
Mr. Wong: That you will find in the General Government budget, line
item of insurance. And the reason for that 15% increase is, here
again, municipalities as a whole here in this item, we are pooled
together with all municipalites for liability coverage, and the
reason for this increase is because lately municipalities have been
having problems in the area of theft, lawsuits, and that type of
claims. Notonly to Beaumont here but cities state wide.
Mayor Thompson: You mean the 35,647 that is indicated for the 84 -85
budget will . . .
Mr. Wong: Correct. Will increase another $5,400 approximately.
That is about a 15% increase. And there is one last item that is
currently on this evening's agenda pertaining to the - Item No.
20. If you will read the narrative in Item No. 20 there is an
amount addressed there, as I recall, $250.00 - $150.00. Those are
the only changes that I know at this time.
Mayor Thompson: Are there any questions for the Finance Director
at this time. The Federal Revenue Sharing funds that we do get
are allocated 100% to the Police Department. Am I correct.
City Manager: That has been the historical application in this
City from the day they were first received five years ago.
Councilman Lowry: How does that amount compare to last years?
Mr. Wong: In the current fiscal year we are looking at $179,000.
Councilman Lowry: So we are down. . .
Mr. Wong: $16,000.
Mayor Thompson: We have a question in the back?
Pat Renna, 987 E. 14th: I don't even know if this is the time to
ask, but how many officers is that.
Mayor Thompson: In what.
Pat Renna: In the Police Department.
Mayor Thompson: There has been no change in the Police Department.
Pat Renna: I understand we lost an officer last week.
City Manager: Well that doesn't mean that he is lost. It means that
he needs to be replaced. There are thirteen authorized positions
in the department. This budget still authorizes thirteen positions.
Pat Renna: Wasn't it not that long ago when we had eighteen, and
for awhile we were up to twenty something.
City Manager: I don't think we have ever been to twenty. We were
authorized at one point eighteen, and, yes, I think the City pro-
bably - I hesitate to use the word mistake, but it probably was a
mistake. When they first got their revenue sharing they took all
that Federal Revenue sharing money and added policemen to the budget.
Then, when Proposition 13 was passed by the voters of California,
all of a sudden the various cities, including the City of Beaumont,
were without a lot of revenue, and they struggled along here for a
year or two, and gradually certain things had to be cut in order to
survive, and one of those things that was cut, was a cutback to
where the City had formerly been before it received the Federal
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Revenue Sharing money because of the loss of the Proposition 13
money.
Pat Renna: Okay, but Proposition 13 passed before I even came to
this town.
City Manager: Well, that is very well and good, that's true, but
the revenue loss is still being felt yet today. If we were getting
all of that tax money that we were previously getting, there
wouldn't be a problem of maintaining any service this City wanted,
because all they would have to do, as they have done in the past,
prior to Prop 13, all they had to do was raise the tax rate each
year to pay for whatever they had. And that is what they used to
do. You can't do that anymore.
Pat Renna: Well you raise our utilities and take away officers.
City Manager: No, we have taken away no officers and, you know,
you have to make a decision. Do you want to pay taxes for things,
and you can still do that, you can promote an assessment district
in the community to pay for extra police officers if you desire.
That is the community's prerogative.
Councilman Mitchell: I have one question of Mr. Wong. I see in the
continued appropriations on the last page that the fire truck,
128,825 is not shown on there. Have we purchased that fire truck
as yet. The continuing appropriations for a fire truck was 128,825,
that was in October of 83.
City Manager: There is no expectation to carry that over as a
reserve for continued appropriations because it is expected to buy
the truck.
Mayor Thompson: It is on Page 3.
Councilman Mitchell: On Page 3.
Mayor Thompson: 47,962. That is the grant there, and then there
was - it shows the fire truck - restricted fund No. 388. $47,962,
and we have paid - allocated for it, what was it the last time. I
don't remember.
City Manager: I can't remember whether it was $120,000 or $150,000.
Councilman Mitchell: It was up there around $165,000 wasn't it.
Mayor Thompson: Somewhere around there, I don't remember but then
this. . .
Councilman Mitchell: We had 128, plus about 60,000.
Mayor Thompson: And then this 47,962 will just about pay for it I
think.
Councilman Mitchell: What page are we on now.
Mayor Thompson: On Page 3, it shows under total restricted fund
revenue summary, it is a grant for the balance of the fire truck.
No. 388.
City Manager: I would agree with you if the fire truck is not
purchased in this year, and I do not recall whether it is in the
fire department budget, which is what 210.
Mr. Wong: From all indications, I have been told it will be pur-
chased this year. The bids are out I understand.
City Manager: Yes. But if we have not spent the money then we
should include the money in the fire department budget for the
fire truck. So between now and the adoption of the budget, or
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
between now and the time of your study sessions, we will check
that out very thoroughly and have a report here to show whether
we are going to spend that money - officially allocate it in this
fiscal year, or whether we need to carry it over into the new year
so that it will be there for the fire truck. In any event it is
there.
Councilman Mitchell: I was just wondering where the $128,000 was
shown at the present time. I see the grant. That grant is shown
47,982, but I haven't been able to find where the 128,825 is shown.
City Manager: Well, obviously he doesn't show it.
Mr. Wong: Our intent is to be purchasing and paying for it this
fiscal year. Therefore, there is no need to put it in next year's
budget.
Councilman Mitchell: This is surplus then.
Mr. Wong: What surplus.
Councilman Mitchell: $128,825.
City Manager: Well you can't buy a fire truck that you pay $160,000
for with $454,000. Obviously you have to have $160,000.
Mr. Wong: The $47,000 is in next year's fiscal budget because that
is when we will receive it.
Councilman Lowry: You have to make a down payment when you place
the order.
City Manager: That is what we plan to do, when we actually place
the precise order we are going to make a down payment.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Davis. This is why I was asking. Contin-
uously we had in October 31, 1983, we had two items showing a
Reserve for Continuing Appropriations. A fire truck $128,825,
building fund, $219,000. Now, of course, I am not very intelligent
I grant, but I know we don't have the fire truck as yet. We know
that we are having a grant fund for a portion of it.
City Manager: The money is still in the current year's budget Mr.
Mitchell. That hasn't disappeared. It hasn't been put in next
year's budget because we expect to spend it. I just indicated to
you that between now and the adoption of this budget, this is a
proposed budget, between now and the time of the adoption of the
budget, if it has not been spent then it is going to be placed in
the budget for you to carry it over into the new year. It is quite
simple.
Councilman Mitchell: It is in the general fund now.
City Manager: Absolutely. It is deposited right where it indicates
in the Reserve for Continuing Appropriations, in the current year's
budget.
Councilman Mitchell: It shows in the General Fund.
City Manager: However Ronney reports it to you is where it is, right.
Councilman Mitchell: I am always curious. I am curious every month.
And I continue to be month after month, and I always ask the question.
I always say you ask Ronney and Ronney won't do it for you. So I
don't know what the story is. I would just like to know where the
money is.
Mr. Wong: In the General Fund. It has not been moved.
Page 5
s:
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: It is in the General Fund and is not committed.
City Manager: It is committed to a fire truck, he didn't say it
was not committed. That is not what he just said.
Mr. Wong: It has not been moved. It is still there. Unchanged.
Councilman Lowry: If it is spent before July 1, 1984, it is in the
current year, and there is no sense in putting it in this new
budget.
Councilman Mitchell: I am asking the accountant sir.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Let's go on. Is there any other question.
Ann Connors, 813 Elm: I read in the paper, I want to check my facts
first, that there is a $7,000 raise in the City Manager's budget.
Is that right. Office budget.
Mayor Thompson: Proposed raise in the City Manager's budget?
Ann Connors: Yeah.
City Manager: Do you want me to speak to it Mayor Thompson?
Mayor Thompson: Well, let's see here just a minute and see where it
comes from. Over last year?
Ann Connors: Yes.
Mayor Thompson: The total figure is higher this year than last year.
Ann Connors: By about $7,000.
Mayor Thompson: I don't know exactly without calculating out, but
do you want to speak to that Norm.
City Manager: Yes, there is a higher figure for the total budget
in the City Manager's office. Primarily, as you will see if you
look on Page 11. Gentlemen, if you will look on Page 11, there is
a word processor, there is a secretary desk, and there is a chair,
totaling $5,400.00, which is the biggest element which has been
increased in the City Manager's budget. We could just as well, if
we had wanted to play games, we could have just as well put it in
somebody else's budget, but, you know, the secretary is going to
use it, we are going to pass her equipment on to another department.
We could have bought it in another department and then passed it
up to us. But, I felt we ought to give anybody that wanted to shoot
at the City Manager's office that opportunity, and so here we are.
Ann Connors: I don't know what you are getting excited about because
I only wanted to ask what the $7,000 was for, and you have answered
the question. I had no intention. . .
Mayor Thompson: About $5,400 is just for equipment, according to
this. On this budget.
Ann Connors: Because, last year when it was raised it was for salary
for the secretary, and so I wondered if it was the same thing or
something different.
Mayor Thompson: Yes, there is a $10.00 per month increase in the
secretary's salary.
Ann Connors: Oh, well. . .
Mayor Thompson: So that makes $120.00 a year.
Ann Connors: Yeah, I was more . . .
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Mayor Thompson: It goes from 1609 to 1619.
Ann Connors: I was more interested in the bulk of it than in the
$10.00.
Mayor Thompson: You asked, so that is where one of the increases is,
yes.
Ann Connors: Yes, that is the answer to the question. Thank you.
Councilman Mitchell: Only one other. On the fly sheet where it
states in the middle, it shows a reflectorial budget of $46,957
surplus. Was that surplus figured prior to the drop in revenue
sharing?
City Manager: Yes it was, so as of today the surplus would be about
$30,000 as of now.
Councilman Mitchell: So the surplus is down. So, now, I see also
that, as stated, this exists before any consideration is given to
any pay boost consideration for City employees.
City Manager: That is true.
Councilman Mitchell: Does that reflect the indication that the City
employees again will not receive an increase in pay.
City Manager: No, but it was a point of information.
Councilman Mitchell: But there is nothing in the projected budget
from your office to show any increase in wages for any employees.
Is that correct.
City Manager: You are correct. You are correct. Other than their
normal merit pay increases that they get. Those are all computed
in. But in terms of a general increase, there is nothing in the
budget. You are correct.
Councilman Mitchell: How long has it been since we have had a
general increase in employee's wages.
Mayor Thompson: At least three years.
City Manager: Well, it has been at least three years, and it has
been at least three years because there hasn't been any money in
the revenue coming into the City to make that possible. You can
only spend what you have.
Councilman Mitchell: I didn't ask for the reason, I just said that
they have not had a raise for three years. And you don't have any-
thing in here for a raise this year.
City Manager: That is correct. At this point, this is nothing.
Mayor Thompson: For 1984 -85.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes. Thank you.
City Manager: We can't have any
we haven't been able to conclude
we have worked out a negotiation
up with the means to pay for it.
with the various groups we can't
arrive at a figure.
thing in here at this point because
negotiations with anybody. Once
package then we can attempt to come
Until we can settle on something
even make a proposal. We can't even
Councilman Mitchell: I wasn't seeking the reasons sir, I was merely
seeking the fact.
City Manager: I think it is very important that you understand the
reasons, Councilman Mitchell.
Page 7
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: I understand them quite well, Mr. Davis.
Mayor Thompson: Is there anything else this time. Okay, there is
going to be some more extensive discussion on various sections of
this, so if you have no objections, we can adjourn this public
hearing. What is a date that we can get back to it and adjourn it
to a specific date. Monday?
The Public Hearing was adjourned to 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, June
20, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, at 8:38 P.M.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Nathan Guerriero, 10130 Utica Way, Cherry Valley, addressed
the Council pertaining to his new structure on Beaumont Avenue,
calling their attention to the fact that Cal -Trans felt he
should not have to install curb and gutter because it would be
covered over when they put the overpass in on Beaumont Avenue.
Therefore he felt the requirement for installation of curb and
gutter should be deleted from his requirements on his plot plan.
Mr. Guerriero's appeal of the Planning Commission Decision
will be heard by the Council at their meeting of June 25.
b. Mrs. Pat Burton asked Councilman May if he was going to put oil
on Xenia Avenue any more, and was advised that he was not.
6. Report Concerning Request of Mr. Tom Parker for Adoption of Ordinance
to Establish a Mobile Home Rent Review Commission. (Continued from
April 23, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to direct the
City Attorney to draft an Ordinance in concert with the present
t County Ordinance in reference to mobile home rent review commission.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Mitchell.
(Councilman Mitchell was away from his chair from 8:47 to 8:55).
7. Request from Merchants located in the 410 -432 Block of East Sixth
Street for Additional Frontage Parking.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to deny the
request from merchants located in the 410 -432 block of East Sixth
Street for additional frontage parking.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
This agenda item was referred to the Police Department for a re -study
of the curb marking.
9. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84- ND -11- Amendment of Zoning Ordinance
490 to Provide for Commercial- General (C -G) Zoning; and Authorization
for Mayor to Sign Notice of Determination.
10. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -13 - Amendment of Zoning Ordinance
490 to Provide for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning; and Auth-
orization for Mayor to Sign Notice of Determination.
Page 8
r
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
11. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -14 - Amendment of Zoning Ordinance
490 to Provide for Industrial Park (I -P) Zoning; and Authorization
for Mayor to Sign Notice of Determination.
12. Consideration of Recommendation of Planning Commission for Adoption
of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -15 - Amendment of Zoning Ordinance
490 to Provide for Residential Housing Development (RHD) Zoning;
and Authorization for Mayor to Sign Notice of Determination.
Motion by Councilman
Negative Declarations
as recommended by the
to sign the Notice of
V \") AYES :
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Councilmen
Thompson.
None.
None.
None.
Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to adopt
84- ND -11, 84- ND -13, 84 -ND -14 and 84 -ND -15
Planning Commission and authorize the Mayor
Determinations.
Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
13. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE NO. 600 - An Urgency Ordinance Amending
Ordinance 490 and Beaumont Municipal Code Title 17 by Adding
Sections 17.20.200, 205, 210; 17.25.300,305,310,315,320,340;
17.30.200,205,210,215,220; 17.35.010,015,020,025,030 Providing
Residential Housing Development (RHD), Commercial- General (C -G),
Industrial Park (I -P) and Planned Unit Development (PUD).
The Public Hearing was opened at 9:10 P.M.
City Manager: This is the addition of three zoning items to
Ordinance 490, which in effect is the creation of three new zones
for the City of Beaumont. Residential Housing Development,
Commercial General, I was right there are four of them, Industrial
Park and the Planned Unit Development. It is not contemplated
this would be applied to any of the existing lands within the City,
but it is intended to apply to new lands that may have just been
annexed or are in the process of annexing to the City. In other
words these are new zones that would be of a little different
nature than anything that currently exists on our books, and
seemed at either the immediate future or the future.
Councilman Mitchell: Doesn't this ordinance almost take over every-
thing in 490.
City Manager: It doesn't take over anything. It doesn't change
anything in 490. It adds to 490, and it will be in the new 590
just the way it is appearing here, is the proposal. At least that
is the intent of both the Commission and the staff that has been
preparing it. No it doesn't change 490 whatsoever in terms of what
it exists. It is adding to 490. We have no industrial park zone
as an example in the existing 490, and it is the intent to apply
the industrial park zone to the area basically of the Loma Linda
property as one example. The Planned Unit Development has been
intended to be placed on all of the big lands pursuant to the General
Plan, that either are presently in or will annex to the City in the
future. It is not changing 4901 it is adding to 490.
Councilman Mitchell: This is very, very broad. There is one or
two in here that I believe should be given a great deal of considera-
tion prior to bringing them into codification and full adoption.
Like screening of outdoor storage, there shall be a masonry wall of
not less than six feet nor more than eight feet in height. Now that
is something that is relatively new.
City Manager: What item is that in Councilman Mitchell.
Councilman Mitchell: That is on Item 11. I don't have a page number
on this document. 17.23.010, Site Development Standards, lot area
dimensions and so forth. It changes a great deal what was in the
other ordinance, some to the better and some, in my opinion, to the
Page 9
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
worser. That is a tremendous word isn't it. But this entire thing
is so broad, and I am taking nothing away from the staff, but I
think that we should have at least a time to study it thoroughly
for a week. It would take a week to just go back and forth to find
out what has been changed.
City Manager: As I say, there hasn't been anything changed. This
is a brand new zone.
Councilman Mitchell: Having read No. 490 quite extensively, I see
many things in here that were in 490 that are changed quite a bit
from what 490 was.
City Manager: I can only say, Mr. Mitchell, there is no I -P zone
in 490. This is a new zone created to be added to 490. If you
don't ever choose to apply this zone anyplace after you create it
that is up to you, but the staff does feel and the Commission felt
that this was a meritorious type of zone to use in terms of indus-
trial park type use.
Councilman Lowry: I had one question too that I forgot to mention
in the study session and that is on RHD zone, the last page, Item
11. Lot Area for Dwelling Unit. The minimum lot area for dwelling
unit shall be 3,000 square feet or a maximum of 12 dwelling units
per acre. It says acres, but that should be acre I am sure. Which-
ever is less providing that the area occupied by all buildings shall
not exceed 75% of the net lot area.of the parcel. Now this last
sentence kind of got me a little bit. Portions of the building area
with slopes in excess of 12 percent shall reduce their dwelling unit
density by one -third or greater. I can see on a slope where you
might have two units on the same elevation and a third unit under
the - outer most unit on the down slope and not have to reduce.
That is quite common. I don't quite understand the need for that.
Mayor Thompson: Which one are you talking about.
Councilman Lowry: Right here. In other words, what I am saying,
they could put two units there and one underneath the slope. It is
quite common.
Mayor Thompson: I think I am looking at the wrong one. And this
is for. . .
Councilman Lowry: . . . a quick sketch. A unit, a unit and another
unit. That is done quite commonly. I don't know the reason for
doing this.
Councilman Mitchell: A person studies this they will find many,
many, as they go through, are extremely difficult in interpretation
even if you have a certain amount of nominal knowledge, which many
of us have.
Mayor Thompson: Are we talking about the same thing.
Councilman Mitchell: I am talking about Ordinance No. 600, an
urgency ordinance of the City of Beaumont, California amending
Ordinance 490 and Beaumont Municipal Code. I think this is it.
City Manager: This is Section 17.20.210, the second page of that
section - the third page, I am sorry - Item 11.
Councilman Russo: Where was the origination of this ordinance.
City Manager: Where is the origination.
Councilman Russo: Yes. Where did this document come from. The
zonings and definitions and so forth. Did they come from our
Planning Commission, did they come up with these.
City Manager: It came from our staff four or five months ago,
and the Planning Commission. They have been studying this thing
in 590 and Jim pulled it out because we had need to use it now not
six months from now when they finally get around to adopting 590.
Page 10
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Mayor Thompson: Is there anybody in the audience that would like
to comment. This is a public hearing and we would like to find
out your input on this. Is there anybody who wants input.
Pat Renna: Why is it an urgency ordinance.
Mayor Thompson: Why is it an urgency ordinance.
City Manager: Because there is a necessity to use it.
Mayor Thompson: Why. Do we have somebody that wants it yesterday.
City Manager: We have the necessity to use the industrial park
zone, yes.
Mayor Thompson: Oh, the industrial park zone.
Councilman Mitchell: Is this a special zone for a special project.
City Manager: No, this is not a special zone. As I said this was
created by the staff some five or six months ago, the Planning
Commission has been going over it for months. It has been pulled
out of 590, and inserted in 490 because we need it. We need it to
apply to the General Plan that this City adopted two years ago.
In 1982 didn't we adopt the General Plan. And we can't apply the
General Plan in this City until we get the zones to make it possible
to make the applications. Specifically the PUD, the general resi-
dential, and the I -P.
Councilman Mitchell: Was there a particular reason it took us two
and a half years to . . .
City Manager: Yes.
Councilman Mitchell: What was the reason.
City Manager: The inability to stay on the subject and get it done.
Councilman Mitchell: Whose problem was that.
City Manager: Why should we sit here and point fingers at people.
Councilman Mitchell: I am just wondering what the point of urgency
is, when it was here for two and a half years.
City Manager: There has been an urgency which I have been communi-
cating to the Planning Commission and the Planning staff for some
two years. Yes there has been an emergency.
Councilman Mitchell: But you haven't been able to get them to make
the changes up until this emergency point now. I would rather study
this and know what is in it.
City Manager: Well, go ahead and study it to death. That is what
the Planning Commission did. That is why we are sitting here today.
Study it to death.
Councilman Mitchell: We are changing Planning Directors quite often.
I am not sure all of them are capatible in their thinking.
City Manager: You made an eloquent plea, Mr. Mitchell, to support
the Planning Commission previously tonight, now you don't want to
do anything that they have recommended.
Mayor Thompson: Did that answer your question back there, Pat.
Pat Renna: No, not really. I don't understand why it is in here
like this. I thought there was an understanding that we weren't
going to get urgency ordinances unless they were urgent.
Page 11
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Mayor Thompson: Well it appears that the existing M zone ordinance
that we have may not cover the requirements that we would like to
put on Westinghouse. That is my understanding. I haven't compared
this exactly with the existing M zone, I am going on memory.
Pat Renna: But there are also - not just one zone - I see three
here.
City Manager: I have no problem gentlemen. You want to read as a
first reading go ahead. It only delays it two months instead
effective thirty days from now. I think we have to put ourself
eventually in the position where we are going to do something in
this City. Everything we seem to do is guided by one word - delay.
Don't do. But as I say, I have no problem, go ahead, have a first
reading and let it go at that.
Councilman Lowry: Didn't we promise Westinghouse that we were
going to expedite their processing through the Planning Commission.
I think we did. Fast Track it.
Mayor Thompson: Let me ask a question. Is this I -P zone. That is
not exactly what - I lost my train of thought - on the Westinghouse
project, there was an indication that there would be - they would
abide by the rules or the existing requirements. In the industrial
zone, am I correct.
City Manager: We have pre -zoned them I -P. We don't have an I -P
zone. Either we create one or we go back and re -zone them to some-
thing else.
Mayor Thompson: We pre -zoned them in anticipation that 590 would
have been done much sooner. And it was not done.
City Manager: That's right.
Mayor Thompson: So that is why it was pre -zoned as I -P. And now
you are trying to play catch -up again - we are - we are trying to
play catch -up.
City Manager: As I say, I have no problems, if you want to take it. .
Councilman Lowry: Can we pull just the I -P out tonight and pass it
as an urgency.
City Manager: Do anything you desire. I would rather you do it all
or nothing. Either have a first reading on all of them or adopt
them all. It makes no difference. It just depends on whether you
want to achieve, or whether you want to continue.
Councilman Lowry: On all of them, this is the point I brought up
earlier that No. 17.50 and No. 17.70 is mentioned in each one of
these it shall be stated No. 17.50 and No. 17.70 or any other
existing applicable ordinance or procedure, because we don't have
any No. 17.50 and 17.70 in our codified ordinances at present. So
that is one thing we have to add. The other point that I brought
up is this question on the slope here, the reason for that I still
don't understand the need for it.
Red Livingston: Can this urgency ordinance be amended from time to
time after it is adopted?
Mayor Thompson: Once it is passed on an urgency basis it becomes
a portion of the ordinance, and then any ordinance then can be
amended from time to time.
Mr. Livingston: It would seem to me that it would be proper than
to pass this type of an ordinance and then at least you have got
it so it is a working thing. We need to get work for people in
the City.
Page 12
F
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: Did you get the name and address.
City Clerk: Yes I did.
Mr. Livingston: Mr. Mitchell, you shut up.
Mayor Thompson: Just a minute.
Councilman Mitchell: Point of Order.
Mayor Thompson: Mr. Livingston.
Mr. Livingston: He has already -- He is just harrassing me, that
is all he is doing.
Mayor Thompson: I know, but that is beside the point. You had a
point to make about the ordinance. About passing the ordinance.
Mr. Livingston: That is what I am trying to do, and I would think
that it would be smart to pass the ordinance, then you would have
a working ordinance, then all of this other stuff that comes up you
can amend the ordinance as you go along. It would be smart to me
to have the ordinance, because we were way behind in that. We tried
to do that a long time ago, and we just keep changing and changing
and changing and changing. We have got dissention and every thing
else. You can't get a thing done this way. I think it should be
passed and let's go on with the City, instead of going backwards,
let's move forward.
Mayor Thompson: Thank you. Yes. Come up and give us your name
and address please.
Mr. Mitchell left his chair at 9:29.
Richard Humilchek, 10014 Jonathan, Cherry Valley: There is an
industrial park zone because of the Westinghouse deal, correct.
At this point there is an interruption of the meeting due to a
disruption from the hallway.
Mayor Thompson: Mr. Humilchek, I think we are going to have to have
a five minute recess to find out what is going on around here. We
will recess for about five minutes. Recess at 9:30 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: We have got a quorum, let's reconvene. We will
reconvene from recess. The time is 9:40 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: We were in the public hearing on Ordinance No. 600,
an urgency ordinance amending Ordinance 490 and the Beaumont Municipal
Code Title 17 by adding sections which were previously read.
City Manager: You had a member of the public, Mayor Thompson, that
wanted to address you.
Mayor Thompson: Oh yes. I am sorry. And your name was. . .
Mr. Humilchek: Richard Humilchek.
Mayor Thompson: Humilchek. Sorry to disrupt you there, go right
ahead.
Mr. Humilchek: As I have understood the discussion, the industrial
park zoning is necessary for the Westinghouse deal, correct. In that
you have already zoned the area for them and you have to have the
ordinance, or the section in the municipal code to cover that,
correct. And the only arguments that I caught were with - had to do
with housing density and the slope, and something that did not seem
to deal with industrial park part of it, so wouldn't it be logical
to pass the industrial park on the urgency, since there is an
urgency for that, and let the rest of it go until there is an urgen-
cy, rather than take it under an urgency ordinance, since there
hasn't - doesn't seem to be a demonstrated urgency for it.
Page 13
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Mr. Russo returned to his seat at 9:42 P.M.
Mr. Mitchell returned to his seat at 9:44 P.M.
City Manager: While your looking, Mayor Thompson, of course the
PUD has been applied to several areas too, annexed areas, and some
of the new areas looking at annexation want the PUD, so there is
some immediancy there, although there is no imminent development,
I will grant that in a PUD zone, or a proposed PUD zone. Again,
I would stress since it is written as one ordinance that you either
adopt it or you continue it, and I really don't find any problem
with either except I just think it is time for this City to get on,
but, you know, if there is even a remote desire to continue it or
to slow it down, go ahead and slow it down.
Councilman Russo: Okay. Let me recap if I can for Mr. Humilchek
and a few other people in the audience that may be confused as to
why we are dragging this out. And I can only speak for myself as a
Councilman and my feelings on it. I hear the City Manager telling
us if we want to drag our feet and go backwards we can hold off on
this, and I personally resent that Norm. I think that in all honesty
and in all fairness you have to allow the City Council an opportunity
to review things and something as lengthy as this, to bring before
us and say we need to pass an urgency ordinance is not fair to us.
In order to review this properly each one of us should take 490 and
go through it and make sure there isn't any duplication. I feel
that that is our responsibility. I think there is another alterna-
tive to the Westinghouse project. Why couldn't it be done under
the existing M -1 zone.
City Manager: If you want to go ahead and rezone it to M -1 and then
you do not get the same standards obviously, otherwise it wouldn't
have been done this way.
Councilman Russo: Let me ask you this question. You, throwing it
back to the Council, and I am going to say that Norm, because that
is what you are doing now, but yet your staff is the one who zoned
it prior to the ordinance being established. I don't think it is
fair for you now to come to the Council and telling us that we are
dragging our feet.
City Manager: Well, I am not saying the Council is dragging its
feet. I am saying this City is dragging its feet. We have had
these items before the City for two years. And I don't mean just
the Council. I don't even mean the Council. It has been laying
out there before the Planning Commission and the Planning staff for
two years now, and finally it has gotten to this point. There is a
necessity for use, and I guess I am saying, and if that is your
desire that is your desire, and I respect it. But I am saying that
on something of this nature, which is relatively straightforward,
relatively technical, that there ought to be some reliance on the
staff. And I am not talking about me. I am talking the planning
people and the Planning Commission certainly has reviewed this
for many months, and it is part of a proposal that has been reviewed
and reviewed and reviewed by them, it just hasn't got here because
the total package has not been reviewed.
Mayor Thompson: We are still in the hearing phase on this. What do
you want to do with this. We can close the hearing, or we can ad-
journ the hearing. You want the hearing closed. The Public Hearing
is closed at 9:45 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, that Ordinance
600 be passed as an urgency ordinance amending Ordinance 490 by
reading of title only.
AYES:
Councilmen
NOES:
Councilmen
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
MOTION FAILED.
Lowry and May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Page 14
I
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to pass
Ordinance 600 at its first reading by reading of the title only,
with the addition of the phrase, "or any other existing applicable
ordinance or procedure" after any place in the ordinance that makes
a reference to 17.50 or 17.70. MOTION WITHDRAWN BY COUNCILMAN
LOWRY AND SECOND WITHDRAWN BY COUNCILMAN MAY.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Ordinance No. 600 on an urgency basis entailing only Sections
17:50.200, 205, 210, 215 and 220.
AYES: Councilmen,Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Motion by Councilman
Ordinance No. 600 by
Sections 17.30.200,
trial Park, with the
applicable ordinance
to 17.50 or 17.70.
Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
reading of the title only, entailing only
205, 210, 215 and 220, with the phrase Indus -
addition of the phrase, "or any other existing
or procedure" inserted after any reference
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. Report from Police Department Concerning Request of Mr. Raymond Berg
for Investigation of Procedures Used by Police Department.
This agenda item was referred to the Personnel Session to be held
later in the meeting for discussion with the City Attorney.
15. Report from Police Department Concerning Request to Establish No
Parking Zone at 677 Beaumont Avenue.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to accept
the Police Department Report concerning the request to establish
a no parking zone at 677 Beaumont Avenue, and further deny the
request.
� AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
16. Acceptance of Donation to Senior Center from Laura Stewart Fund,
and Authorization for Budget Adjustment to Increase Senior Center
Budget for Purchase of Equipment as a Result of this Donation.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to accept
the donation to the Senior Center from the Laura Stewart Fund,
and to authorize budget adjustment to increase the Senior Center
budget for purchase of equipment as a result of this donation.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
17. Request for Certification of Population Estimate for January 1, 1984
by State Controller.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to endorse
the State Department of Finance population estimate, and authorize
the City Manager to submit a request for certification to the De-
,AK partment of Finance, Population Research Unit, of 7,567 people as
the population of the City of Beaumont as of January 1, 1984.
Page 15
t
18.
F
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Request to Develop Specs and Prepare for Bid on Fuel Dispensing
Operation at Public Works Yard.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to auth-
orize the development of specifications and a bid package for a
uel dispensing system as suggested by the Vehicle Maintenance
and Transportation Superintendent for return to the Council for
approval and submission to bid.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
19. Request from City Attorney for Direction as to the Response to be
Given by his Office to Requests for Legal Research, etc. (Continued
from May 29, 1984).
This agenda item was continued to the next regular meeting when
City Attorney Ryskamp will be in attendance.
20. Request for Authorization for Formation of Community Involvement
Program.
21.
22.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to accept
? the request to authorize the formation of the Community Involvement
Program for a period of three months with a budget of $450.00 for
the three month period, with a review of the program in September.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -31 - Setting Appropriations Limit for 1984 -85.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -31.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -33 - Setting Dog License and Related Animal
Control Fees.
,,,Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
' Resolution No. 1984 -33, with changes as directed.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
23. REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS:
� Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
qu. budget adjustments as requested for a) purchase of budgeted roll
on rack for vehicle maintenance; and b) purchase of evaporative
cooler for Room 11 (Planning /Engineering).
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
__ 1
r
Beaumont City Council
June 11, 1984
24. SUBMITTAL OF REPORTS FOR FILING
a) Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of June 5, 1984.
b) Report on Construction of Public Works Office.
Councilman Mitchell objected to the filing of the report on the
construction of the public works office based upon a request
he submitted on May 7, 1984 requesting from the Purchasing
Officer all information on Minute Order dated February 14, 1984
relative to the maintenance yard office. Councilman Mitchell
then enumerated the documents requested and requested the City
Attorney to obtain those documents for him.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to accept the reports for filing
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
25. Executive Session for Discussion of Legal and Personnel Matters.
The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session at 10:34 P.M.
The meeting reconvened to Regular Session at 11:13 P.M.
Let the record show there was discussion of legal and personnel
matters in Executive Session, however, there was no definitive
action taken in Executive Session.
The following action will be taken as a result of discussion in
Executive Session.
26. Settlement of Berens Case with Insurance Companies.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept the
recommendation of the City Attorney that the City settle this case
11 V
411 for coverage and unspecified amount of costs from the defendant
/ insurance companies.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
14. Report from Police Department Concerning Request of Mr. Raymond
Berg for Investigation of Procedures Used by Police Department.
N Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to instruct
the City Attorney to take the matter under advisement and supply
Mr. Berg with appropriate copies of reports as recommended.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned to 7:00 P.M., Wednesday, June 20, 1984, in the City Council
Chambers. Time of Adjournment 11:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
I NE J E SWEE EY,
CITY CL
Page 17
a
it
E,
4:
f
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF JUNE 20, 1984
(Adjourned from June 11, 1984)
1. The Beaumont City Council met in an adjourned meeting at 7:06 P.M.,
Wednesday, June 20, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor
Thompson presiding.
2. On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo and Mayor Thompson. Councilman Mitchell arrived at 7:14 P.M.
3. PUBLIC HEARING - (Continued from June 11, 1984) - Budget and Revenue
Sharing Hearing.
The Hearing was re- opened at 7:09 P.M.
The Council continued their review of the proposed Fiscal Year 1984-
1985 Budget for the City of Beaumont on a department by department
basis.
The Department Heads were present and answered questions concerning
their budget requests.
Councilman Mitchell asked to be excused from the meeting at 9:14 P.M.
Let the record show no member of the audience requested to be heard.
There being no objections, the Public Hearing was continued to the
regular meeting of the City Council to be held on Monday, June 25,
1984, at 9:40 P.M.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:41 P.M.
Res,91ctfully submitted,
ty City Clerk
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
JUNE 25, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:40 P.M., Monday,
June 25, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson presiding.
1
The Invocation was given by Reverand George Kreiger, 1st Christian Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes of
Regular Council Meeting of June 11, 1984 and Adjourned Council
Meeting of June 20, 1984, were approved as submitted.
2. Appeal of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of June 5, 1984, re-
garding the following:
a) Request for Change of Conditions of Approval. Conditional Use
Permit No. 1005 (82- CUP -3) - Seeburger.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to deny the
request for extension of six months, and require the improvements
to be completed in ninety days as required by the original require-
ments was WITHDRAWN by Councilmen Lowry and May respectively.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, that
Planning Commission decision on CUP 1005 stand as written in
recommended Conditions of Approval dated June 5, 1984, as clari-
fied in staff report dated June 20, 1984 (Report of Action of
Planning Commission at meeting of June 19, 1984).
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
b) Request for Review of Conditions - (83 -SP -8) Plot Plan 1043 -
Guerriero.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, that the
requirements of the Planning Commission be complied with.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion that
the Planning Commission conditions be required when and if another
development goes into that area, but in the interim to apply the
Cal -Trans requirements on the assumption that Cal -Trans is going to
go through there. DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
3. There being no objections, the minutes of Regular Planning Commission
meeting of June 5, 1984 were accepted as submitted.
4. Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
warrants as audited per warrant list of June 25, 1984, in the
amount of $65,965.82 and Payroll of June 14, 1984, in the amount of
$24,770.08 for payment as audited.
Page 1
a
3eaumont City Council
June 25, 1984
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to amend
Councilman Lawry's motion to delete Warrant No. 2599 from this
warrant list.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to amend
Councilman Mitchell's amendment to the main motion to state that
the documents be made public after the fact to show there is no
collusion.
VOTE TAKEN ON SECOND AMENDMENT:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
SECOND AMENDMENT TO MAIN MOTION CARRIED.
VOTE TAKEN ON FIRST AMENDMENT:
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO MAIN MOTION FAILED.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED BY SECOND AMENDMENT, CARRIED.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Harold Blackaby, 662 Maple Avenue,
reading from a prepared statement aski
to apologize for his statement made in
April 23, 1984, that only a handful'of
making the City's problems, as he felt
completely out of order. Mr. Blackaby
to the City Attorney.
addressed the Council
ng City Attorney Ryskamp
the Council meeting of
rabble rousers were
that the statement was
then gave his statement
b. Dr. Richard Agee, representing the Rusty Lantern, addressed the
Council, asking if the City was going to change the traffic
control in front of the Rusty Lantern so that the left turn
into the parking lot would not be allowed.
Dr. Agee was advised there was no
to change the agreed upon traffic
turn would continue to be allowed
been received the island would be
barricades being used to delinate
be removed.
intention on the City's part
control, and the left hand
As soon as the paint has
properly striped and the
the road separation would
6. ORDINANCE NO. 601 - An Urgency Ordinance Amending Title 17 of the
Beaumont Municipal Code by Amending the Zoning Map of the City of
Beaumont to Provide Land Annexed to the City with Interim Industrial
Park (I -P) Zoning.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to consider
Ordinance No. 601 as an Urgency Ordinance by title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
June 25, 1984
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Ordinance No. 601 as an Urgency Ordinance by reading of the title
only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
7. ORDINANCE NO. 602 - Establishing a Rent Review Commission. Request
to Set Date for Hearing of July 9, 1984 and Designate Administrative
Officer to Function Under the Ordinance.
It was the concensus of the City Council that the date of July 9,
1984 will be set for public hearing concerning this proposed
6 -- JOrdinance, with the Finance Director being named to act as Adminis-
trative Officer to function under this Ordinance.
8. ORDINANCE NO. 603 - FIRST READING - Amending the Beaumont Municipal
Code, Title 17, by Adding Chapter 38, Mobile Homes.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to pass
` Ordinance No. 603 at its first reading by title only.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Councilman Lowry left his chair at 8:55 and returned at 8:57.
9. Request for Ordinance Preparation Re: Responsibility for Sidewalk
and Curb and Gutter Maintenance.
otion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to grant
the request for ordinance preparation regarding responsibility for
sidewalk and curb and gutter maintenance.
10.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
Councilman Mitchell left his chair at 8:57 and returned at 9:00.
COUGAR - BROOKSIDE SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 1983 -1:
a) RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -34 - Approving Engineer's Report and
Ordering Hearing.
b) RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -35 - Ordering Notice Inviting Construction
Bids.
c) RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -36 - Amending Resolution of Intention No.
1984 -20.
d) RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -37 - Fixing Amount of Liquidated Damages.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Resolutions 1984 -34, 1984 -35, 1984 -36 and 1984 -37.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
None.
None.
Councilman Mitchell.
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
June 25, 1984
11. Appeal Filed by Mrs. JoAnna Davis of Council Decision Concerning
Reimbursement for Damages Caused by Sewer Back -Up.
,Aotion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to grant
the appeal and reimburse Mrs. JoAnna Davis the additional $85.00
previously denied.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
12. Lease Agreement with Beaumont Unified School District.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to authorize
the Mayor and City Manager to sign the new document (Lease - City
of Beaumont -- Beaumont Unified School District) submitted by the
School District when approved as to form by the City Attorney, and
�.. "when the District has approved and signed the City's "Lease Agree-
ment with Option to Purchase Real Property" and submitted the
resolution requested therein; further directing that all documents
compliment one another and that combined they constitute the con-
tractual package.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
" Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
13. Extension of Terms of Senior Citizen Advisory Commission Members.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to extend
the terms of Senior Citizen Advisory Commission Members for an
(Xadditional two year term, as follows:
V Grace Begley - Extended to July 1, 1986.
Lila McKinney - Extended to July 1, 1986.
Dovie Bunch - Extended to July 12, 1986.
Ben Narem - Extended to August 9, 1986.
Burke Hensley - Extended to October 25, 1986.
,. AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. Report from Police Department Concerning the Request from Merchants
Located in the 410 -432 Block of E. Sixth Street for Additional
Frontage Parking. (Continued from June 11, 1984).
otion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to accept
-the Police Department recommendation dated June 25, 1984, and direct
the City Manager to prepare a resolution to implement this curb
marking change.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
15. Request from City Attorney for Direction as to the Response to be
Given by His Office to Requests for Legal Research, etc. (Continued
from June 11, 1984).
After hearing comments from the City Attorney regarding his request
for direction, it was the concensus of the Council that they will
each submit written suggestions to be considered at the next regu-
larly scheduled meeting to be held on July 9, 1984.
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
June 25, 1984
16. Request for Authorization to Refund Permit Fee.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
refund of permit fee of $225.02 to Solar - Tronics Supply, which was
aid in error to the City of Beaumont.
/AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
17. Request for Authorization to Hold "Beer Baseball" Event at 9th Street
Ball Park.
otion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to deny the
request to hold a "beer baseball" event at 9th Street Ball Park.
/AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
i
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
18. Consideration of Claim Filed by Mary Hightower Against the City of
Beaumont.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to reject
he claim filed by Mary Hightower against the City of Beaumont and
irect the City Clerk to send Notice of Rejection to the claimant.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
19. Presentation of Specifications for Fuel Dispensing Operation at
Public Works Yard; Request for Authorization to Submit to Bid; and
Request for Fund Designation.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to approve the
specifications for the fuel dispensing operation; authorize the
Purchasing Officer to submit to bid; and authorize budget adjustment
to increase Account No. 01- 505 -302 in the amount of $65,000.00, with
bids to be returned to the City Council as soon as possible.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
split the transfer of money from the authorization to go to bid and
vote on the money as a separate item. DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
20. Request from Riverside County Fire Department for Support of Coopera-
tive Regional Hazardous Materials Concept, and Authorization for
Mayor to Sign Joint Powers Agreement When Presented.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to support the
Cooperative Regional Hazardous Materials Concept and authorize the
Mayor to sign the Joint Powers Agreement when presented.
AYES: Councilmen May and Russo.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
It
Page 5
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF JUNE 28, 1984
(Adjourned from June 25, 1984)
The Beaumont City Council met in an adjourned meeting at 8:00 A.M., on
Thursday, June 28, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor
Thompson presiding.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS:
a. To cover costs of radio frequency change over.
b. To purchase 5 HP air compressor for maintenance yard.
C. To transfer insurance reimbursement in order to replace
equipment stolen in December.
d. To purchase heavy duty office machine stand for Planning.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
budget adjustments as requested.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
2. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - 1984 -85 Budget and Revenue Sharing
Hearing.
The Public Hearing was re-opened at 8:05 A.M.
The Council continued their review of the proposed 1984 -85 budget
with specific discussion concerning the sewer fund projected
deficit and the proposed purchase of a new backhoe for that
department.
The City Manager recommended an increase in the sewer user fee
to offset this projected deficit.
Let the record show there were no members of the public present who
desired to speak concerning the proposed 1984 -85 budget.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to delete
Item 10- 405 -301 (Land Improvements), in the amount of $35,700;
to reduce Item 10- 405 -303 ( Backhoe) by $27,959, leaving a balance
of $17,041 in that item; and to hold the decision regarding
increasing the fees for ninety days until cost of the backhoe has
been determined.
AYES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
None.
None.
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to close the
public hearing at 8:55 A.M.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 1
A.
Beaumont City Council
June 28, 1984
Motion by
the propo
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
sed 1984 -85 Budget as corrected.
Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
Councilman Mitchell.
None.
None.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 9:00 A.M.
Respectfully submit
X
City l Clerk f J / - - — !
Page 2
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
JULY 9, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
July 9, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson presiding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand Bob Whited, Cherry Valley Brethren
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Lowry.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes of
Regular Council Meeting of June 25, 1984 and Adjourned Council
Meeting of June 28, 1984 were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the minutes of Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of June 19, 1984 were accepted as submitted.
3. Motion by Councilman Lowry, Second by Councilman Russo, to approve
warrants as audited per warrant list of July 9, 1984, in the
amount of $111,433.76, with Warrants No. 2685 and 2689 being ad-
justed and Payroll of June 28, 1984, in the amount of $27,676.77,
for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Robert Brundy re Sewer Hook -Up.
Mr. Brundy, 773 Edgar Avenue, addressed the Council concerning
property he recently purchased, on which a house had previously
been located, stating the $1,020.00 sewer hook -up fee levied on
him was illegal because sewer had already been brought to the
property.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to refer
this matter to the City Attorney for an opinion being brought
back to Council at their next regular meeting.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
b. Mr. Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania.
Mr. Gordon addressed the Council stating the City Attorney was
supposed to negotiate with the other party over the $2,700.00,
and they have never heard a report regarding that.
The City Attorney stated a demurrer had been filed successfully,
and attempts have been made to negotiate and those negotiations
are ongoing; and since this involves existing litigation he pre-
ferred to make no further statement at this time.
Mr. Gordon then questioned the Community Involvement Meetings which
have been scheduled, one of which has already been held, consti-
tuting closed meetings being held using taxpayers money, and these
meetings should be thrown open to the general public.
Page I
3aumont City Council
July 9, 1984
Mr. Gordon was advised these are not closed meetings. The City
has to restrict the invitation list to a certain number of peo-
ple per meeting in order to comply with the amount of money
budgeted, however, anyone wishing to pay for their own breakfast
or dinner would be welcome to attend at any time. Further, an
attempt is being made to cover as large a cross - section of the
community as possible at each meeting.
C. Mrs. Ann Connors, 813 Elm.
Mrs. Connors addressed the Council stating she had not heard a
reply to the question concerning who was making up the invitation
list for these meetings.
Mayor Thompson advised Mrs. Connors the City Manager is responsible
for this list, and in the instance of the last meeting he also had
some input.
5. PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of Establishing a Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:15 P.M.
Mr. Tom Parker, 1425 Cherry Avenue, Space 133, spoke in favor of
this Ordinance being adopted to establish a rent review commission
in the City of Beaumont.
There were no other members of the audience who desired to speak
to this issue either in favor or opposed.
Councilman Mitchell was excused at 8:16 P.M., returning to his
seat at 8:19 P.M.).
The City Clerk was directed to publish notice of this hearing, as
well as mailing notices to all Mobile Home Park Managers /Owners in
the City.
The Public Hearing was continued to 8:00 P.M. on July 23, 1984, at
8:30 P.M.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 602 - FIRST READING - Establishing a Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission.
Consideration of this Ordinance was continued to July 23, 1984.
7. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Change of Zone 84 -RZ -1 (Westinghouse)
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:30 P.M.
There were no proponents or opponents wishing to speak concerning
this Change of Zone.
(Councilman Lowry was excused at 8:33, returning to his seat at
8:39 P.M.)
The Public Hearing was closed at 8:35 P.M.
8. �dnsideration of Adoption of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -17 for
/Change of Zone 84 -RZ -1 (Westinghouse).
i
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -17 for Change of Zone 84 -RZ -1.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 2
oeaumont City Council
July 9, 1984
9. ORDINANCE NO. 604 - FIRST READING - Rezoning Certain Property from
County M -M to City I -P.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to pass
Ordinance No. 604 at its first reading by title only
t
V� A'VES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
10. Consideration of Adoption of Negative Declaration 84 -ND -16 for
Mobile Home Ordinance.
a
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -16 for Mobile Home Ordinance No. 603.
AYES:
Councilmen
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
11. ORDINANCE NO. 603 - SECOND READING - Amending the Beaumont Municipal
Code, Title 17, by Adding Chapter 38, Mobile Homes.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Ordinance No. 603 at its second reading by title only.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
12. ORDINANCE NO. 605 - FIRST READING - Amending Ordinance No. 490 to
Provide for Condominium Development and Setback Requirements.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to pass
Ordinance No. 605 at its first reading by title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None. a
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
13. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -38 - Pertaining to Traffic Ordinance No. 369,
,Amending Resolution No. 1983 -27 by Adding Subsection 15 of 13 -B
and Adding Subsection 7 of 13 -D to Change and Provide for Temporary
Parking Zone on 6th Street Easterly of Beaumont Avenue.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -38 with the change made to the title specifying
"Limited" parking rather than "Temporary" parking.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo and Mitchell.
14. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -39 - Amending Resolution No. 1984 -01, Section I
to Provide for Mobile Home or Modular Home on Foundation Application
Permit Fee.
'Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt Reso-
lution No. 1984 -39.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
July 9, 1984
15. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -40 - Authorizing the Signing and Execution of
the Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Beaumont and
the General Employees Unit Represented by the Public Employees
Association of Riverside County, Inc.
16. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -41 - Authorizing the Signing and Execution of
the Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Beaumont and
the Management - Executive Group as Individuals.
lix.Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -40 and Resolution No. 1984 -41.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
17. Request from Riverside County Fire Department for Support of Coopera-
tive Regional Hazardous Materials Concept, and Authorization for Mayor
to Sign Joint Powers Agreement When Presented. (Continued from June
25, 1984).
This agenda item was continued to the next regular Council meeting
to be held on July 23, 1984.
18. Consideration of Suggestions Submitted by Each Individual Council
Member Concerning Request of City Attorney for Direction. (Continued
from June 25, 1984).
There was lengthy discussion concerning the various suggestions sub-
mitted, and questions answered by the City Attorney.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Councilman Lowry's suggestion as a Minute Order to be used by
the City Attorney.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to delete Items No. 4 and 5 of Councilman Lowry's suggestion.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to amend
Councilman Lowry's motion that Item No. 3 read, "30 minutes of
research time, drafts of ordinances and resolutions, may be
approved by two concurring Councilmen in written form.
i
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Lowry restated the main motion to include striking the
words from Item No. 5, "as a private citizen ". Councilman May,
as second to the motion, concurred. The main motion is restated
as follows:
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Councilman Lowry's suggestion as a Minute Order to be used by
the City Attorney, with Item No. 5 being reworded to strike the
reference to "as a private citizen ".
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION AS RESTATED:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MAIN MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED.
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
July 9, 1984
(Councilman Mitchell was excused at 9:35 P.M., returning to his
seat at 9:36 P.M.)
19. Designation of Voting Delegate for League of California Cities
Annual Conference.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to designate
the City Manager as voting delegate, with the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem
as alternate, at the League of California Cities Annual Conference.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
state that any member of the City Council may attend with full ex-
penses being paid, to bring back a report. DIED FOR LACK OF A
SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
state that the delegates bring back a full written report of all
activities and make it available to each of the City Councilmen.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
20. Consideration of Support for One Day Conference of All Western
Riverside County Cities and the County, and Designation of Repre-
sentative to Attend Conference.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to support
the proposed one day forum proposed by the County of Riverside
of all cities in Western Riverside County along with the County of
Riverside.
s
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
21. Structural Engineer's Report Regarding Beaumont Stor -All and Request
for Council Direction.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
instruct the City Attorney to proceed with the legal procedures
!' that are necessary for condemnation and to open any door available
for negotiation for correction of the building prior to condemna-
tion proceedings.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
22. Authorization to Submit 1984 -85 Article 4 Claim.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
authorize the submittal of the 1984 -85 Article 4 Claim as pre-
sented.
AYES: C
Councilmen Lowry, M
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
July 9, 1984
23. 6th Street Storm Drain Project; Request to Join with Riverside County
Flood Control District to Build Project to Master Plan Standard.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to request
that Riverside County Flood Control District join with the City in
a joint project development of the District's Line 15, the City's
Sixth Street Storm Drain Project; that the District transfer its
funds for the Line 14 project to the Line 15 project; that the
District serve as the lead agency in project development; and that
'A he Board of Supervisors support the transfer of funds and the joint
project development as requested. Additionally, that Community
e
Development be requested to authorize the project as proposed, and
permit the City to submit a new timetable for completion of the
project.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
24. Request for Authorization to Initiate Annexation Proceedings.
25.
26.
-Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to authorize
the preparation of an annexation application for the Deutsch
property, Highland Springs Village No. 2 and Highland Springs
Resort; that the costs be paid by the City and funds provided as
follows: Transfer $2,200.00 from 1 -145 -256, Insurance, to
1- 135 -275, annexations.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of July 3, 1984
was accepted for filing.
ADD ITEM.
Planning Director Salary.
The City Manager reported the status of the recruitment activity
for a full time Planning Director, and asked the Council to con-
sider authorizing a higher salary range for this position.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to auth-
rize a salary of $31,000 per year and benefits for the Planning
Director position.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:27 P.M.
Page 6
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
JULY 23, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:34 P.M., Monday,
July 23, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson presiding.
The Invocation was given by Father John Domas, San Gorgonio Catholic Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May was excused.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes of
Regular Council Meeting of July 9, 1984 were approved as submitted.
2. Appeal by Councilman Lowry of Planning Commission Decision at Meeting
of July 3, 1984, Conditions of Approval, Westinghouse Development
Plan 84 -DP -3.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, that Condi-
tion E.2 - a street light shall be installed at Highland Springs
Road and 2nd Street, with plan approved by the City Engineer and
Edison - be reinstated into the Conditions of Approval of West-
inghouse Development Plan 84 -DP -3, to be installed as part of the
off -site improvement to be provided by Westinghouse Electric
Corporation.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
W ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
3. There being no objections, the minutes of Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of July 3, 1984 were accepted as submitted.
4. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of July 23, 1984, in the amount of
$162,959.70, were approved for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Robert E. Brundy, 773 Edgar.
Mr. Brundy addressed the Council concerning his q
questioning the assessment of a sewer hook -up fee
perty.
The City Attorney presented his report concerning
stating Mr. Brundy should be given a credit equal
of either $100.00 or 10% of the square footage of
times 20 cents, with the balance of the $1,000.00
Mr. Brundy.
uestion of July 9
against his pro -
this question
to the greater
his property
being owed by
6. ORDINANCE NO. 604 - SECOND READING - Rezoning Certain Property from
County M -M (Medium Manufacturing) to City I -P (Industrial Park).
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Ordinance No. 604 at its second reading by title only.
JAYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
July 23, 1984
7. ORDINANCE NO. 605 - SECOND READING - Pertaining to Title 17 of the
Beaumont Municipal Code Amending Section 17.08.480 and Section 17.
32.030.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Ordinance No. 605 at its second reading by title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
8. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Consideration of Establishing a Mobile
Home Rent Review Commission.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:05 P.M.
Mr. Thomas Parker, 1425 Cherry Avenue, Space 133, was the spokesman
representing Valley Chapter No. 971 of GSMOL, speaking as proponents
for the establishing of a Mobile Home Rent Review Commission.
Let the record show a show of hands indicated approximately 88 people
in the audience were proponents of the proposed Ordinance.
Those speaking in opposition were as follows:
Mr. Gordon Meyer, owner, Curry's Mobile Home Park, 1490 E. 6th
Street.
Mr. Tom Shelton, owner of vacant land at Cougar Way and Beaumont
Avenue, on which a mobile home park is proposed.
Mr. Steve McLemore, owner, Kozy Mobile Home Park, 525 Palm Avenue.
Ms. Blair Barnes, representing Riverside County Manufactured
Housing Educational Trust.
Mr. Thomas Parker, proponent, spoke in rebuttal to statements made
by opponents.
Ms. Blair Barnes, opponent, spoke in rebuttal to statements made by
Mr. Parker.
Let the record show a written comment from Mr. Henry Schroeder, re-
presenting Pioneer Trailer Court, stating opposition to the
proposed ordinance, was entered into the record.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to continue
Public Hearing to 8:00 P.M. on Monday, August 13, 1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 602 - FIRST READING - Adding Chapter 13.16 to the
Beaumont Municipal Code Establishing a Mobile Home Rent Review
Commission.
Consideration of Ordinance No. 602 was continued to Monday, August
13, 1984.
-4-°e Let the record show Councilman Lowry was excused at 8:45, returning
?� to his seat at 8:47 P.M.
Let the record show Councilman Mitchell was excused at 9:01, re-
turning to his seat at 9:03 P.M.
A five minute recess was called at approximately 9:10 P.M. with
the meeting reconvening at 9:15 P.M.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
July 23, 1984
10. Acceptance of Certification by Registrar of Voters of Signatures
on Recall Petitions.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
accept the Certification by the Registrar of Voters of Signatures
on Recall Petitions.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -42 - Calling and Giving Notice of the Holding
of a Special Municipal Election to be Held in Said City on Tuesday,
November 6, 1984 for the Submission to the Qualified Electors of
Said City the Question of the Recall of Certain Officers of Said
City and the Question of Filling the Vacancy or Vacancies if the
Recall Prevails.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -43 - Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Riverside to Consolidate a Special Municipal Election of
Said City to be Held on November 6, 1984 with the Statewide General
Election to be Held on Said Date Pursuant to Section 23302 of the
., "Elections Code.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -42 and Resolution No. 1984 -43.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -44 - Accepting Offer of Dedication for Public
Street and Highway Purposes and Providing for Recordation.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -44.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -45 - Accepting the Interest in Real Property
Conveyed by Sewer Easement.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -45.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Request of Mr. William Elliott for City to Alleviate Drainage Problem
in the Vicinity of 12th and Orange.
This agenda item was referred to staff for consideration.
Request of Beaumont Federation of Police Unit of California Organi-
zation of Police and Sheriffs to Address Council.
This agenda item was referred to staff for renegotiation.
Request from Bernie Fagot to be Heard on Tract 18341.
This agenda item was referred to the Building and Planning Department
for consideration, with a report to be brought back to the Council
at their regular meeting of August 13, 1984.
Page 3
L-aumont City Council
July 23, 1984
18. Report on Request of Riverside County for Support of Hazardous
Materials Unit. (Continued from July 9, 1984).
This agenda item was continued to Monday, August 13, 1984.
19. Planning Commission Request for Abatement of Structures at 6th and
Massachusetts.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to refer
�
jr, this request to the Building Inspector for a report in two weeks
iA so that the Council will have information for decision making and
referral to the City Attorney.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
20. Consideration of Continued Participation in Urban County Program.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to elect
;;fo participate in the Urban County Program for the Federal Fiscal
''9Years 1984 through 1987; further to adopt the Cooperation Agree-
ment for Community Development Block Grant Funds Implementing
the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 as amended by
i' the Housing and Urban Recovery Act of 1983 and authorizing the
Mayor to sign on behalf of the City of Beaumont
i AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
21. Request for Authorization to Purchase Personnel Boom Truck at Public
Auction.
z�
V Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
the staff to purchase at public auction a personnel boom truck to
a maximum of $10,000; authorization to stand for balance of fiscal
__e a r .
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Recommendation Regarding the Return of $50,000 Bond Posted by Field
CableVision.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to refund
the $50,000 bond as recommended by the City Engineer as follows:
1. Review the Map and Plan of Construction showing areas served
and the explanation of areas not served.
2. If the review of Item 1 is satisfactory, authorize the City
Manager to release the $50,000 bond upon completion of street
repair and any other Ordinance requirements by August 9, 1984.
and further authorizing the waiver as requested by American Cable
on the system itself.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
23. Consideration of Service Agreement for Pavement Striping Project
and Authorization for City Manager to Execute Same.
This agenda item was continued to an adjourned meeting to be held
at 3:00 P.M. on Thursday, July 26, 1984.
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
July 23, 1984
24. Request for Budget Transfer for Pavement Striping Program.
This agenda item was continued to an adjourned meeting to be held
at 3:00 P.M. on Thursday, July 26, 1984.
25. Consideration of Claim Filed by Joseph N. Sibole and Virginia Sibole
Against the City of Beaumont.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to deny
claim filed by Joseph N. Sibole and Virginia Sibole with City Clerk
directed to mail Notice of Rejection.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
26. Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of July 17, 1984 was
ordered filed.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned to 3:00 P.M. on Thursday, July 26, 1984,
in the City Council Chambers, at 11:19 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Page 5
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF JULY 26, 1984
(Adjourned from July 23, 1984)
The City Clerk called the meeting to order at 3:00 P.M. There being no
quorum present at that time, the City Clerk adjourned the meeting to
4:30 P.M., on the same date, in the City Manager's Conference Room, Room
4, City Hall.
The adjourned meeting of the Beaumont City Council was called to order
at 4:30 P.M. by Mayor Thompson. There being no quorum present at roll
call, the meeting was delayed pending the arrival of sufficient Council
Members to make a quorum.
The meeting was again called to order by Mayor Thompson at 5:15 P.M.
On roll call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo
and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May was excused. Councilman Mitchell
arrived at 5:17 P.M.
At the request of Attorney Richard Anderson, Agenda Items No. 10 and 11
were taken out of sequence.
10. HEARING OF PROTESTS TO IMPROVEMENTS - Assessment District 1983 -1
The Hearing was opened at 5:16 P.M.
At the request of the Mayor, the City Clerk showed proof of Notice
of Hearing.
James Dotson, the Engineer of Work, presented the Engineer's report.
Mr. Dotson then presented the summary of bids received, and advised
the Council the low bidder, Meyer Constructors, made an error in
his bid and is now asking to be released from their proposal, the
error being approximately $40,000.00.
Mr. Dotson' recommendation was that Meyer Constructors be relieved
of their bid and to award to the second low bidder, T. A. Rivard,
Inc.
The City Clerk confirmed there had been no written objections or
protests filed or received.
There was no response to Mayor Thompson's request for protests or
objections from the audience.
Since there were no written protests or objections filed, or protests
or objections from the audience, the Mayor declared a majority pro-
test does not exist.
The Hearing was closed at 5:23 P.M.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -47 - Confirming Assessment and Ordering Improve-
ments.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -47.
YES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
July 26, 1984
13. Request of Meyer Constructors to be Relieved of Bid.
tion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to relieve
eyer Constructors from their proposal as submitted for sewer im-
provements within Assessment District 1983 -1 dated July 17, 1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. Authorization for Best, Best & Krieger to Obtain Informal Proposals.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
Best, Best & Krieger to proceed to invite informal proposals for
purchase of bonds on a negotiated basis.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
4. Approval of Agreement for Prosecution Services for Fiscal Year July
1, 1984 /June 30, 1985, with District Attorney's Office.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to accept
y� Agreement for Prosecution Services with District Attorney's office
for Fiscal Year July 1, 1984 /June 30, 1985, and authorize Mayor
to sign on behalf of the City.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
5. Submittal of Force Account Work Proposals for Pavement Striping
Program.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
the execution of a service agreement with Cotemark, Inc. for the
HES striping program.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
6. Consideration of Service Agreement for Pavement Striping Program and
Authorization for City Manager to Execute Same. (Continued from
July 23, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
the proposed Service Agreement and authorize the City Manager to
execute same.
f
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
7. Request for Budget Transfer for Pavement Striping Program. (Continued
from July 23, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
budget adjustment from the road fund to Account 01- 325 -400 in the
amount of $10,820.00.
I
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
July 26, 1984
8. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -46 - Consenting and Authorizing Submittal of
Annexation Application of Uninhabited Territory (Beaumont Annexa-
�;�tion No. 84- ANX -4 -35) Far West Development, Inc.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -46.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 606 - An Urgency Ordinance of the City of Beaumont To
Amend Title 17 of the Beaumont Municipal Code by Amending the Zoning
Map to Provide Land Annexed to the City with Interim General Commer-
cial (I -C2) and Interim Mobile Home Subdivision (I -RT).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Ordinance No. 606 as an Urgency Ordinance.
The Ordinance was read in its entirety by the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF 4/5 MAJORITY.
12. Executive Session for Personnel Discussion.
The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session for Personnel Wage
Discussion at 5:52 P.M.
The meeting reconvened to regular session at 6:07 P.M.
Let the record show no definitive action was taken in Executive
Session.
The following action will be taken as a result of discussion in
Executive Session.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to maintain
the negotiated stance with the Police Department originally set by
the Council.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 6:11 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
C TY CL
Page 3
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
SPECIAL MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a Special Meeting at 7:32 P.M., Monday,
August 6, 1984, in the City Council Chambers with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Lowry.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Thompson.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo and Mayor Thompson. Councilman Mitchell was excused.
1. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -48 - Adopting the Sewerage and Sanitation Fees
'Report and Directing that said Report be Certified to the County
Auditor for collection on the Tax Rolls.
---- Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
C Resolution No. 1984 -48.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Mitchell.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 7:50 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
AUGUST 13, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
August 13, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Russo.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Lowry.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes of
Regular Council Meeting of July 23, 1984, Adjourned Meeting of July
26, 1984 and Special Meeting of August 6, 1984 were approved as
submitted.
2. There being no objections, the minutes of Regular Planning Commission
meeting of July 17, 1984 were accepted as submitted.
3. Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
warrants as audited per warrant list of August 13, 1984, in the
amount of $110,136.99; and Payroll of July 12, 1984 and July 26,
1984, in the amounts of $29,867.98 and $30,331.36 respectively, for
payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
36. Out of Sequence.
Report re: Waiver of Fees on Tract 18341 (Turner- Fagot).
Motion by Councilman Mitchell that the Tentative Tract Map be ex-
tended in time at a maximum cost not to exceed two days of labor
from the engineering department to bring it up -to -date to allow'
them to finish the project for the benefit of the City, was with-
drawn by Councilman Mitchell as it did not address the request made.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to waive
the fees.
AYES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, that the
fees be set at $1,120.00.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to amend
Councilman Lowry's motion to read the maximum fees will not exceed
$650.00.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION FAILED.
Page 1
4.
5.
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry and Russo.
NOES: Councilmen May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to set the
fees at $850.00.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
Lowry, May and Mitchell.
Russo and Mayor Thompson.
a) Mr. Tom Parker, 1425 Cherry Avenue, Space 133, addressed the
Council requesting the City Attorney to draw up an Urgency
Ordinance to protect mobilehome owners from anticipatory space
rental increases while relief is being considered and imple-
mented; a freeze on such rents at the level existing July 1,
1984; or, alternatively, an authorization for rollback to that
date of any increases.
PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Consideration of Establishing a Mobile
Home Rent Review Commission. (Continued from July 23, 1984).
The Public Hearing was re- opened at 8 :25 P.M.
Mr. Matthew Farr, General Partner of Valley Mobile Home Park, Ltd,
located at 121 Great Circle Drive, Mill Valley, California. Through
my correspondence to you Mr. Thompson, and.then later on, subsequent
to that, to the gentlemen of the Council over here, I have said that
I wasn't here, so I am - really not - know first hand what was said
about Valley Mobile Home Park, and so I was not here to defend our
position. So if anybody has anything they want to ask me regarding
that aspect of the meeting on the 23rd of July, I will be very, very
glad to answer those questions. But getting back, actually, since
that time, or since July.23, we called for a mobile home owner's
meeting, and on, I believe, the 29th, July 29, we had a meeting with
approximately one -third of the homeowners attended, and they had
varieties of things to ask us about it, and we, from the very beginning
wanted to tell them that we own the property since January of 1984,
and when we actually purchased the property we found out that the
property, being thirteen years old, required a great deal of uplifting
for the benefit of the homeowners, and the City and ourselves. We
start working on numerous improvements and additions to the park. I
wanted to make sure that when we completed all our efforts and reno-
vations, then we would have a meeting and report that to the home-
owners. And that is why we were not able, or did not think it was
appropriate to meet with the owners at the very beginning, however,
our representative had been in the park at least once a month, and
were in contact daily discussion and contact with our on -site manager.
At the very beginning we found out that the perimeter of the property
was brown, had never been watered, and the sprinkler system was in
great disrepair. We felt, after getting into it, that a thirteen
year old sprinkler system was rusted, broken, and a great deal of
attention had to be given to it. After several months of time, labor
wd finally have put the perimeter sprinkler system into first class
condition, and as of a result of that our water bill has gone up
about three times higher because we want to keep that area green. We
also started an area about four feet by two thousand feet along side
the wall, the long wall facing the street, and we will like to put
additional shrubberies and additional flowers in the area over there
to enhance the beauty of the park, and also.in time give the park
additional sound barrier from the street levels. The previous owners
have closed the back clubhouse. We have two clubhouses, one in the
front and one in the back. And that, we felt, was definitely not
Paae 2
AYES:
Councilmen
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Councilman
None.
1_
1
ABSENT:
None.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
Lowry, May and Mitchell.
Russo and Mayor Thompson.
a) Mr. Tom Parker, 1425 Cherry Avenue, Space 133, addressed the
Council requesting the City Attorney to draw up an Urgency
Ordinance to protect mobilehome owners from anticipatory space
rental increases while relief is being considered and imple-
mented; a freeze on such rents at the level existing July 1,
1984; or, alternatively, an authorization for rollback to that
date of any increases.
PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Consideration of Establishing a Mobile
Home Rent Review Commission. (Continued from July 23, 1984).
The Public Hearing was re- opened at 8 :25 P.M.
Mr. Matthew Farr, General Partner of Valley Mobile Home Park, Ltd,
located at 121 Great Circle Drive, Mill Valley, California. Through
my correspondence to you Mr. Thompson, and.then later on, subsequent
to that, to the gentlemen of the Council over here, I have said that
I wasn't here, so I am - really not - know first hand what was said
about Valley Mobile Home Park, and so I was not here to defend our
position. So if anybody has anything they want to ask me regarding
that aspect of the meeting on the 23rd of July, I will be very, very
glad to answer those questions. But getting back, actually, since
that time, or since July.23, we called for a mobile home owner's
meeting, and on, I believe, the 29th, July 29, we had a meeting with
approximately one -third of the homeowners attended, and they had
varieties of things to ask us about it, and we, from the very beginning
wanted to tell them that we own the property since January of 1984,
and when we actually purchased the property we found out that the
property, being thirteen years old, required a great deal of uplifting
for the benefit of the homeowners, and the City and ourselves. We
start working on numerous improvements and additions to the park. I
wanted to make sure that when we completed all our efforts and reno-
vations, then we would have a meeting and report that to the home-
owners. And that is why we were not able, or did not think it was
appropriate to meet with the owners at the very beginning, however,
our representative had been in the park at least once a month, and
were in contact daily discussion and contact with our on -site manager.
At the very beginning we found out that the perimeter of the property
was brown, had never been watered, and the sprinkler system was in
great disrepair. We felt, after getting into it, that a thirteen
year old sprinkler system was rusted, broken, and a great deal of
attention had to be given to it. After several months of time, labor
wd finally have put the perimeter sprinkler system into first class
condition, and as of a result of that our water bill has gone up
about three times higher because we want to keep that area green. We
also started an area about four feet by two thousand feet along side
the wall, the long wall facing the street, and we will like to put
additional shrubberies and additional flowers in the area over there
to enhance the beauty of the park, and also.in time give the park
additional sound barrier from the street levels. The previous owners
have closed the back clubhouse. We have two clubhouses, one in the
front and one in the back. And that, we felt, was definitely not
Paae 2
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
warranted since we needed - I mean inherited I should say, about 18
families along with the rest of the park, and we felt that it would
be a good idea to separate the families and the children from the
front clubhouse, so we went ahead and redecorated the clubhouse,
painted, put new drapes in there and other things such as renovated
the pool tables and other facilities for the children. Subsequently,
most of them were stolen and we are now replacing them again.
The air conditioner in the back clubhouse was not operating We re-
placed that. The spa in the back clubhouse was not functioning.
We replaced the heater, and now we are placing, in addition to that,
there are several other items that were given to us by the City of
Beaumont to add to that area of spa, which has been ordered.
We found out that a lot of people are parking in there that are not
supposed to be parking. We have ordered some additional signs for
the front of the property at both entrances, and we feel that this
will give the homeowners additional areas for guest parking which
they are not allowed at the present time to park in the street, and
guests have to park outside and walk in. So that area is going to
be taken care of. We have, also, additional parking areas. . .
Councilman Russo: Excuse me. Mr. Mayor, we have got about three
conversations going. I would like to hear this gentleman right now.
Mayor Thompson: Gentlemen, you want to have a seat over there so
that we can continue. Okay, you can go ahead now. Let me interrupt
you for a minute. I think the basic contention is, well what you
are talking about has been brought forth. But I am not sure this is
the basic problem that.has been brought forth that triggers the re-
question for a rent review ordinance. If I may interrupt you and
ask a question - in previous testimony it indicated that the rent in
1977, correct me if I am wrong, was $68.00 a month.
Mr. Farr: I have no idea, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Thompson: What is it now in 1984.
Mr. Farr: $158.00.
Mayor Thompson: $158.00?
Mr. Farr: Yes.
Mayor Thompson: I think the question that triggered this is a lot of
people think that the rent increase is disproportionate to the amount
of - what - what is the word I am looking for - Matt? Amenities -
disproportionate to the amount of amenities that have been placed in
the park.
Councilman Lowry: And by his own testimony, the upkeep of the park. .
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Mayor, has the gentlemen mentioned any in-
creases yet.
Mayor Thompson: He hasn't mentioned any.
Councilman Mitchell: That is why I asked the question.
Mayor Thompson: But the thing that triggered this was the request
from the mobile home park residents, and they indicated that in 1977
the rent per space per month was $68.00, and it is now $158.00 a
month, and that is what triggered it. And I want him to address that
if he can to bring it in line with what is going on.
Mr. Farr: Do you want an answer to that Mr. Thompson.
Mayor Thompson: Do you have one.
Mr. Farr: Yes sir.
Mayor Thompson: Sir. Sir. Would you take your seat sir if you are
not participating. . . .
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Mr. Farr: Mr. Thompson. Let me say something regarding the original
rents that is usually sort of misleading. I have been in the mobile
home park business for over fourteen years. We have other parks in
other areas. We have developed some ourselves. Usually the develop-
ers, in the very beginning, deliberately want to lose money to lower
the rents to fill up the park, and then, of course, subsequently,
once the people are in there, they will find out that the $77.00 is
not a justifiable rent for their investment, and also the costs in-
volved, and subsequently, obviously, the rent goes up. The time has
changed. That $77.00 that you were talking about at a time that the
interest rates were around 7 -1/2%. And to say, at the present time
the banks, who charge over 14 or 15 %, and when you buy something,
anything, you buy a car, your house, whatever you do, at the present
time you have to pay the existing going evaluation of what it is.
The City has already raised the water bill twice, so far as I was
told, in water, we have not raised our rents. We feel that other
utilities have gone up, that we have not done anything about it, and
most of all, we felt that any rent raise has to be in parallel with
what you give the people. We felt that actually the park, we are all
of us in the same boat with homeowners. We have to.lift up and give
a good uplifting to the park, and that is why we have bought the
property, and we thought that spending the money over there would be
justifiable to give the people additional valuation for their homes.
We are trying to enforce a great number of problems that are over
there that the homeowners are not taking care of themselves. So
these are all part of the expenses that we are going through.
Now, again, I have to say that $77.00 probably should have been at the
time $125.00. I just guess at it, but I have no idea at the time who
was the owners, and why they did that, but that is the usual way when
you start a park. You start very, very low because you are trying to
attract and it is.costing you money with empty park sitting over
there, but you have to justify the rents based on the bottom line.
Everybody - the people who are in business here - recognize that an
investment has been made over there and in order for us to improve
the property we have to eventually raise rents.
Mayor Thompson: Does anyone have a question of this gentlemen.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes I have a question.
Mayor Thompson: You have a question, Mr. Mitchell?
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Farr, you stated you have been in the mobile
home business for some fourteen years.
Mr. Farr: We have been in the business for fourteen years, of that
about ten years of it have been in mobile homes.
Councilman Mitchell: As a point of information, I see that you are
a real estate broker.
Mr. Farr: Yes sir.
Councilman Mitchell: As a point of information, when, generally
speaking, when a person buys a piece of property for income, he
usually buys it on a capitalization basis, does he not.
Mr. Farr: You mean. . .
Councilman Mitchell: Where his return will be on his capital.
Mr. Farr: That is right.
Councilman Mitchell: You anticipate a return on capital.
Mr. Farr: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: So when you purchased this park this year you
anticipated a return on capital.
Mr. Farr: Yes sir.
Page 4
A
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: At the going rates.
Mr. Farr: Yes sir.
Councilman Mitchell: Because that is what you bought it on.
Mr. Farr: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: And when you had that anticipated return on
capital did you anticipate any specific increase over and above
that to compensate you for over and above what you had paid on
your purchase of capitalization.
Mr. Farr: I am not very clear . . .
Councilman Mitchell: What did you anticipate a capitalization net
return - 15 - 18 - 20 %.
Mr. Farr: Oh no. No way you can get 18 %.
Councilman Mitchell: What did you anticipate.
Mr. Farr: We figured out approximately, maximum, if we have about 10%
would be a good return for our investors.
Councilman Mitchell: Now, 10% gross capital return.
Mr. Farr: 10% of the actual cash on cash return to the investors,
yes.
Councilman Mitchell: A net capital return of 10 %.
Mr. Farr: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: Then of course to get investors for that you have
to have another area of, shall we say, write -off on depreciation.
Mr. Farr: Yes, you have some write -off. That is why you are not going
to have 14 or 15 %.
Councilman Mitchell: Okay, fine. So when you came in you on the park
you knew it was $158.00 a month. Is that correct?
Mr. Farr: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: What did.you anticipate your percentage of in-
creases would need to be to give you the 10% return that you bought
the park on.
Mr. Farr: At this moment I would say that this is very hard really
to answer, because, again, it goes back on recapturing what the
investment was made since then. I would say again probably between
8 or 10% raise.
Councilman Mitchell: An 8 or 10% raise. Now is that per annum.
Mr. Farr: Per annum, yes.
Councilman Mitchell: 8 or 10% raise per annum is what you antici-
pate.
Mr. Farr: Yes. May I say one more thing. We are also figuring out
approximately a 5% increase in expenses as well.
Councilman Mitchell: Plus a 5 %.
Mr. Farr: From that 10% would be a 5% increase in expenses which
means the bottom line would be a 5% return.
Councilman Mitchell: Well, but I mean your increases.are anticipated
between 13 and 15% a year. Which is normal for an investment.
Mr. Farr: Yes sir.
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: Allow me to ask you a question, and I don't
mean to get into this too deeply, but inasmuch as you are the park
owner I will just ask you a propounded question. In the event,
in the event this City Council would designate two people on the
Council to be approached for any rent increase, and you as a park
owner could approach them, and you would allow the park renters
to represent, and you would both be there to have a meeting, then
if you came into something that was agreeable, fine. If not, then
you could name an arbitrator, they could name an arbitrator, and
the two of you could name another arbitrator and agree on the arbi-
trator's decision. Does that sound reasonable to you?
Mr. Farr: It is very, very cumbersome Councilman Mitchell.
Councilman Mitchell: Well it isn't as cumbersome as a rent control
commission.
Mr. Farr: I would say that we have no objection to discuss any rent
increases with.our homeowners in advance. We have done that in the
past and we have felt we have always negotiated for such an amount,
and if they wanted to see certain expenses that we have gone, or
other things we have done for the park, we have actually been open
on that too.
Councilman Mitchell: Would you object to arbitration sir?
Mr-. Farr: Well, I am not - right now, I am opposed to the resolution
that you have in front of you.
Councilman Mitchell: I don't like it either. That is why I brought
something up in front of you.
Mr. Farr: I wanted to say that I would like to deal with stating
the fact that our record and the track record will show that we
have never been an owner and manager that basically done something
like I have heard from people in San Jose for example, raising
$150.00 in one month.
Councilman Mitchell: Have you had the opportunity to discuss what
you have stated to me today, a 13 to 15% increase a year. Have you
had a chance to discuss that with anyone in the park.
Mr. Farr: I have not, but I would certainly like to discuss it. Yes.
Councilman Mitchell: I think it would be a good idea.
Mr. Farr: A very good idea, yes.
Councilman Mitchell: Before we come up to some burdensome problem
that will not solve a situation.
Mr. Farr: I certainly would do - yes sir - yes sir.
Councilman Mitchell: Thank you very much.
Mayor Thompson: Anything else you want to add Mr. Farr.
Mr. Farr: I just wanted to make sure that all the Councilmen received
the letter that I sent out to them.
City Clerk: They did.
Councilman Mitchell: It was very well written.
Mr. Farr: Thank you.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, Mr. Farr, thank you very much for your input.
I have another person that has indicated speaking in opposition. A
Blair Barnes. Before you start is there anything in your dissertation
that will parallel or' overlap what has already been said.
Ms. Barnes: No.
Mayor Thompson: You are going to cover new ground.
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Blair Barnes: My name is Blair Barnes, I am with the Riverside
County Manufactured Housing Educational Trust, I represent mobile
home park owners in Riverside County. I wanted to say that at
the last Council meeting I said to you that we would make contact
with Mr. Farr and we have made contact. He is here tonight. I
believe that he has answered the questions that the Council has
raised. I am concerned about some of the leading questions. I
believe that in the free enterprise system that any type of rent
control ordinance is going to be a violation of that, and I think
that we have seen that the park owner and the resident does make
headway if they set down and keep the problems in the park, and
try to come up with some type of negotiation that -I believe Mr. Farr
has been in his park, and he has made an attempt to sit down and
talk with his residents, and I think that was the big bone of con-
tention at the last meeting. That he wasn't in town, he is in town
and he has met with his residents, and I think, any type of -- I
don't see the need for an ordinance when Mr. Farr is here and he is
working with his residents, and two of the other owners are here
tonight and they will be happy to address any questions. And if
there are any questions I can answer for the Council I will be happy
to.
Councilman Mitchell: May I ask a question.
Mayor Thompson: Go ahead.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Farr just told me a few moments ago that
he had not talked with any of the tenants.
Ms. Barnes: No that is not -- there is a misunderstanding. He.has
been in his park. He has been in his park and I believe you have
received correspondence to that.
Councilman Mitchell: I have the correspondence. . .
Mayor Thompson: Excuse me Mr. Mitchell. If I might refresh your
memory, I think your question to Mr. Farr was had you discussed the
potential rent increase with your people.
Councilman Mitchell: That is exactly right, and he said no.
Mayor Thompson: Well he probably hasn't discussed the rent increase
according to his letter, he discussed everything else. Ms. Barnes
excuse me. According to his letter he discussed everything else but
that. 5o, let's be very specific in how you ask your questions.
Councilman Mitchell: I am trying to be very specific, Mr. Thompson,
and I questioned him on the 13 and 15 %, and you - what are the park
owners that you are representing here this evening.
Ms. Barnes: Mr. McLemore is here and Mr. Meyers is also here.
Councilman Mitchell: Before I say anything else, I would like to
let them have their say.
Mayor Thompson: Is there anything else, Blair. Then I have McLemore,
then I have one other after that.
Mr. McLemore: Good evening Councilmen and Mr. Mayor. After the last
meeting I went by just to take a look at the Valley Park. Just as
another owner. Because I hadn't been there, I had been to most of
the other parks in town, and I drove by there. I went in and I spoke
with the manager for just a minute. I looked at the amenities that
they had. I saw that they had two pools, the jaccuzzis, they had a
large rec room, they had a library in it. They had a full kitchen,
it had a TV, it had carpeting, it was bigger than your Council
Chambers if I am not mistaken. And it was cool, it had air condi-
tioning. You know, myself, I own other parks in other areas, and I
think, myself, that $.158.00 is not a bad deal. That is my honest
opinion on that park. And it was beautiful. It was clean, and
there was nothing wrong with it that I could see. And, just as I
drove around the outside perimeter of that park I counted twenty -
six single wide coaches, so they are not all double -wide and triple -
wides, as was stated at the last meeting. And most of them are
Pa.gP 7
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
are moderately sized double wides from what I seen. And, I believe,
if I am not mistaken, Mr. Parker is a member of Golden State Home-
owners League, and that one thing that I thought I would make the
Council aware of - I don't know if they were - but one of the primary
goals of the Mobile Homeowners League, according to the reporter that
is put out by the Western Mobile Home Association, is that they are
in the business of taking over parks. Now I didn't know if.you people
were aware of that, but they are. In fact, they will supervise and
they will sponsor a committee to help take over a park. They will
recommend consultants to help. . .
Mayor Thompson: What do you mean - take over.
Mr. McLemore: To buy it. To own it.
Mayor Thompson: Okay.
Mr. McLemore: To co -op it. However. They are behind that. They
will recommend, a course of action to the tenants. And they will
recommend any outside agencies that might help them besides the
Golden State Mobile Homehowners League. But that is one of their
objectives besides being a representative of a tenant, is that they
represent themselves as taking over parks. And, actually that about
covers it. I was curious if Mr. Lowry was a member of Golden State
Mobile Homeowners League.
Councilman Lowry: Yes I am.
Mr. McLemore: You are? Thank you. That is about all that I had to
say on the subject: I think that the rent review board.should not
be passed. I think you are going to stop any future development of
mobile home parks. I noticed the Plantation as I come down the free-
way, and that is a beautiful new park that is being put up down there.
I don't know what City that is in. But I think you could just about
write off anything like that in Beaumont if this was passed. I know
one of the primary reasons that I bought.here was because there was
no controls, and it looked like a relatively peaceful town from what
I could see. That is funny tonight. You know, there has been - one
other thing I wanted to point out is that there has been no other
studies, to my knowledge, on this so far as rent gouging, or anything
like that. And there has only been one park primarily in question,
and that has been the Valley Park. And I really don't think the
Council should vote on something like this until there has been a
study by - maybe you would want to form a staff or something like
that to look into it - but I don't think there has been any gouging
in this town that I am aware of, and, at least the parks that.I'
visited, there didn't seem to be. I think that just about covers it
and I want to thank you very much.
Councilman Mitchell: May I ask you a question sir.
Mr. McLemore: Yes sir.
Councilman Mitchell: Which is your park, sir.
Mr. McLemore: It is the Cozy Park. It is just a block down and to
the right.
Councilman Mitchell: Oh, the Cozy, yes. That is a small, nice little
park.
Mr. McLemore: Yes, it is a very clean, quiet little park.
Councilman Mitchell: In my observations, almost each of these parks
has its own specific different type of - shall we say - problem or
condition. None of them are together, and a complete Ordinance
encompassing all parks, in my opinion, would be adverse to the bene-
fit of both the park owner and the tenants.
Mr. McLemore: Yes sir. It is dumping all of them into one bag.
Councilman Mitchell: This is why I was going to ask you the question
the same as I was the other park owner. Do you believe that in a
reasonable way that we could work an arbitration area, recognizing
that you have to have certain increases every year for your capital-
Da o•n R
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
ization for your investors and for yourself. To just have a simple
arbitration deal where the park can name someone, the tenants can
name someone, the two of you can name someone else, to have a rea-
sonable arbitration understanding. Do you think that might work.
Each park would have its own problems, and take care of its own
problems that way.
Mr. McLemore: Well, Mr. Mitchell, something like that would be
forced to work if that was forced upon us, but myself, I don't think
I would participate in that. That is one of the reasons I came to
Beaumont because there was no controls, or there was nobody inter-
fering in your business that way, and I don't think that is fair
under the free enterprise system, I just don't think that that
would go.
Councilman Mitchell: I am trying to seek the lesser of two evils.
Mr. McLemore: I personally would be opposed to that.
Councilman Mitchell: I am not in favor of rent controls, believe me.
I am only trying to find an area.
Mr. McLemore: One thing. Could I say one other thing. Whenever
something like this is passed, it has been shown it gradually becomes
more restrictive as time goes along. A lot of times if when a rent
ordinance is passed two years ago doesn't resemble what we have today
in some cities.
Councilman Mitchell: That is the name of bureaucracy, sir.
Mr. McLemore: You are correct there sir. Incidentally, I moved one
other mobile home while I was here. Seventy -five miles. I made
some copies if the Council would like to take a look at them. I
have made one for each of you.
Councilman Mitchell: I moved one three weeks ago and it cost us
$6,000.00.
Mr. McLemore: $6,000.00. I paid $202.00 for that one. Seventy -five
miles.
Councilman Mitchell: You are a better dealer than I am.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Parker. The other
item I have a request to speak on this is Mr. Parker. On Item 5.
Tom Parker, 1425 Cherry Avenue, Space 133: I am representing the
Valley Chapter of GSMOL 971. First I would like to say GSMOL does
not buy any parks. They help to buy if the park residents asked them
to buy - they have manuals and everything to buy, and there was
agreement throughout that the mobile home resident would have the
right of first refusal on any sale, so it was up in the Sacramento
and it died before it got to the Assembly. But I would like to say
this, Cherry Valley has two parks that are in the County. On this
606, which I made the mistake and put 606 on the badges here tonight,
and also on other papers. It was my mistake because I had been
pretty well confined at home and I have not been able to do a lot of
free time. I asked the owner of the mobile home park in Cherry
Valley if he had any trouble with the County ordinance. He said no.
He increased the rent since it went into effect $10.00 and no com-
plaints. That is in the County and they are under the same ordinance
with a few changes that you have there. In Yucaipa, they are, right
now, going out after to become incorporated so they can make their
own ordinance because what they are under, they are a very bunch of
dissatisfied people. And I don't mean just a few, I mean in the
hundreds. There is a lot of difference between mobile.home parks
and RV Parks. It is governed by - every bit of the government is
done by separate government agencies. Mobile home parks are under
HCD, and also, we have a mobile home residency law which applies to
both the owner and the resident. Under the RV Parks is under the
DMV, and I went through two of the other parks, and they are all
intermingling RVs in with the mobile homes, which is strictly against
Page 9
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
the Civil Code. I am not objecting to that if the people are not.
What I am objecting to is the idea of not having a say if our rent
is fair. The last few weeks the First District Court of Appeal,
which this County is under, passed that the fair market
unconstitutional, and all weights and increases must be by reasonable
return, which was the Oceanside( ?) on it. And right now the Orange
County Grand Jury is investigating the mobile home parks in Orange
County, and they are going to urge rent legislation not to exceed
the CPI. In Beaumont, I know various places the rent could be lower
I wasn't able to check all of them, the rates vary from $95.00 to
$158.00. The $95.00 came from $17.00 almost fourteen or fifteen
years ago, to $95.00 by gradual increase over a time. The mobile
home parks are governed by park rules. They tell you whether it is
a.family park or an adult park. They have to give you a six months
notice of any change in the type of park. Two years ago, or maybe
it will be two and one -half year's ago, we received a notice our
park was an adult park. And that is agreeable with the Civil Code
and people cannot sell their property to any family. The families
in there were protected by the Godfather clause. So, the people .
were stymied, that began under.a previous owner, we did not receive
a notice of any change. We have not received any notice of any change
in the current rules, so we are still an adult park and we are being
invaded by families. Which I don't have anything against a family,
but you got a rule you should live up to it.
Also, we had a fellow there in the park a few years ago. To replace
his mobile home he went out to Save -On. He brought.a brand new 14
foot wide mobile home. He was ready to have it delivered when they
told him in the park that it had to be a double wide. It could not
be a single wide. So, he had to buy a double wide, even though he
had bought a 14 foot wide. A brand new 14.
Mayor Thompson: Mr. Parker, excuse me a minute. I don't think these
things really pertain to rent review, do they? Those are basically
the responsibility of the park resident and the park owner to de-
termine. Those have nothing to do with park rent increases do they?
Mr. Parker: I was just trying to show that we are being limited on
what we can do. The width and also some of them that move in a
mobile home that was over the age limit of a former owner, they had
to put siding on. The different park's owners had verious ways to
increase the expenses. One, the brand new one is, they formed a
property management fund, which they have control of and they will
be paid salary for running the park and which the people pay for
both return on what their investment is, plus the management fee that
they charge. Our capital improvements are being put through as
ordinary maintenance, and you will find that most of the owners won't
abide by the law unless they are forced to. And with the few days
that we had - just since Saturday noon - with the friends and neigh-
bors of another park, wanting you to adopt Ordinance No. 602. And
I did make that mistake and made it 606 and I apologize. And so far
Banning not being laid down, they are going to come back with an
initiative ( ?) and they are going to ask for the same ordinance that
we had before, which was a two year's roll back, plus a limitation,
and it is the same as has been tested in the Courts, and it is legal.
I received a call from one of the Councilman in Banning and he told
me that they are beginning talks. If we do not get an Ordinance by
the City Council, we would go for a Special Election and it will also
have a roll back in legal limit increases. All we ask is to keep us
from being economically rejected. That is what we are asking. Thank
you.
Mayor Thompson: Mr. Parker. I think Mr. Russo has a question for
you.
Councilman Russo: Mr. Parker in reference to some testimony that you
gave at the beginning of the hearing at the last City Council meeting
you made mention that it is not necessarily - you are not looking
for controls. Okay. `Mainly you want an opportunity to sit down with
an owner and negotiate. Is that correct?
Page 10
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Mr. Parker: Yes.
Councilman Russo: You have mentioned a lot of things this evening.
Have you had an opportunity to sit down and negotiate with your park
owner now.
Mr. Parker: No.
Councilman Russo: You have not attended the meetings.
Mr. Parker: I attended but he - you cannot talk everything - because
there were people, and he not - probably would not open up any more
in front of them. His wife did most of the talking.
Councilman Russo: Did you get some things resolved at all.
Mr. Parker: No. Nothing as far as what we are up against.
Councilman Russo: Was the subject brought up.
Mr. Parker: No.
Councilman Russo: You mentioned in the past - you mentioned a lot of
problems with reference to past owners. These people have owned it
since January of 84, right?
Mr. Parker: Yes.
Councilman Russo: And you also said last time you personally had not
made any attempt to contact the owners.
Mr. Parker: Yes I had. I said I had but I had not received a name
because I was told there was a group of them, and I did check and I
did not check with the assessor's office or the County Recorder
because the last time I did that it was still under the old name.
Councilman Russo: And you checked with the manager right. And I
understand there has been a change there now, right.
Mr. Parker: Yes. There have been two changes.
Councilman Russo: Just recently there has been a change in management.
Mr. Parker: Yes.
Councilman Russo: All right, thank you.
Councilman May: Just.a quick one. Has the rent been increased since
the new owners took over.
Mr. Parker: No. No, but we expect it to, and we don't have protection
and knowing what we are paying for, we are going to be limited. There
has been - they tell you that if you have any hardship you can file
- you can go and file the papers - but I do know you can get relief
if you can prove it is a hardship. There has only been one or two
mobile home owners approved. So it would be just like you telling
the people how much money you make in the automobile business.
Councilman Russo: You just made reference - at least if I understand
what you were saying, you were saying to Mr. May it would be just like
someone telling you how much money you can make in the automobile
business, is that correct?
Mr. Parker: No, I said he wouldn't advertise how much he made, and
that is the same way with individuals, they do not like to tell what
their income is. If they are having a hardship, they won't admit it.
Councilman Russo: I see what you are trying to say.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Parker, with you - I mean in an interim
area, a tight rent control is not always the best thing in the world.
It has been proven many times. It isn't necessary in areas. But
do you think an arbitration committee of an arbitrator from the owner
and from yourselves, having them choose a third one, before a rent
T--_ -1 '7
a
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
increase, do you think that might solve some of the problems.
Mr. Parker: If you read the Ordinance, you have a park committee
first, which is two residents and two representatives of the
management, which is the owner, manager or his appointee. If the
four of you cannot agree, then you ask for arbitration. Then if the
arbitration doesn't work and the people in the park vote to take it
to the City review commission, then the City has a Commission which
is two mobile home owners, and two representatives of management, and
they do not have to be from Beaumont, they can be from anywhere, to
serve on that. But they cannot be in the park that is filing the
notice for arbitration.
Councilman Mitchell: Well, Mr. Parker, I am not adverse to your idea.
I am trying to modify this and do exactly what you want. Now wait
a moment sir, that is compatible to the investor. Bearing in mind
that the investor is entitled to a reasonable return for his money.
Mr. Parker: Yes.
Councilman Mitchell: You people are entitled not to pay more than the
general standard of living, the same as any lease agreement. Any
lease agreement goes on a pattern - a long term lease. And if they
followed along on that line, with a one and one committee, with a
third party - if they could not come to an agreement - do you think
that might be worth a try.
Mr. Parker: That is what you have in the Ordinance.
Councilman Mitchell: Without passing the particular Ordinance. There
are many things in that Ordinance that are rather sticky Mr. Parker.
Mr. Parker: Well, it has been proved legal no matter what. There
has been - it has been before the Court already, and there has not
been any objection - there has been one.case before the Commission
since last January, and that went in favor of the owner, and he had
to increase it again and it is back before the park committee again
to go for the arbitration again on the latest rates. And - it gives
any people at any park that is being gouged by any unjust rent a
chance to speak out.
Councilman Mitchell: I understand, Mr. Parker. I am not arguing
with your point or your idea, I was just trying to find an area that
you might be able to climb up far enough on the mountain without
getting to the peak, and see if it works. That is all I am talking
about.
Mr. Parker: Well, any law you have governing the owners and the
mobile home owners has to have teeth in it or the owners will take
That has been the case and I can name four
or five right now that did not appear for arbitration in the past.
Councilman Mitchell: There are many paper tigers with rubber teeth
Mr. Parker. Thank you very much.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Thank you. Just a minute Mr. Farr, I have
got a question for the attorney. In the proposed ordinance, 602,
there is a section in there that defines net operating income. That
is on Page 8, line 15.
City Attorney: I don't think I have a copy of the Ordinance.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. I will read it. Net Operating Income. I
guess this is the definition. All operating expenses normal and
necessary to the operation of the park shall be considered except
debt service and income tax depreciation. Isn't debt service a
normal expense for any business.
City Attorney: I believe this is referring to the. . .
Mayor Thompson: It is evidently the income of the park - a park.
Page 12
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
The gross income. Let's see, the net operating income. It is on
Page 8.
City Attorney: Item 2.
Mayor Thompson: Yes, Item 2. The net operating income shall be
operating expense except debt service and income tax depreciation.
Debt service isn't that normally considered an expense? A legitimate,
reasonable business expense.
City Attorney: Yes.
Mayor Thompson: How can it be excluded? As an operating expense.
City Attorney: Because they wish to define that as separate from,
because that is the return to the investors.
Mayor Thompson: What happens to that. Is it just left out in left
field.
City Attorney: Oh no. That is, in effect, a return to the investors.
Mayor Thompson: The debt expense?
City Attorney: Yes. I believe that is the debt service that it is
referring to.
Mayor Thompson: Debt service is to the investors. The interest rate
that you pay on your loan. Is that what we are talking about.
City Attorney: That is what I understand they are talking about.
Councilman Mitchell: A debt service could be over five years or
thirty years. I mean it leaves a very grey area.
City Attorney: I agree.
Councilman Russo: Irregardless, it is an operating expense.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes sir.
City Attorney: In setting this up we followed the basic format of
the County.
Councilman Lowry: They reviewed that very thoroughly.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Gentlemen have you had - I don't have any
other pro or con.
Councilman Lowry: I move that we close the Public Hearing.
Mayor Thompson: There was one person that had something - the owner
of Valley, he had an additional comment and I was talking with the
attorney. Mr. Farr you had an additional comment.
Mr. Farr: Yes sir. I really did not want to let this go by Mr.
Thompson. I had some few things in here which I had to actually
address to the Council. This was not correct. In our last meeting
on the 29th of July, Mr. Thompson said - Mr. Parker that is, I am
sorry, Mr. Parker said that the majority of the people were there and
they were unhappy. I actually counted 56 people in the meeting, and
we had canvassed. My wife and I went door to door and asked every
single person please attend this meeting because it is very, very
important for you to tell us what your basic feelings about the
park is. 56 people were there, out of 56 people, I would assume
most were husband and wives. We have 181 spaces, we assume at least
two persons should be occupying each home, so out of 260 people,
there were only 50 people over there. That is one.
He also mentioned something about families. We inherited the park
with 18 to 20 families, and our policy at the present time, no more
families allowed because we feel that it is definitely not to the
Page 13
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
benefit of the homeowners at the present time. Even though we feel
it is not the way it should be obviously in some areas, and we know
the State will force any owner in apartments that they should have
families, and I certainly have nothing against the families, but I
feel that as long as this park was originally done - originally in-
augarated so to speak - without families, we should continue on and
do it. I only want to say something again. That we feel that the
time of raise of the rent. We will assure this Council that any
person that lives in our park that has any reason that cannot be able,
and I say a poverty reason, cannot be able to absorb additional
increase as we are going to be implementing, we will discuss with
every one of them, and we will not have anybody go without food or
utilities or anything else that would have to pay us first, and we
have to actually evict them.
Councilman Mitchell: Who would define the poverty level sir?
Mr. Farr: Well the poverty - that is something - they would have to
give us a financial statement. . .
Councilman Mitchell: I understand sir. See I am getting into an area
that we aren't even speaking of now. We are trying to determine what
area you are able to increase the rent which will protect the people
who are living there. This City Council - the entire City has an
obligation - to the people who have investments in their mobile homes
and to people who have investment in the park. The only time you
can straighten things out - and it has been proven over the years -
is through a clean, solid, honest arbitration. It has been done in
unions, it has been done in any and all negotiations, but you cannot
be left high and dry where you cannot increase to cover your costs,
by the same token the residents cannot be left be high and dry where
you can go this. You are talking here of a 13 to 15% increase per
annum. Now does that say that you will be confined to a 15% each
year, or to 15% each month, or to 15% each day. What I am talking
about you have to have an arbitration. You have to give and the
residents have to give. We, as a Council, have to find a meeting
ground that is fair for all people. And I wish everyone could look
at it that way, and we may need.a little bit more talking to get it
straightened out because the investor cannot lose money. The renter
cannot be priced out of his home. So there has to be an area, and
it is up to each of us to try to determine what that area is. We
have had many problems with many places where.rent control has blown
up in their face. Most of the places that have been satisfied have
had an arbitration. I believe if we think of an arbitration - all
parties - we might be on the right track. Thank you very much.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Gentlemen we have heard both sides on this
tonight. We heard it three weeks ago and we are beginning to cover
ground again that we have covered previously. Now we have spent
another hour on it tonight so unless you have something entirely new
to add I wouldn't like to go through and hear some more of the rheor-
tic that we have already heard. There is one standing up. Fred I
know that you have trouble getting around.
Fred Shaw: I think they can hear me. I don't need a microphone.
You know that. How does this gentlemen differentiate between what
he calls maintenance and embellishments for the park. Now I think
routine maintenance should not be included in embellishments and
enhancement to the park, that is what
(this.portion of Mr. Shaw's testimony is unintelligible due to
a conversation at the microphones)
. . . . . on their improving and maintenance of the park. Now I
think that it is a regular routine thing and it shouldn't enter
into the picture and it shouldn't be considered in an increase in
the monthly rates.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Gentlemen. Ladies and Gentlemen. Basically
what we have here is .a Public Hearing to consider the establishment
of a mobile home rent review commission. Some of the things that
we have heard tonight properly belong in arbitration discussion
between the residents and owners and should not be considered at
this point of establishing a rent review commission. It appears that
Page 14
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
we have one basic problem with the largest park in town. It has the
most residents. And it is probably a problem of non - communication,
or lack of communication between the owners and the residents. Other
than that we have had adequate, I think, input on this Public Hearing
over the past three weeks, and unless the Council has some other
questions we can close the Public Hearing and review the testimony
as we have got it and make our decision within the prescribed period.
Councilman Mitchell: I move the Public Hearing be closed.
Jim Melvin: Mr. Mayor, before you close the Public Hearing I would
like to ask one question of Mr. Farr.
Mayor Thompson: Well, I don't have a second on the motion.
Councilman Mitchell: I will withdraw the motion in favor of Mr.
Melvin.
Jim Melvin: Mr. Farr, I am only going to question you about - actually
two questions. One, you made a statement that you had visited every
mobile home in the park, had contacted everybody about attending the
meeting. I personally live there, you did not contact me or my wife,
and I received a notice the day before . Secondly, you said you were
no longer going to have families in the park. Well I know personally
that the manager that you just brought into the park does have a
family.
Mayor Thompson: I don't think this is really germaine right now. We
have had adequate testimony and I am sure that in a park of this size
that somebody is not going to be home at the time that we go knocking
on doors. But you did receive notification didn't you Jim.
MN. Melvin: One day before. And it was stuck under my mailbox.
Councilman Mitchell: I move that the Public Hearing be closed.
Councilman Russo: Second.
Mayor Thompson: We don't really need a motion. We can just close it
by concensus. Do we have a concensus? Okay it is a concensus that
the testimony that we have heard will be adequate at this time and
we will close the Public Hearing at 9:30 P.M. We will close the
Public Hearing at this time and according to the regulations and
rules we have, I think it is forty days within which to render a
decision, or before. That is the maximum time we can take. We
have a maximum of forty days.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Mayor. I was going through my file and I
run into sheets from 1981 - through the latter part of 80 and 81, 2
and 3 and 4 relative to trying to get a determination on a basic
rent control review commission. And I art, going to proposed a motion
at the present time that we adopt the rent control No. 606 on a
temporary basis for six months. 602, I am sorry. For six months
to give it a chance to operate, to give all parties a chance to
bring in the pros and cons on how it did operate, and in this manner
the people will at least know if they have a operating deal, the
owners will know if they have an operating deal, and put it on a
temporary six months basis instead of setting it off, continuing,
delaying it, because everyone is concerned about the issue. I make
that motion, I hope I can get a second.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, it has been moved that Ordinance, in other
words you are saying that the public, no, never mind. Be adopted
to expire in six months, 180 days. Why bother to adopt it for that
short a period of time.
Councilman Mitchell: Well let's just try it for six months Mr. Thompson
instead of delaying it for four years like we have.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, do I hear a second. Do I hear a second. Do I
hear a second. The motion died for lack of a second. If I may make
a suggestion that we consider the testimony that we have heard after
it is typed, and render our decision within the prescribed period.
Page 15
6.
7.
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: May I ask that we have a committe so we can
study it, and do something instead of nothing.
Mayor Thompson: I think when we discuss it it should be discussed by
the entire Council at the same time rather than a committee.
Councilman Mitchell: Who is we and when.
Mayor Thompson: I think it should be discussed as a Council. As
soon as we can arrange it as soon as we can get the testimony typed.
Councilman Mitchell: We have the testimony now. I think we should
give a service to these people. Tell them that we are interested and
that we will do something. It is up to you Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Thompson: Approximately what is the time frame for typing
this. By Monday for instance.
City Clerk: Not Monday.
Mayor Thompson: I say by Monday. We can have it typed by Monday.
City Clerk: Next Monday, yes, that is fine.
Mayor Thompson: Next Monday, that is the 20th. If we have a couple
of days to look at it we could set the. . .
City Clerk: Just this testimony?
Mayor Thompson: Just this testimony.
City Clerk. Fine.
Mayor Thompson: We could have our Council meet on the 23rd in the
evening. That is a Thursday. The next meeting would be the 27th.
We can have it by the next meeting.
City Clerk: You can have it before the next meeting so you can study
it.
Mayor Thompson: Well give it to us as soon as possible and then we
will bring it back on the agenda at the next meeting.
Councilman Mitchell: Could we have it before the agenda Mr. Thompson.
Mayor Thompson: You will have it as soon as we can get it done and it
will be prior to the agenda.
Councilman Mitchell: That is all I ask. Thank you sir.
Mayor Thompson: It will come back to our next meeting on the 27th.
ORDINANCE NO. 602 - FIRST READING - Adding Chapter 13.16 to the
Beaumont Municipal Code Establishing a Mobile Home Rent Review
Commission.
This agenda item was continued to the next regular meeting to be held
on August 27.
PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Proposed Zoning Amendments to Ordinance
490. (Commercial- General, Planned Unit Development and Residential
Housing Development).
The Public Hearing was opened at 9:35 F.M.
Mayor Thompson: We have an exhibit of public notice in'a newspaper
of general circulation dated August 6, and it is Ordinance No. 607
amending Ordinance 490 to include or to add Sections covering Resi-
dential Housing Development, Commercial- General and Planned Unit
Development. We will open the public hearing on Ordinance 607 to
add zoning classifications to Ordinance 490. Zoning classifications
Page 16
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
as indicated to cover Residential Housing Development, Planned Unit
Development and Commercial- General. Anyone wish to speak against
the proposal to add these zoning designations to amend 490 - to add
these zoning designations. Anyone wish to speak against the amend-
ment to 490 which would add these zoning designations. Broadly
classified as Residential Housing Development, Planned Unit Develop-
ment and General Commercial. I hear no opposition or no person
wishing to speak opposing the amendment to Ordinance 490 for those
designations.
Any member of the Council?
Councilman Mitchell: There are very many areas in here Mr. Thompson
- I just got this as the rest of you did on Friday, and I haven't
had a chance to go all the way through it. I am quite sure that
nobody else here has gone all the way through it to find out what.we
would or would not be voting on. There is one point that I do have.
I don't have these by page number, I am sorry. No. 17.020.210 - lot
area and dimensions. Where it names as specific of two bedrooms not
less than 800 feet. I think that is an arbitrary figure because many,
many or satisfactory with 700 feet. One bedroom with not less than
650. Many are satisfactory with around 550. And the other not less
than 500 would be satisfactory with 450. I don't know where they
picked the thing up. I don't know what they based it on, or if it
was just a flip of the coin. I have no idea. All that I mentioned
are well inside of the housing code of the State of California.
Mayor Thompson: I remember previously square footages of certain
apartment type buildings were set by Planning Commission quite a few
years ago.
Councilman Mitchell: Who was on the Planning Commission?
Mayor Thompson: I happened to be on the Planning Commission at that
time.
Councilman Mitchell: That is why I asked the question sir.
Mayor Thompson: I know you did.
City Manager: Mayor Thompson, I would like to point out that actually
all the Councilmen had this material - all this material either six or
eight weeks ago, and on that particular night you continued these
three zones for this consideration, and on that particular first night
that you first had it you adopted the I -P zone, and there were four
zones recommended initially, as you recall, so these have been lying
around for some time gentlemen, and it is certainly no surprise, or
it should not be a surprise to anyone.
Councilman Mitchell: Who was the Planning Director then Mr. Davis.
City Manager: Mr. Morrissey.
Councilman Mitchell: How long ago.
City Manager: Mr. Morrissey. I say six or eight weeks ago.
Councilman Mitchell: I misunderstood you.
Councilman Lowry: I did have a question that was brought up in the
study session, on the zero lot line modification.
City Manager: What page is that again Councilman Lowry.
Councilman Lowry: Well there is no page numbers. On exhibit "a" is
about the second. . .
Mayor Thompson: About the second page over.
City Manager: Under what category though.
Councilman Lowry: Zero Lot Line Modifications.
Pnpra 17
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
City Manager: Okay.
Councilman Lowry: In which it mentions that the front yard setbacks
either (a) 22 foot plus setback with a mandatory variable of two
feet from dwelling to dwelling (e.g. 22 feet, 25 feet, 23 feet, 25
feet, etc.) or (b) 5 to 7 foot setback with a mandatory variable of
one foot from dwelling to dwelling provided each unit is supplied
with an automatic garage door openers. Now to me it just seems that
what this is saying, is the set back from the property line would
only be 5 to 7 foot to the front of the garage, and that doesn't
seem adequate to me.
City Manager: You are reading that wrong Councilman.Lowry because
that is saying 5 to 7 foot setback with a mandatory variable from
dwelling to dwelling. Now that doesn't mean front yard setback.
Councilman Lowry: Yes it does, it says so. Front yard setback.
A), 22 foot, etc., or B) either /or. It does say that sir.
City Manager: Well, okay. If that is true than we ought to have
the planner speak to it. Let me point out what was behind the
Commission's thinking here.
Councilman Lowry: Well, there is one other thing before the Planner
gets up to speak. Come down to number 3 and it says b) in combination
with the 5 to 9 foot design with a 15 foot rear yard. Evidently that
is referring to the 5 to 7 foot, now it says 5 to 9 down here, so
there is a conflict there and those things I would like the planner
to speak to.
Mayor Thompson: May I ask a question on that one Bill. Norm, on this
type of a Zero Lot Line Modification is this the type of development
that you would normally see in Peacock Valley, that type of develop-
ment? With this type of Zero Lot Line Modification.
City Manager: Well I don't know about Peacock Valley, but it would
be the type of development where you would probably have some common
ownership possibly, or maybe not common ownership,.but zero lot line
may be between two dwellings, which you have approved - as an example
in one of the subdivisions recently approved in the northern part of
the City.
Councilman Lowry: I have no problem with . . .
City Manager: The whole idea here though was to make it possible,
particularly for meandering streets and where you have different
depths of the lot, and where you have a impossibility almost to achieve
a full width lot with a standard setback, and so it is an attempt to
provide flexibility in the developments that are totally different,
I will have to grant that, but also not to make them look like a
standard row of houses with a 25 foot setback, but to let them blend
in, or lend themselves to flexibility with these odd - shaped, or ir-
regularly shaped lots that often occur in many of these types of
developments.
Mayor Thompson: May we have Ron address us. Ron, would you address
that for a minute. It is the zero lot line modification. The
rationale behind it.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: I have gone through all of the
Ordinances that are being proposed and particularly that one that
was just brought up. The City Manager is correct in that it brings
the ordinance, or potentially would bring a project up to the state
of the art as far as architectural considerations are concerned. It
also has some ramifications as far as the economics of development.
If the City would like to pursue, at some future time, a project that
may make housing more affordable to persons, these are some of the
things that would be considered - not just for aesthetic reasons,
but also for consideration of the overall unit cost of property.
You want to have some flexibility in order to have maybe smaller lot
sizes, but not do away with the amenities of the larger lot. For
instance the trend toward condominiums and to townhouse development.
Page 18
1 }s
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
There are many people who wouldn't be able to buy a full sized,
single family house, but they still want the ownership, and at the
same time they don't want to be bothered with yard work. They would
prefer to have common access to open areas, and this just gives the
- our code - brings, really, our code up -to -date with the state of
the art as far as planning and architectural features, and economics.
Councilman Lowry: You aren't answering my question at all sir. The
question I brought up is on the zero lot line, the 5 to 7 foot set-
back from the front - the front yard setback. It just seemed to me
that 5 to 7 foot is not anywhere near sufficient.
Mr. Larson: It is sufficient if you have an electric garage door
opener. Because then you do not have any provision for parking in
the front yard. There are some developments which are designed
specifically for that purpose, but they do not want to see cars
sitting out in front of the houses in the driveway, so they will
specifically reduce the front yard setback and require that there be
a garage door opener so that anytime the cars are on the premises
they are in a garage and out of sight. This happens with some of
the more expensive developments.
Councilman Lowry: Supposing the opener is inoperative. Then what
happens.
Mr. Larson: This is just an alternative. This may not be something
that the City of Beaumont would ever want to exercise. If you prefer
to have larger front yards, or if you want to have some flexibility
as far as what you want to do - it is an option - it is available.
Not to say that the Planning Commission or the City Council would be
bound to provide for that.
Councilman Lowry: All right. Now is there an area between these two
-,between one and 3 where it says 5 to 9 design. Is that possibly an
error in typing or what.
Mr. Larson: No. That is correct.
Councilman Lowry: Because there is no 5 to 9 mentioned anywhere else.
City Manager: It is a different yard. It is a rear yard.
Mr. Larson: Let me see which one that is again. I thought I had it
marked.
Councilman Lowry: A fifteen foot rear yard - with the 5 to 9 design,
a fifteen rear - in combination with a 5 to 9 design, a fifteen foot
rear yard. So it must be speaking of the opposite end of the building.
It must be - it looks to be like it is referring back to the 5 to 7
foot setback.
City Manager: No, it is saying, Councilman Lowry, that when you have
a 20 foot front yard setback, then you can get by with a five foot
rear yard. Or in combination with a 5 to 9 foot front design, in
effect then you can have a 15 foot rear yard setback. You must have
a fifteen foot.
Mx. Larson: You also need to consider the side yard. The usable side
yard provisions of the code. This is one thing that has been over-
looked in times past where we have required a typical house to have
two side yards, one on each side, and zero lot line is designed to
shift it over and to make that side yard usable.
Councilman Lowry: I realize that. I wasn't finding any fault with
the zero lot line. I realize what that is, it just seemed to me
that this 5 to 9 might be a mistake.
City Manager: What it is saying is.that if you are going to have a
smaller front yard, then you can have a bigger rear yard.
Mr. Larson: Right. Or vice versa.
Page 19
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Councilman Lowry: The wording is confusing to me, and I imagine it
is going to be confusing to other people too. In combination with
the 5 to 9 foot design, which has never been mentioned before. It
is referring like it is referring to something that is mentioned
before.
City Attorney: Shouldn't that read 5 to 7 feet.
Councilman Lowry: That is what I think it should be. If it is 5 to
7 at the top, it should be 5 to 7. . .
City Attorney: It refers back to the front yard setbacks, so it
should be 5 to 7. Or should the top one be 5 to 9?
Councilman Lowry: Yes. One way or the other.
City Attorney: It should be the same.
Councilman Lowry: Look at number one, it says 5 to 7, then look down
at number 3 here and it says 5 to 9.
Mr. Larson: Well, of course, the first 5 to 7 says with a mandatory
variable of one foot from dwelling to dwelling, so there is degree
of flexibility there, and it can be developed in that manner. If
you want to make it 5 to 7 to make it consistent. . .
Councilman Lowry: Well if it was only one foot than it would be eight,
it wouldn't be nine. Still, there is something screwy there, which
I don't understand.
City Manager: Just change it. That is no problem.
City Attorney: Which one should be changed.
Mr. Larson: I would say if you are going to change one, it should be
the bottom one - 5 to 9, to coincide with the 5 to 7.
Councilman Lowry: Should be 5 to 7?
Mr. Larson: Right. I didn't have anything to do with drawing this
up, but in just looking at it here, if you made it 5 to 7 with a
variable for one foot. That won't be a problem then.
Councilman May: Is this idea to accommodate developers.
Mr. Larson: Indirectly, possibly. What it would be doing is accom-
modating not so much developers as you would be accommodating
developers who want to build housing to suit the needs of the
consumers who would be buying them. For instance, it is obvious
now that not very many people can afford to buy a full single family
home with detached garage, with a 25 foot rear and front yard and
that sort of thing, and if the developer wants to develop a property
in order to appeal to the lower.income groups, particularly with
some of the programs that are available under Farmers Home Adminis-
tration, and some of the other subsidized programs, this would give
that type of developer the opportunity to build affordable housing.
City Manager: Not only that, Ron, I think you are giving the wrong
impression here, because certainly you indicated to start here that
this is the state of the art procedure anymore. You could have,
- certainly this sort of thing is utilized in other cities, whether
it be Palm Springs or Rancho Mirage, and I wouldn't call them relying
on subsidized housing, or any thing of that nature. It is a state of
the art which puts you competitive, or makes it possible for you to
allow the same sort of thing that is going to happen in every other
City. If you don't want that, then, of course, you don't adopt it,
but. . .
Councilman May: Okay. Now we are getting to the point that I wanted
to bring out. If we had a developer come in here and build 75 to 100
of these homes, what laws do we have in there for a developer to
Page 20
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
build a park in with the housing development, because these people are
going to have very little room to move around in their yards. They
ought to have a park in with the development.
City Manager: Well, that is up to the Planning Department to make
recommendations to you. Whether it is a park, or whether it is dona-
tion of money or land, or a fire station, or whatever.
Councilman May: Well the developer should be . . .
City Manager: Well you can't write hard and fast rules here I don't
think. But this is what you have a staff for to watch over these_
kinds of things when they come in. One may be three acres, or five
acres and you can't require much out of him, but the next guy maybe
with 20 or 40 acres you would require a great deal out of him. So
it depends upon each development, but you are sitting there making
the final determination, and if you don't like what is being
recommended in any case, you can send it back for a further considera-
tion.
Councilman May: Well I think it should stipulate that . . .
Councilman Mitchell: May I ask a question.
Mayor Thompson: I think Matt had a question he wanted to ask, Mr.
Mitchell.
Councilman Russo: I think when we talk about affordable housing. . .
Mayor Thompson: Excuse me, were you through?
City Manager: Well, let me make a comment to his last comment there.
If you desire to say that out of every 20 lot subdivision you shall
donate whatever, you can put that stipulation on, but that is up to
you.
Councilman May: I desire it.
City Manager: Well, as I say, that is up to you. If you want them to
build a five acre park with 20 lots say so. If you want them to
donate a fire station, say so. Whatever it is.
Mayor Thompson: That is not what this is all about though.
City Manager: Yes, well, no. That is an answer to his question.
Mayor Thompson: You are establishing a zone. Basically, that is
what you are doing.
City Manager: That is right.
Mayor Thompson: You had a question Matt?
Councilman Russo: Just a point of clarification, if I understand
what I am hearing. With this we will have the availability to offer
other types of development to those developers coming into the
community with, - especially the availability for them to build
what you may call starting homes, or affordable houseing, Right? Is
that basically it?
Mr. Larson: It is one way it can affect that way. It is up to the
developer. He can put in deluxe, luxury type facilities. . .
Councilman Russo: But he does not have that option now.
Mr. Larson: No. No, it is difficult to do it now. You end up having
to meet the code and grant a lot of variances for virtually every one
of these design criteria, you would have to have a variance for. Also,
you should - don't assume when these - you know the yard setbacks are
reduced or something of that nature, that he is going to be able to
cram more units on the site. In some cases, the density factor is
already created there, and it would be a situation where instead of
Page 21
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
having a lot of back yard - large back yards - in back of the units,
you may be able to cluster the units and have more open space, so
that the design here you may end up with the facilities such that
you have smaller units, you may have smaller private space for the
developer, but it may free up additional open space which can be
used for recreation - active or passive recreational facilities.
Councilman Russo: In any case, though, as far as you know, do we
have a developer on line that wants this type of development right
now.
Mr. Larson: Not to my knowledge.
Councilman Russo: Okay. One more question. Before any developer
would be allowed to use this type of development, it would have to
go through the Planning Commission, and through the City Council,
the whole process.
Mr. Larson: Right.
Councilman Russo: So all we are going is making it possible and
creating a zone. Okay.
Mr. Larson: Right. To have that designation. Of making it avail-
able if desired by the City.
Councilman Mitchell: Seeing all these zones and looking at a map here.
Here we have R -3, R -3, R -3, R -3, R -1 and C -2. Now when these designa-
tions come in, there are many of these R -3 lots that are 55 by 100
feet long. Now do they get a specific - one of these zoning for a
particular lot, or is it going to be for an area, or for a district.
Or are you going to blanket this area and say this area is entitled
to those densities and those conditions, or shall we say that it is
lot by lot as they.apply. I am only trying to get to what it is.
We are going to have a broad classification, and so is this broad
classification going into this R -1 area. Going into the R -3 area,
will it be in the C -2 area, what area will it go into. There has to
be some kind of determination.
City Manager: Councilman Mitchell, Ron can answer, but my thought
would be that I would find it very difficult in my mind to think
that you would put it any place in the area you are pointing to. I
would think it would go into the new areas of the City that have not
been zoned anything.
Councilman Mitchell: Then let us set it, and so we put this instead
of being a shotgun, on a subjective basis to find out what areas will
have certain zonings. I would not - in any way - accept all those
zoning classifications unless we had some type of an indication of
where they would be,-or what conditions they would be under. Are
they going to be on 6,000 square foot lots, 20,000, five acres, unless
we know what they would be, you are going to get in where it will be
a complete subjective thing. Somebody wants to build a three story
apartment alongside a street of residential houses. I think you
would run into trouble. We ran into trouble once and we got hooked
with it. I don't like to see us get hooked again.
Mr. Larson: Maybe I could respond to this. I think you were looking
at the wrong map. Probably, as far as the application of these
zoning designations. When the City adopted the General Plan you had
some designations proposed for PUD. Those areas, in looking at the
General Plan map, those are the areas that would probably be most
suitable to apply this type of zoning to. If and when - if they
happen to be outside the City limits at the present time, possibly,
when they annex, if they happen to be inside the City limits, those
would be the only areas that I would consider, first of all, PUD
General Plan designations.
Councilman Mitchell: As the Planning Director, could you identify
the areas for these myriad of zones.
Mayor Thompson: He just stated there is no particular area yet.
So far as I know, we are just establishing a zone so that when this
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
property does come in for development there is a zone established
that they may apply for, if their development so suits that area.
That is my understanding. Mr. Russo, you had a question.
Councilman Russo: Let me ask you this. I think the question is
being raised as to procedure in adopting the zone. In your experience
is this normal procedure to adopt a zone and then, at a later date,
apply the zone to a particular area as it is applied for by a
developer.
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: May I ask a question of all of the Councilmen.
Does anyone here know what a PRSS is?
Mayor Thompson: Planned single family. The way I understand it, is
that correct.
Mr. Larson: Planned Residential.
Mayor Thompson: Planned Residential Single Family. Planned resi-
dential single family, high density.
Councilman Mitchell: How do you get one of those. Do you buy a lot.
What do you do. Make an application and say I want this zoning.
Mt. Larson: That is right. You would make - the applicant would make
an application for it if he felt that this would - that this zoning
would suit the proposed development that he has.
Mayor Thompson: He has to meet the criteria'.
Mr. Larson: Right. Meet the criteria. And if he felt that this fit
into it, then he would apply for that type of zoning, and before the
zoning would be considered my recommendation would be to look at a
least a conceptual plan of what it would look like.
Mayor Thompson: But before you could even do that, you have to have
the zoning designation.
Mr. Larson: Oh, yes, certainly.
Mayor Thompson: All we are going tonight is setting up the zoning
designation. That is correct?
Mr. Larson: That is correct. And the zoning designations are con-
sistent with the General Plan. Right now you have areas designated
for potential future PUD, but you don't have a PUD classification
that is suitable in the zoning ordinance right now. So it is
basically a housekeeping activity that you are going through right
now , to create zone classifications that are in accordance with
what you have already adopted in the General Plan, and, of course, I
wasn't here when you adopted the General Plan, but you do have the
PUD classification, and that usually is an indication that you want
to see some flexibility in housing styles and layouts and that sort
of thing.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Thank you Ron. Harold you had a question?
Harold Blackaby, 662 Maple: Is this - within this slew of ordinances
here, does that include the high density zoning that I heard about of
23 units per acre.
Mayor Thompson: No, this does not include that. This is establishing
a zoning designation. And it will be applied, like I said, to land
or development down the road when it appears. We have no indication
right now of any particular area for this particular zoning until it
is requested. All it is is establishing a zone designation, just
like R -1, R -2 and R -3.
Page 23
I
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
Mr. Blackaby: You know, this does have to do with increasing densi-
ties though.
Mayor Thompson: This is establishing the zoning classification if
we have a residential high density. In other words, say we have an
area that somebody wants to put - what - two story, three story
condominiums, we will now have an area that we can apply the zoning
to. And we will have criteria for them to build with.
Mr. Blackaby: You spent a lot of years on the Planning Commission.
You know when you open up something like this wide open, that it is
hard to get control of - the fact is you will have a lot of lawsuits
over it.
Mayor Thompson: What? The zoning designation.
Mr. Blackaby: The densities.
Mayor Thompson: This has nothing to do with density, yet. Not until
we - we are passing a zoning designation. Now, at the present time,
what is our density requirement - or - what is it. I don't remember
it. Under our high density, what is our zoning density, right now.
Mr. Larson: The high density. Up to 16 units per acre, I think.
This particular ordinance that we were talking about recently, the
last page, if you will look at the last page, it says the minimum
lot size. If you look at the last page of this ordinance we have just
been talking about, it is talking about the minimum lot area for
dwelling units shall be 3,000 square foot, or a maximum of 12 dwelling
units per acre. So it really covers your medium density.
Councilman Mitchell: Ron, what happened to the 32 units per acre.
They spoke of that in the Planning Commission the other day.
Mr. Larson: That is still before the Planning Commission.
Councilman Mitchell: So it is 32 units to the acre, not 16.
Mr. Larson: Right. That is still. . .
Councilman Mitchell: Thank you.
Mr. Larson: The Commission hasn't taken any action on it.
Councilman Mitchell: I thought they passed it.
Mr. Larson: No.
Mr. Blackaby: What I am trying to say, Tommy, is this. Since the
time you were on the Planning Commission, the densities in certain
zones are down from what it was when you were on there. Now we are
going for something more. And, while you have control, let's keep
control. And you can always lift it up later if you want to.
Mayor Thompson: All we are doing right now is setting up a zoning
designation. We are not applying it at this time. We are just
putting it there in the Ordinance.
Councilman Lowry: The Planning Commission and the Council will have
the control.
Mayor Thompson: Then we control it as we go along.
Mr. Blackaby: What I am saying is, zoning designation also designates
the densities.
Mayor Thompson: It designates the use, yes. It designates the use.
Okay, we have - there was no one opposing - speaking in opposition .
to this public hearing. The Council has had adequate input, You have
had adequate input gentlemen. Okay, we will close the public hearing
as of 10:05.
Page 24
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
The Public Hearing was closed at 10:05 P.M.
8. ORDINANCE NO. 607 - FIRST READING - Amending Ordinance 490 and
Beaumont Municipal Code Title 17 by Adding Sections 17.20.200,
17.20.205, 17.20.210, 17.25.300, 17.25.305, 17,25.310, 17.25.315,
17.25.320, 17.25.325, 17.35.010, 17.35.015, 17.35.020, 17,35.025
nd 17.35.030, Residential Housing.Development (R -HD), Commercial
eneral (C -G) and Planning Unit Development (PUD).
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to pass
Ordinance No. 607 at its first reading by reading of title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
9. Negative Declaration 84 -ND -19 - General Plan Amendment 84 -GP -3 and
Pre - Annexation Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -2.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to deny
A Negative Declaration 84- ND -19.
A AYES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
MOTION FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to accept
Negative Declaration 84- ND -19.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
MOTION CARRIED.
10. ORDINANCE NO. 606 - An Urgency Ordinance to Provide Land Annexed
to the City with Interim General Commercial and Interim Mobile
Home Subdivision.
/Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to table
Ordinance No. 606.
:Z (Councilman May was excused at 10:55 and returned to his chair at 11:00).
AYES: Councilman Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
MOTION FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to pass
Ordinance No. 606 at its first reading by reading of title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
f YES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
OES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
,Aq ABSENT: None.
MOTION CARRIED.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -49 - Setting the Policy of Using the Streets
and Highways Code as it Applies to Maintenance and Repair Pro-
ceedings in the Matter of Repair of Sidewalks, Curb and Gutters.
Page 25
Beaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
12. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -50 - Authorizing the Signing and Execution of
the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Beaumont and
the Beaumont Confederation of Police.
13. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -51 - Providing for Posting an Area with No
Parking Signs When No Curb Exists.
31. Out of Sequence.
Acceptance of Addendum to Memorandum of Understanding for Manage-
ment- Executive Group as Applies to Police Group Only.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -49, Resolution No. 1984 -50, Resolution No.
1 84 -51, and to accept the Addendum to Memorandum of Understanding
or Management- Executive Group as Applies to Police Group Only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. Request of Councilman Mitchell for Reconsideration of Brundy Sewer
Hook -Up Decision.
/Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to recon-
sider the Brundy sewer hook -up decision.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
15. Request from Mr. Robert Brundy for Refund of Sewer Hook -Up Fee.
" Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to refund
the sewer hook -up fee to Mr. Brundy.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
16. Appeal by Mr. Robert Morse of Issuance of City Business License to
Keith E. and Brenda K. Behnke.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to deny
he appeal of Mr. Robert Morse regarding the issuance of a City
Business License to Keith E. and Brenda K. Behnke.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
17. Report re: Planning Commission Request for Abatement of Structures
at 6th and Massachusetts. (Continued from July 23, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to honor
the request of the Planning Commission for abatement and instruct
"'44J the City Attorney to determine the owner of record.
;AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
1.
Be__amont City Council
August 13, 1984
Report re: Riverside County Hazardous Material Unit. (Continued
from July 23, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to file this
agenda item until more action is forthcoming from the State level.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES: None.
U' ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Report re: Orange Street Flood Plain at 12th Street. (Continued
from July 23, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to direct the
staff to work for inclusion of Line 1 in the 1985 -86 budget of Zone
5 of the Flood Control District, and further direct the Building
?1> Inspector to require grading permits for all new construction in the
flood plains as identified by the Flood Control District Study of
1978.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Report re: Bids Received for Fuel Dispensing System and Request for
Award of Bid.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Russo, to continue this
agenda item until the next regularly scheduled meeting.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Request for Authorization to Purchase Thermoplastic Paint for Pavement
Striping Program.
-}Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to authorize
X the Purchasing Officer to buy the paint from the source that can
supply thermoplastic paint at the best price.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
:2. Approval of Plans and Specs for First Street Lift Station Project.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept the
,_plans and specifications for the First Street Lift Station Project,
LID, and setting the date for receipt of bids on September 7, 1984 at 11:00
x A.M. and September 11, 1984 as the date the City Council will con-
sider awarding the contract.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
23. Request for Authorization to Dispose of All Documents Dating Prior
to 1975.
This agenda item was referred to the City Attorney for preparation of
a Resolution for destruction of records up to and including 1975
for submittal to the City Council at their next regular meeting.
Page 27
.seaumont City Council
August 13, 1984
9. Participation in Riverside County Marshal's Office Hard Work Program.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to author-
ize the participation in the Marshal's Hard Work Program and further
authorizing the Mayor to sign a letter in agreement.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
`} ABSENT: None.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to adjourn this meeting to 7:00 P.M. on
Monday, August 20, 1984, in the City Council Chambers for the pur-
pose of completing this agenda, with unanimous concurrence by the
Council.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 12:10 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
CITY CL , CITY OF BEAUM T
o.
Page 28
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF AUGUST 20, 1984
(Adjourned from August 13, 1984)
The Beaumont City Council met in an Adjourned Meeting at 7:00 P.M., on
Monday, August 20, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson
presiding.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
The purpose of this meeting is to complete the agenda of August 13, and
will begin with Item No. 24.
24. Request for Payment of Charges Incurred Due to Sewer Back -Up.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to reject the request for payment of
charges DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
authorize payment of $94.68 to Stagecoach Plumbing.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to recon-
sider (for informational purposes only) the question of request
for payment of charges incurred due to sewer back -up at the next
regular meeting.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
25. Authorization for Funding for Fire Hydrant Repair.
*Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
repair of the fire hydrants as requested, with a budget transfer
of $2,500.00 from 0001- 2100 -4060 (Contractual Services) to 0001-
2100 -4095 (Fire Hydrant Repairs).
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
26. Allocation of Basic Service Facility Fee to Fund for City Hall
Construction.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to continue this agenda item until
the next meeting DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to allocate
all Basic Services Facility Service Fees collected during the
1984 -85 fiscal year and thereafter to a Capitol Improvement Pro-
jects Fund, Fund No. 0035 -8520.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to state that everything remain status quo until there is a com-
plete determination of the phraseology of Ordinance No. 506, with
the agenda item to be brought back to the next meeting.
T- -„ 1
Beaumont City Council
August 20, 1984
MOTION TO AMEND RULED OUT OF ORDER. WITHDRAWN BY COUNCILMAN
MITCHELL.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Councilmen Russo
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION CARRIED
May and Mayor Thompson.
and Mitchell.
27. Request for Remuneration for Planning Director Services to Jim
Morrissey.
(At the request of Councilman Mitchell, the following discussion
is recorded verbatim).
Mayor Thompson: Item 27. You want to - we have that request from
the City Manager. Do you want to tell them what it is all about.
City Manager: Very briefly, the letter points.out that the City
of Hemet loaned Jim Morrissey as the - for services as Planning
Director to the City of Beaumont. He commenced work on May 14
and was supposed to have ceased work on July 1. We were not able
to have a new Planning Director hired at that time, so he stayed
on until we did get one on the 30th of July. So, he served.for
two and one -half months, and I feel, because he gave us service
over and above what he would have been giving his own City by
going to work at 8:00 and getting off at 5:00, having to leave
early in the morning and getting home later at night, and staying
for Planning Commission meetings, that we certainly could well
afford to give him a minor amount of remuneration for that extra
time that he gave the City over and above what he was being paid
for by Hemet. I have checked with the City Manager and his
superiors in the City of Hemet, and, as I pointed out, they felt
that this would be a very gracious gesture on our part, and I feel
very strongly that we ought to do it. He saved us somewhere in
the neighborhood of $5,000, by giving us free time during that
period, and I think we could well afford to give him $750.00 as a
extra for the extra work that he gave this City.
Councilman Mitchell: He saved us how much for six weeks?
City Manager: Well, at the rate the previous planner was getting,
$1,600 per month, two and one -half months would be $4,000, to be
precise.
Councilman Mitchell: You said he did this for six weeks?
City Manager: Well, I didn't mean to say six weeks. I meant to
say 60 days plus two weeks. Because he served from May 14 until
July 30 - two and one -half months.
Councilman Mitchell: And it was all donated by the City of Hemet,
is that correct?
City Manager: I pointed out that it was free so far as any charge.
I offered to pay the City of Hemet and they said no, we will loan
him to you.
Mayor Thompson: Actually what you are saying is that up until
July 1, that was the original agreement or, what do I want to say,
understanding.
City Manager: It was an understanding. . .
Mayor Thompson: Okay. After July 1, this was extra that we had
not anticipated.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
August 20, 1984
City Manager: Well, very definitely, but I am also saying that he
as an individual gave us more time than he would have had to give
his own City for the amount of money that he was being paid. He
could have left his home at five or ten until eight and been at
work. He had to leave a good deal earlier than that to get to
Beaumont, and he got home a good deal later. And then on the nights
he stayed for the Planning Commission, he got home 10:00, 10:30,
11:00, rather than getting home at ten minutes after five.
Councilman Mitchell: To clarify a point then. In paying this
$750.00, this would, in effect, be paying $750.00, without a
contract or a specific agreement, to pay for work that was not
contracted or agreed to by anyone, and it is being paid subse-
quent to that time. Is that a legal way to pay.
City Manager: I am absolutely amazed that we would even talk
about it. But go ahead gentlemen and talk all you want.
Councilman Mitchell: I am merely asking a question, Mr. Davis.
Councilman Lowry: Wait one moment. The City Manager has the
right to hire whoever he wishes as his staff. He doesn't have to
have a contract.
City Manager: I am merely asking you gentlemen - I have no auth-
orization - ability to pay this money. I am asking you gentlemen
to authorize it, and I believe, wholeheartedly, that we ought to
do this. But I fail to understand why anybody would even ask a
question. I know that is not right, maybe, to say that. But I
am going to say it, because I think Jim Morrissey came here and
gave us a service that didn't cost us a penny for eight weeks -
no ten weeks - and why we would begrudge paying $750.00 for this
amount of service I cannot understand.
Councilman Mitchell: The City of Hemet gave it to us. Isn't that
correct.
Councilman Lowry: I move that the $750.00 be paid to Jim Morrissey
for services rendered as Interim Planning Director for the City of
Beaumont.
Councilman Russo: Second.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Thompson: Just a second. It has been moved and seconded
that the Council authorize payment of $750.00 to Jim Morrissey
for services rendered as Interim Planning Director for the City
of Beaumont. Mr. Mitchell.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Mayor, I would request that we would
obtain a legal opinion as to the legality of this type of payment
without any contract. Without any prior showing up until last
week. I just want to know what the legality is. There are many
things that are done where you say, let's do it, and then you
find out later that there was something in the law that says no.
That has happened many times.
City Manager: Are you suggesting, Mr. Mitchell, that we should
not even have had him here in the first place.
Councilman Mitchell: I didn't say that. Don't try to confuse an
issue. I asked for a legal opinion.
City Manager: I would never try to confuse anything. Believe me.
I am being dealt with by the master.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Just a minute, gentlemen. The discussion
is that we authorize the payment.
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
August 20, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: That is right. I will make the motion that
the payment be withheld.
Mayor Thompson: There is a motion and a second on the floor Mr.
Mitchell.
Councilman Mitchell: Then I will amend the motion, or I will add
to the motion.
Mayor Thompson: You want to amend the motion.
Councilman Mitchell: By adding thereto, the funds will be paid
upon the written determination of the City Council stating that
they are legal.
City Manager: I think that is a good idea just to satisfy Mr.
Mitchell since he has raised the question and thrown it at the
community.
Councilman Lowry: I will second that. I don't think there is any
question about it. You have the right to hire and fire your help.
Councilman Mitchell: I was told the same thing about. . .
Mayor Thompson: The determination of the City Attorney.
City Manager: The City Attorney approval. Is that what you are
saying.
Mayor Thompson: City Attorney approval.
Councilman Mitchell: With approval of City Attorney for all of us
to see.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Any other questions. Any other discussion.
Councilman Lowry: Call the question.
Mayor Thompson: This is on the amendment. The amendment states
that the funds to be paid upon the determination by the City
Attorney. To be determined on the approval of the City Attorney
that the expenditures are legitimate. Roll Call please.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
For clarification, let the record show, the motion on Agenda Item
No. 27 will read as follows:
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, as amended
by Councilman Mitchell with second by Councilman Lowry, to authorize
payment of $750.00 to Jim Morrissey for services rendered as
Interim Planning Director for the City of Beaumont, with the funds
to be paid upon the approval of the City Attorney that the expen-
ditures are legitimate.
Motion carried with unanimous vote.
Page 4
ME
M
32.
33.
Beaumont City Council
August 20, 1984
Authorization of Optional Dental - Medical Coverage.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, that all
employees of the City, at their option, may elect to have a
dental insurance premium ($200.00 currently authorized per annum)
placed in an account to their credit which will draw 7.5% in-
terest per year if no withdrawal is made during the year. It
may be used for dental work, eye and /or ear appliances. The
fund would accumulate yearly and any balance would be paid to
the employee upon leaving the service of the City;
Further, any employee, at their option, who could provide proof
that the spouse had a medical coverage plan which covered said
City employee, may elect to have one -half (1/2) of their medi-
cal insurance premium paid into the employee's medical coverage
fund where it would draw 7.5% interest yearly if it were not
drawn upon during the year. The fund could be drawn upon for
excess coverage to spouse's plan and any accumulated balance
,would be paid to the employee upon leaving the City's service.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Policy Concerning Placement of Items on Agenda for Council Action.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to set the
policy that all requests from Council Members will be placed
on the agenda with the City Manager responsible to determine
whether requests from anyone else are appropriate.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Authorization to Employ Engineering Assistance.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to approve
the City Engineer's request to employ engineering assistance,
with the cost not to exceed $1,500.00, to be budgeted as
follows:
HES Pavement Marking Inspection to be taken from
Account 0001- 3250 - 4160 -4000.
Inspection and plan checking to be taken from
Account 0001- 3050 -4060.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Request of Councilman Mitchell for Open Discussion re: Norm Davis'
Contact with District Attorney Office.
Objection by Councilman Russo to consideration of this question
based on the fact that it is controversial and contentious.
It was determined by Mayor Thompson that an objection to con-
sideration requires no second, is undebatable, unamendable and
a two- thirds vote is required on whether the question shall be
considered.
VOTE TAKEN ON WHETHER OR NOT THE QUESTION SHALL BE CONSIDERED:
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
August 20, 1984
AYES: Councilman Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
34. Request of Councilman Mitchell for Full Disclosure of Turner -Davis
Contract.
Objection by Councilman Russo to consideration of this question.
It was again determined an objection of consideration requires
no second, is undebatable, unamendable and a two - thirds vote
is required on whether the question shall be considered.
VOTE TAKEN ON WHETHER OR NOT THE QUESTION SHALL BE CONSIDERED:
AYES: Councilman Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
35. Submittal of Report of Action of Planning Commission at Meeting at
August 7, 1984.
This report was ordered filed.
36. Establishing a Special Occasion Expenditure Fund.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to authorize
budget line item 001 -1050 -4095 be created (City Council - Special
Occasion Fund) with $300.00 allocated thereto.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
37. Request for Change of Bid Date on First Street Lift Station Pro-
ject.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to set new
dates of September 20 at 11:00 P.M. for receipt of bids on the
First Street Lift Station Project, and September 24 for report
to Council for award of bid.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
i"
C TY CL � CITY OF BEAUMO T
Page 6
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
AUGUST 27,, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
August 27, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Pastor Dan Thompson, New Covenant Fellowship.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
There was no one present requesting to address the Council under
oral communication.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 602 - FIRST READING - Mobile Home Rent Review Commission.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to pass
Ordinance No. 602 at its first reading by reading of title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED.
3. Appeal of Planning Commission Action Filed by Ruben H. Manzanares
Regarding Off -Site Improvement.
At the request of Councilman Mitchell, this agenda item was taken
out of sequence in order that Item No. 4 may be heard first.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - 8:00 P.M.
4. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance to amend Section 204 of Ordinance
490 (Title 17, Sections 17.12.380 - 17.12.400 of the Beaumont Municipal
Code) Off -Site Improvement Requirements.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:00 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: To amend Section 204 of Ordinance 490.
Councilman Mitchell: Isn't this codified.
Mayor Thompson: Yes, as the parentheses indicate, Title 17, Section
17.12.380 - 17.12.400 of the Municipal Code. It has to do with off -
site improvements. Is Ron here. The Planning Department has evi-
dently initiated this request. Norm, the Planning Department
initiated this request.
City Manager: It came to the Planning Commission, initially, from
them, to try - to attempt to try to clarify the ordinance, which
as it points out in the background material here, at present the
ordinance vaguely indicates curb and gutter should be provided.
'Phis was an attempt on the part of the staff to get down to a posi-
tion where it was a mandatory provision of the law, rather than
this other approach to saying, yes it is policy, or ,yes it is law,
and really not being able to hang their hat on anything. There are
two things in it, gentlemen, I would like to dissent with, and that
number one is the requirement for sidewalk along with the curb
gutter in all residential areas. Very frankly, I think that is a
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
rather useless requirement in an old City where you don't have -
but very, very little sidewalk. Seemingly, in this day and age
there is almost no use for it. However, of course, it is in the
new Subdivision Ordinance as a requirement, and most cities do
require sidewalks to be built in new subdivisions, and I think
that is all right to stay with that requirement, but, personally,
I think this is taking one step too far, and then, additionally,
at this point, I would like to speak to the point in Section 204.3,
and indicate to you that I think you will be buying the City a
massive headache and make problems for owners, or subsequent owners,
by requiring, or making it possible to lien the requirement rather
than bonding or posting a cash deposit or causing it to be done up
front.
Councilman Russo: What you are saying then is that if we give
people the option, we will never have curbs and gutters in the
City.
City Manager: I think that is basically true. I think that those
who do tend to comply, or not ask questions, are then, in effect,
going to be treated somewhat unfairly, and you get less development
that way then by making mandatory upon everybody - personally I
feel you ought to make it mandatory upon everyone, or remove the
requirement altogether, if that is what you want the community to
remain, not see that development, then take it away. Either that
or make it necessary for everybody to perform in an equal manner.
Councilman Lowry: Now about the third alternative of having a
curb and gutter district under - what is it - Title 11.
Councilman Russo: 1911 Act.
City Manager: Well, that is a policy decision for you to undertake
and doesn't really have anything to do with the ordinance require-
ments.
Councilman Lowry: Tonight, no, but it can enter into the thinking
we do on this.
City Manager: That is what I say. That is a policy decision for
you gentlemen to make.
Councilman Mitchell: Has anyone made a survey to tell us how many
thousands of linear feet we have in the developed area of the City
of Beaumont that does not have a full curb and gutter from one
block to the next. Has that ever been made in a survey.
City Manager: No, but if that is of interest to you, it could. . .
Councilman Mitchell: Allow me to finish, Mr. Davis, if I may. . .
City Manager: You asked a question. I took - your question is not
completed yet?
Councilman Mitchell: You said no, and I accept your answer no.
Thank you. Has it been - where a gutter is put in and it matches
to a street, some of these completely unimproved streets that
have been in there for five or six years, maybe ten years, has
anybody noticed a deterioration of those curbs and gutters in front
of that one place. They don't do anything. They can't be swept
with a sweeper or anything else.
City Manager: In answer to that I would say that I would have to
be shown be shown that condition. I do not know of any.
Councilman Mitchell: Well would you have time tomorrow. I would
be glad to take you around. It would take about four hours.
City Manager: Yes, very definitely. I don't think it would take
four hours, but I would take whatever time you think would be
necessary.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: All right. We should have a camera with us
so we can take pictures so everyone can understand and won't have
to take the same trip. I think when you see that and actually get
it in pictures in your mind's eye, you will realize how ridiculous
it is if a man buys a 55 foot lot with houses up and down both
sides of the street with no curb and gutter, why he would have to
put in a curb and gutter in the street in front of his house. It
doesn't make any sense to me at all. You can make a condition for
that entire area to have curbs and gutters over a certain period
of time, that can work. Through your 1911 act it can work out.
You can go on a block to block basis. You don't have to do it
citywide. Then you can pick these things up as you go along as
other capable jurisdictions have done.
Councilman Russo: May I ask a couple of questions. So what you
are saying, Mr. Mitchell, if I understand, is that the viable
option is to adopt a policy citywide that will take it in sections.
Councilman Mitchell: That is correct.
Councilman Russo: But what ability does the City have to make sure
that happens, other than by request.
Councilman Mitchell: I won't argue that point.
City Manager: That is a decision the people make.
Councilman Russo: So unless the City either provides the funding
for the project, or has it done as properties are developed, there
really is no viable option.
City Manager: I would say there is a viable option, but it is not
an assured viable option.
Councilman Russo: Okay. What would that be.
City Manager: In other words, no guarantee. When you rely upon
people who may make their own decision then, you know, naturally,
they are making the decision and you have no guarantee.
Councilman Lowry: Excuse me. May I ask a question. Isn't side-
walk also covered by the same ordinance. There has to be sidewalk,
curb and gutter at the time the development is. . .
Councilman Russo: That is what it says here.
City Manager: That is what they are recommending here Councilman
Lowry. I think it is rather useless. . .
Councilman Lowry: Isn't that in the present ordinance also.
City Manager: For new developments, yes. Not for. . .
Councilman Lowry: I thought any development, any residence, that
that was - I was told that my friends of ours that were going to
add just room to their house that they had to put in curb and
gutter and sidewalk around the corner.
City Manager: I think there have been some recent policy decisions
in that matter, but you look out here, as Mr. Mitchell has said,
and there has been a great number of lineal feet construction, or
curb and gutter construction in this City in the last six, eight,
ten years, whenever this ordinance has been on the books, and
there has been virtually almost no sidewalk built in connection
with it.
Councilman Lowry: I see. Isn't it also a requirement that the pro-
perty owner be responsible for the curb and gutter and sidewalk in
front of his place.
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
City Manager: Once it is there, yes.
Councilman Lowry: As long as it is there - the maintenance and the
upkeep and to see that it doesn't deteriorate and so forth.
City Manager: Once it is there that is correct. That is under
State law.
Councilman Russo: There was some discussion in study session with
reference to - Mr. Lowry had mentioned a special district to see
that that project could be completed throughout the City. Is that
a feasible option. Something that would be worthy of pursuing.
City Manager: I think it would be very worthy. I am not sure how
successful it would be, but it would most assuredly be worthy
because it would change the face of the community. Very definitely.
Councilman Mitchell: Would it be out of line to obtain a bit of
background from someone who has more expertise then we by asking
our Planning Director and get his opinion.
Mayor Thompson: He has put his opinion in his report. Ron.
Councilman Mitchell: I would just like to hear it.
Mayor Thompson: Ron, would you like to input on this.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: This particular proposal was, as
I understand it, between the former planner and the City Engineer,
who felt that the existing ordinance was inadequate and really adds
two things. The curb and gutter was always a requirement. The
sidewalk was only required in the case of.new residential, and no
requirement was ever made for match -up paving, so it became, tech-
nically, an unworkable situation where you could require curb and
gutter, but you may have a street there then you have dirt between
the existing pavement and the gutter when you are through. Plus
it was inconsistent to have the sidewalks only required as part of
new subdivisions. In order to create equitability throughout the
City, I am assuming that the City Engineer and the Planner felt
that the sidewalks were necessary for safety. It is an unconscion-
able situation when you go into a community and you have got -
either you should have all sidewalks or no sidewalks. And it is
a matter of going one way or another. Either roll your curbs and
have no sidewalks and everybody walks in the streets, or if you do
go with sidewalks endeavor to try to have them throughout the City
on a uniform basis. There is a responsibility on both the City and
the property owners at that time. The only time you are asking for
the property owners to do anything so far as improvements is when
he is improving the rest of his property. We require commercial
enterprises, if they improve their property, to put in improvements
including parking spaces, things of that nature, so it is just a
consistency carried through into this ordinance. But the crux of
it really is to give an alternative rather than having to put the
improvements in immediately, for instance there is a block which
has no improvements and a guy has a piece of property in the in-
terior or on the corner somewhere rather than require him to put
them in immediately, he can post a sum with the City and then, over
a period of time, when there is more, at least half a block ready
to be improved, then that would be the time to put it in.
Mayor Thompson: Let me interrupt you just a minute. When you are
speaking like this are you speaking of residential or commercial
property.
Mr. Larson: Residential.
Mayor Thompson: Residential.
Mr. Larson: That is what this ordinance covers.
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Mayor Thompson: I just wanted to clarify that.
Councilman Lowry: Wasn't your question to him asking of the feasi-
bility of under Title 11 to do the entire City and what his opinion
was. I thought you said that.
Councilman Russo: Yes, we want to get into that. Ron, you have re-
viewed this report then. You concur with the recommendation.
Mr. Larson: Yes.
Councilman Russo: On all points.
Mr. Larson: Yes.
Councilman Russo: All right then, Mr. Mitchell. . .
Mr. Larson: It is similar to most other cities that I have ever
worked for. There is always a provision. You always have older
portions of the City which were overlooked in times past when they
didn't feel that they were financially capable, or didn't see the
need for proper sidewalks and drainage facilities, and of course,
in California, curb, gutter and sidewalk do serve a purpose of
helping with drainage.
Councilman Russo: In your experience when these options are.made
available to developers and homeowners and landowners, whatever,
do they ever get built.
Mr. Larson: Yes.
Councilman Russo: They do.
Mr. Larson: Yes. It takes a period of time, but the thing is on
all new subdivisions they are required to be put in at the time it
is built, and you have to have some mechanism in order to bring
the rest of the City up, and usually you either have to do it
through an assessment district and try to get the property owners
to agree to it, or you have to make it a requirement when there
are any improvements to the property.
Councilman Russo: What about the question of an assessment district.
What is your opinion of that.
Mr. Larson: Assessment Districts work fine if they are in areas
where people are willing to allow themselves to be taxed to pay
for the improvements. But, because it has been found to be not
the fastest way to do it, one of the ways is to whenever there
are improvements at least you get something. Even if it is piece-
meal.
City Manager: I just wanted to ask this because you told Councilman
Russo that you favored everything proposed here. Do you favor the
use of the lien and, if so, how would you advocate the lien be
exercised at some point. Who, in your mind, would ride herd on
this and how effective do you feel it would be, or do you know
of any other City that has ever used it with success.
Mr. Larson: The lien provision is probably one that in most of
my experience there has been a cash bond required to be deposited
rather than going with a lien provision. This is a lenient, very
lenient alternative as far as being - allowing the City, that when
the improvement is made then the City places a lien against the
property which can't be sold until those improvements are made or
until a cash bond is made. But it does bring to some point along
the development scale of someone providing the improvements for
the property.
City Manager: That is going farther than what is spelled out here.
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
You just stated now that it could not be sold until the improvements
were made. And that is not. . .
Mr. Larson: That is correct. If there is a lien on the property. . .
City Manager: But that is not what this says, and the lien just
stays there and stays there and stays there. According to this,
until it is called in by the City.
Mr. Larson: Well if you have a lien on a piece of property I believe
the title is clouded by a lien.
City Manager: Well, that is true but if somebody accepts the lien.
I can have a _lien on a piece of property by reason of the fact I
may have a tax assessment against it - or a bond assessment - and
that is a lien that stays there with the property - goes from one
owner to the next. Unless, I, as buyer, insist the seller pay it
off. And that would be the case here. But what you say, if there
were hard and fast requirement that it be upgraded, or be executed
at the time of sale, then you would be right back where you are
right now. It still may be the only one in the block. I see that
as a major problem, and I think it would be a real major headache.
I can agree in terms of bonding, or cash bond, but to lien it is
a major problem.
Mayor Thompson: Ron, I have one question for you. The problem
exists in the older developed areas of the City.
Mr. Larson: Correct.
Mayor Thompson: There has been some discussion of the 1911 improve-
ment district I guess it is being formed and doing what we are
talking about, the curbs and gutter, match -up paving, throughout
the City. Now if that were done there would be no need for this
then would there?
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
City Attorney: The way this has been worded, as I read it, to
choose the first alternative you need approval from the City Council.
There is no indication that is the case on the second alternative.
I don't think that was intended, but that is the way it reads. The
City Council approval requirement is listed on one, but not on two.
Mayor Thompson: Yes, it says or there doesn't it.
City Attorney: It says or, and it does not clearly indicate who
makes the decision as to which alternative is available, and it
would appear to indicate that alternative requires City Council
approval, and two does not. Reading it, I don't know if that was
intended.
Mr. Larson: I believe the staff, when they wrote it, understood
the intent since they would be the ones enforcing it. And it was
clearly - that it had to be with City Council approval.
City Attorney: With all due respect to the staff, when I look at
the Ordinance Ron, basically what they did, is they - the concept
in the Ordinance was labeled one, and they added two, and I don't
think they considered the language.
Mr. Larson: That is possible. There could be a correction there.
It possibly should have had it reviewed by the City Attorney.
City Attorney: I didn't see this - it obviously is not in proper
ordinance form. I didn't see this until it came in the agenda
today.
Mayor Thompson: Well, in number two all you would have to do is
take the first phrase of number one - when approved by the City
Council, execute in agreement with the City that the property
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
owner shall install the required.
City Attorney: You are then going to have City Council approval of
each one of these?
Mayor Thompson: Right, so it would be secured by a lien.
City Manager: Could we ask Ron again. What would you envision
would be the problems of trying to make number two work here,
Ron.
Mr. Larson: Number two. Oh I can see the problems with simply all
of the filing of liens against property. I think - frankly I
think cash bonds are better. They are more enforceable, or at
least they are surety bonds.
City Manager: Do you see any problems in trying to enforce it.
What do you see in terms of the bookkeeping, the managing, what-
ever you want to call it.
Mr. Larson: That I see a problem. Very definitely. I agree with
you on that. But, the Finance Director, or whoever, would be re-
quired to maintain and file the liens, would have a housekeeping
problem if there is such an influx of improvements to property
that would come under this ordinance. I am not familiar with -
that familiar with the community, so I am not sure what magnitude
you have. I would anticipate there would probably - the Building
Department could probably give you a better answer on that.
Councilman Mitchell: Let us say there is one street where there is
just one piece of property where they want to put a 55 foot front
house. It is next door to a bunch of old houses all the way through.
There is no curb or gutter on either side of the street. It is the
only vacant lot. He goes in and he puts in a curb and gutter, and
a driveway. The only curb and gutter and driveway in the entire
block area. I don't know your opinion, or anybody else's opinion,
but I think there has to be a better way of doing this.
Mr. Larson: Well, of course, that is the way the code was on the
books prior to staff looking at it. There wasn't a satisfactory
alternative to that. It was required to be put in at the time of
construction or improvement to the property. Staff simply added
another measure in order to defer the improvements to the time -
the future time when the rest of the block, or a portion of the
block would be going in. They - the staff, so far as I know,
didn't do anything except give another alternative under the
ordinance. Right now we have a difficult ordinance because we do
require it to go in at the same time, and you end up with problems
of development of the street. But as far as deferring the improve-
ments to a more suitable time so that the City Engineer can program
out improvements would make sense. And that was the basic intent
of the ordinance, I think.
Councilman Mitchell: Are you acquainted with the manner in which
they handle delinquent sewer bills. They go on the tax rolls.
Isn't they correct.
Mr. Larson: Most cities I work for we shut off the water if there
is a delinquent sewer. . .
Councilman Mitchell: But you can't shut off the sewer.
Mr. Larson: If you shut off the water, you shut off the sewer.
Councilman Mitchell: Not really. But that is beside the point.
If they haven't paid, it is put on the tax roll as a delinquent
tax. I am just wondering on the improvements, I have seen it done
before, where a person could put a lien on the land, a voluntary
lien, that upon transfer and /or sale, the new party must either
make the improvement or renew the lien. The lien is not an interst
Page 7
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
bearing lien. It is a guarantee - it is a covenant - that curb
and gutter will be put on at such and such a time. A covenant
rather than a lien. And with a covenant, a covenant follows the
land. I believe I am right Mr. Ryskamp. I don't know, I could
in error.
City Attorney: You are correct, Mr. Mitchell, that the covenant,
such a lien, would follow the land, and ideally the system you
described is the best one. That there be some type of renewal of
the lien at the time each new owner takes over the property.
Councilman Mitchell: That could be spelled out in the covenant.
And the title company would pick it up and nobody could take
title unless that was handled.
City Attorney: The title company should pick that up, yes.
Councilman Mitchell: They would pick it up.
Councilman Russo: As I understand it, the problem is whether or
not we want to have curb and gutter and match -up paving in the
older parts of the City where there is new development. That is
the real question here. I guess the next question would be at
what point in time are we going to put it at the end of this
goal. When do we accomplish it. Will we keep saying here - are
we just going to keep stretching it on for ever and ever and ever.
By one means or another. Either by liens or some sort of option
Councilman Lowry: Or an assessment district either by block or
streets or something.
Councilman Russo: Yes, that seems to be the only viable option
really.
Councilman Mitchell: An assessment district would be the best
answer, but in the interim, to keep it from being a burden, on
certain individuals. . .
Councilman Russo: Don't do it at all then. Don't do it at all
throughout the City until you see a district is feasible.
City Manager: That is the better alternative rather than picking
and choosing who you are going to make this applicable to, and if
you are trying to relieve somebody of a burden - okay, Joe buys it
today and he builds a new house, and he says that is too much of
a burden for me, I want to lien it - then he passes the burden on
to the next guy - and, you know, somebody has got to pay for it
if you are going to have it. If you aren't - eliminate them.
That is my thought. Do away with them. If you want your City to
look exactly as it looks today with not any ability to change it
and improve it, then eliminate it. Either that, or if you do want
to improve it, tackle it all at once, but one way or another don't
- what you are doing, when you do this sort of thing, you put the
burden right back on yourself because somebody is always going to
appeal to you and say, hey, I don't want to do this, or relieve me
of this responsibility and all you are doing is making headaches
for yourself gentlemen, or a subsequent Council.
Councilman Lowry: There is one other alternative. You put a lien
with a time limit on it - say four years, five years, then they
have to do it at the end of that time.
Councilman Russo: Yes. But what do you do for existing properties.
You have to have some kind of control. To assess every property.
Councilman Lowry: It was mentioned if an improvement was made, a
new house put there then they want a lien instead of putting a curb
and gutter in, if he is going to live in that house for twenty ,years
he could wait twenty years then - just the lien stay there.
Page 8
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Mr. Larson: No, I believe the ordinance says when required by the
City. I think if you read that portion.
Councilman Russo: Yes, but again you say we can't make them do it.
Mr. Larson: The time requested by the City.
City Manager: Who is going to do that. All he has to do is appeal
back to the Council and the Council backs off. But, you know, when
it comes right down to it what is this cost you are talking about
a sixty foot lot times $7.50, $450.00.
Councilman Russo: But that is not really the point. It is not
going to be consistent with anything else around it. It is not
going to look good really unless everything else matches up to it.
Councilman Lowry: The only concern I have is the match -up pavement.
You couldn't have a raised place there that would hold water and
ponding. That is the only thing. . .
Councilman Russo: That is what you are going to have if you en-
gineered a curb and gutter to one property, right?
City Manager: The only thing I can say to you
around the City, and you know, there are some
almost built out with individual development -
constructions, and if that requirement had not
wouldn't have been a nickles worth of curb and
block.
gentlemen is look
blocks that have
individual lot
been there there
gutter in the whole
Councilman Russo: You are talking new development now.
City Manager: No I am talking our existing City. You drive up
and down this City and look at the homes that have been built in
the last ten years. Some of those areas - some areas there have
been virtually new city blocks created of curb and gutter which
would have never been there had you not had this requirement.
Sure there are some areas where there is only a single piece of
curb and gutter in a block, or maybe two pieces or three pieces,
but I think the decision your view has to be - are we going to
change or are we going to leave it forever the way it is. And
that is your basic decision.
Councilman Mitchell: One thing we should observe is that this is
not going to be in jeopardy of the entire City of Beaumont. It
will affect some low areas. $450.00 doesn't sound like very much
except if a man has $600.00 and needs $1,000.00 down, he don't
have the other $450.00, it does make a difference. And if we
would start looking at Beaumont as the City of Beaumont rather
than the City of Los Angeles, or one of the other metropolitan
areas, I think we would better serve the people, and then have a
transitional procedure to go ahead and get the bonding on a block
to block basis. And it can be done on a block to block basis.
It is done in many areas that way. You have one entire block that
arees to it. Let them know how much - what little it does cost
them and put it in, and it could be done very easily that way, but
it takes concentration and effort.
City Manager: Having made decisions many, many times through many
years on these types of developments, I can tell you, gentlemen,
that going on a block to block basis is going to be a great deal
more costly. Because you are going to have to pay for the engineer,
you are going to have to pay for the attorney, no matter whether
you are dealing on a block, or ten blocks or 100 blocks. And, it
is the same old story, the bulk gets you more - a better bargain
as it were.
Councilman May: I my travels I always notice driving through
communities or cities you can always tell where the new develop-
ment is. There is curb and gutter, and I will take as an example
Placentia, that is over there near Anaheim. That was a country
type town, and of course now it is going to be a big City, and
Page 9
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
as you travel around through that City the older part doesn't have
curb and gutter, but all new construction has curb and gutter and
it looks real neat, so I think if somebody comes in to build, I
don't think that curb and gutter is going to tear their pocketbook
up too bad, and I think it does a lot of good.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, does anyone else Norm?
City Manager: One other aspect of it which you haven't talked
about at all gentlemen. It certainly makes street maintenance
much, much cheaper for the City. Curb and gutter maintains your
street line, instead of having pavement breaking off, and being
eaten away, it definitely is a major maintenance saver for the
City - for any City.
Councilman Mitchell: That is very good, but 55 feet in the middle
of the block will not do that. You know that as well as I.
City Manager: Well, if we were only going to have one house built
here in the next ten years, I would agree with you fully.
Councilman Mitchell_: Well, you are working on it.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, in other words, the amendment under 204.3
the - in lieu of such - half -way down, No. 1, if you delete 1 or
the option and it indicates there that you are going to have curb,
gutter and sidewalk - and match -up paving when a new house is built
on a vacant lot in the developed area of town.
City Manager: What this is on here tonight gentlemen, is primarily
to have you give the City Attorney direction on what you would like
to have prepared because, as he indicated, this is not in a.pre-
pared form tonight. The intent was to put it on here to have you
arrive at some sort of concensus what you would like to see con-
sidered, he will draft up and bring it back and then you will
proceed with your action at a subsequent meeting.
Mayor Thompson: Gentlemen, we have had - this is actually a public
hearing, and now I think we have had our say, let's open it now to
the public and Mr. Gordon.
Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania: Two questions that I would like
to ask. First of all if you would, by chance, go with the assess-
ment district, which personally I think that is the best thing to
do, that way the City would be uniform looking, would that
assessment be against all properties or only those which are not
now covered by curb and gutter.
City Manager: Only those properties that benefit, which means only
those not presently developed.
Mr. Gordon: All right. My second question is, and my parents ran
into this in Santa Ana many, many years ago, where they happened
to have a home that had a curb, gutter and sidewalk, and then - but
the balance of the street didn't, and the City decided they were
going to curb and gutter that street, and they came through and
they had to tear that portion out because it didn't conform, and
they turned right around and assessed them because they had to
put it in. My question is, would that happen here, because I
think we all understand that there are some streets in here that
probably need some realigning when the engineer gets on there with
his transit.
Mayor Thompson: Would you like a personal opinion on that.
Mr. Gordon: Well, yes, yes, right, sure.
Mayor Thompson: I am serious, a personal opinion, and it has no
legal standing or anything like this. But at the time a piece
of property puts curb and gutter in, it is put in to the standard
set by the City at that time.
Mr. Gordon: That is correct.
Dnrro In
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Mayor Thompson: Now if the City comes back and changes the standard,
they should replace the curb and gutter at no cost to the property
owner. They have already complied with it.
Mr. Gordon: I agree, and I think as long as you have the same
Council seated that might happen, except in this case it happened
to be twenty years later, and a lot of things had changed.
Councilman Russo: Well, you could address that in the. . .
Mr. Gordon: Well, I think that if the Council would decide to go
in that manner, I think that wording should be in there. Be spelled
out. Thank you.
Ruben Manzanares, 815 Cherry Avenue: First of all, I would like to
say there was a lot of good points brought up on both sides of the
issue here, but ,just because there might be a little bit of effort
involved in drafting up this issue to meet all of your opinions on
it, it is not reason to just say well let's either get rid of it
altogether or just agree on what is there now as far as the draft
that exists now. And, another thing that I wanted to say was, I
will have to agree with Mr. Mitchell that the fact that if some-
one does come in and put in a curb and gutter no matter what the
length is, and at the same time, agreeing with the City Manager,
that there is no telling whether the other properties are going to
be developed in the next ten years, at the same time there is no
telling whether or not they ever will be developed. You may have
a condition where all those properties are developed and just that
one is put in and you are still caught with the same problem, so
you know, I think it is something to be considered, and you know I
do feel that you guys have got to kick that thing around a little
bit and iron out all the. . .
Mayor Thompson: That is what this is all about. This is a public
hearing to get some input from the public, property owners and for
our input too. So somebody knows which way to go. Harold.
Harold Blackaby, 662 Maple: This piecemeal matter of constructing
the sidewalks, curbs and matching paving matching to the curbs, I
have seen this in this town where there were curbs only that you
couldn't park on the curb because they were 8 to 10 inches above
the dirt street. I have also seen it in other places where they
approached it from this manner. Here is a 60 foot lot, or a 55
foot lot in this instance, put curbs and gutters in, the engineer
wants to raise it for drainage purposes, he brings it up 8 to 10
inches and it is paved that way and everybody drives around it. A
truck runs over it and breaks down the pavement. I just thought
I would bring it up for whatever good it is. Thank you.
Mayor Thompson: Thank you Harold. Anyone else. Anyone else.
Councilman Lowry: I would like to make it a minute order to the
City Attorney to see what it would take to develop an assessment
district under the 1911 improvement act for the entire City and. .
City Manager: I don't think you would want our City Attorney to
do it, and I am not being disrespectful, but I think he would
agree that there are counsels and there are engineers that do only,
well not only this, but who are very specialized in this area and
if that is what you are going to do you ought to get a report back
for your future consideration.
Councilman Lowry: Report from whom.
City Manager: Well the attorney or me or whoever, but I think you
need information, you don't want to make a decision tonight.
City Attorney: There are firms that handle bonding matters, and
this is a bonding matter and they - a specialized firm should be
brought in, in addition - they don't bill on a hourly fee.
Page 11
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Councilman Lowry: Just for informational purposes first.
City Attorney: There wouldn't be any problem at all. There are
several firms who could be consulted who would be quite willing
and happy to have the opportunity to present information to you.
Gentlemen, bonding counsel is paid out of a percentage of the bonds.
Mr. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, doesn't the City already have a bonding
attorney, that was quite a long discussion here not long ago.
Mayor Thompson: That was on that sewer district up there on
Cougar.
Mr. Gordon: But that was the purpose. We have a bond attorney.
Mayor Thompson: Yeah, but we are not paying him.
City Attorney: The firm that was appointed at that time was for
that specific point, in fact we talked about the option of naming
someone as bond counsel in advance and determined that at this
time it wasn't necessary. Frankly, I think there would be some
advantage in talking with the various firms to find out their
rates and their willingness to offer information when there is
no guarantee they are going to get a job.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, gentlemen, we have had discussion. We have
had input from the Council level, we have had input from the public.
Do you have anything else you want to add. Do you want to close
the public hearing.
Councilman Lowry: I move the public hearing be closed.
City Manager: May is suggest Mayor Thompson that you don't really
close the public hearing until you get something drafted that you
are really going to consider.
Mayor Thompson: Then you want to adjourn the public hearing, or
continue the public hearing.
City Manager: Continue the public hearing with direction to the
City Attorney as to what you want drafted to be brought back to
be considered.
Councilman Lowry: Well I made my proposal and he said it wasn't
his proper field of endeavor.
Mayor Thompson: Do you want the . . .
City Manager: I think the ordinance and what you are proposing
Councilman Lowry are two different things. Either - if you want
to do away with the Ordinance, okay. If you want to adopt it
with everything that is recommended here, or a part of it, or
whatever, then you ought to do that.
Councilman Lowry: Well if we are thinking of an assessment district,
then we are not thinking of this ordinance at all, and I would say
that we just forget this for. . .
City Attorney: Part of the problem is that most of this ordinance
is already an ordinance. The only changes are those portions which
are underlined. In fact - and so the ordinance is on the books,
the question is do you want to modify the ordinance with a time
period either to consider and initiate an assessment district and
therefore relieve burden on individuals. . .
Councilman Lowry: There is an error in this suggestion, I believe,
and that - on 204.3, curb, gutter, sidewalk and match -up paving,
any application should probably be any applicant.
City Attorney: Well there are several problems in this the way
it is drafted.
Page 12
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Councilman Russo: Is sidewalk going to remain in there.
Councilman Lowry: Well this says sidewalk, and then make up.
City Manager: It is up to you gentlemen, but I certainly don't
think it should, but then you are the decision makers and that is
what. . .
Councilman Lowry: Why don't we hold over consideration. .
City Manager: No, we need a motion from you on what you want the
City Attorney to draft. Now that doesn't mean you are going to
adopt what he drafts, but he needs something of your thinking in
order to be able to draft something, unless you want him to draft
exactly what is here - well, not unless - if you want him to draft
exactly what is here, make a motion to that effect. If you want
him to draft what is here deleting certain items, make a motion to
that effect. If you don't want anything, you want to cancel the
whole thing, cancel the whole thing.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, what you are looking at here is the items
that are underlined are the additions, the upgrading or updating
of the existing ordinance. Then, in 204.3, on the third and fourth
line, and match -up paving is underlined, that would be added, right.
Qouncilman Lowry: I don't think you should do that at this time if
you are going to do it piecemeal because you are going-to . . .
Mayor Thompson: Wait just a minute. Wait until I finish. That is
the new portion for match -up paving. Right. Norm.
City Manager: Basically. Well, the requirement for sidewalk is
new, the requirement for match -up paving is really new, and the
authorization to lien the property. . .
Mayor Thompson: Wait a minute, you are ahead of me. The underlining
of and match -up paving, that is added to the existing ordinance. Now
we get down here to the number one, when approved by the City Council,
that is already in the existing ordinance, right. And number two
has been added, and then the second paragraph of that is part of
number two, right. So basically what you are talking about here,
at the present time, is adding match -up paving and the method of
payment is a lien, or assuring payment of the lien, number two,
so basically what you are talking about here is - since Ron has
indicated the problem of securing a lien against the property, delete
number two and retain the addition of match -up paving. That is all
you are asking.
City Manager: I think there would be some wisdom in that, yes.
Mayor Thompson: Delete number two.
Councilman Lowry: In other words, and the property owner shall
install required street improvements at the time requested by the
City. Where is the number two that you are talking about.
City Attorney: Item number two is identified as 2) . . .
Councilman Lowry: Well that is what I am reading. No. 204.3, No.
2, which is underlined.
Mayor Thompson: You still have the option to have bonding, cash
bond or a surety bond, or whatever. We have that already.
City Manager: Letter of Credit or a cash bond.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. And what would increase the record keeping
and things is number two. Right. And then all you are asking then
is to add match -up paving.
Page 13
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Councilman Lowry: Sidewalks also. As I understand it.
Mayor Thompson: Well sidewalks aren't even. . .
Councilman Lowry: Oh yes. Gutters and sidewalks. Third line down
in 204.3.
Mayor Thompson: Well, that wasn't underlined.
Councilman Lowry: They didn't underline it.
Mayor Thompson: Well it is in there. It has been in there for
years. Sidewalks.
Councilman Lowry: I don't think so.
Mayor Thompson: Yes. Sidewalks was put in under. . . Ordinance
282. Ordinance 282, amendments 282.
Councilman Lowry: The problem with match -up paving at this time,
as I see it, if they put in the curb and.gutter on a short stretch
and match up the paving and raise the paving up to that point,
then you are going to pond water upstream from that in every rain,
in most instances.
City Manager: Hasn't happened in the City though. It isn't as if
we haven't been building these things for ten years now.
Councilman Lowry: Yes, but you haven't been matching the paving
so therefore. . .
City Manager: Yes we have, very definitely. There have been some
areas where it has not been done by the property owner, and then
the City has gone in and done it subsequently, but I don't think
there exists anyplace in the City today. . .
Councilman Lowry: Well then, if the City does it they go beyond
the property line and see that there is a continuous flow line in
the gutter, feather it, sure.
Mayor Thompson: All they are asking here, basically, is this applies
to residential and you are wanting curb, gutter, sidewalks and match -
up paving, and there can be a delayed installation by the posting
of a bond. That is what is going on, isn't it?
City Manager: That is really it. But come back to one point I
made earlier, in the interest of uniformity and past practice I
would still urge you to strike sidewalks. I really don't think
that the sidewalks add anything.
Councilman Mitchell: Even in new subdivisions.
City Manager: No I am not talking new subdivisions. I agree in
the new subdivisions.
Mayor Thompson: Let me ask a question. In that case, then, if you
strike sidewalks. . .
Councilman Lowry: How do you ever get them.
Mayor Thompson: No, no -
Councilman Lowry: How do you ever get them.
Mayor Thompson: What if you have a piece of property that already
has some sidewalks already existing, but there is a vacant piece
of property in between there. You don't want sidewalks here.
Qity Manager: I am trying to think of any other place other than
our main street here in this town where there are any sidewalks,
and there probably is, but I can't think of any.
Page 14
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Councilman Lowry: I remember one or two of them that has been
before this Council that they did put the curb and gutter and
sidewalks in.
Councilman Russo: I personally don't think all the questions are
answered in this attempt to amend this.
Councilman Mitchell: Baker's new tract doesn't have sidewalks. I
think we ought to kick it back to the Planning Commission. Let
them come up with some other alternatives for us.
City Manager: All he put in was the curb and gutter in conjunction
with the Pennsylvania Avenue project.
City Attorney: I have two questions along those lines. One, every -
time there is going to be a deposit made does the City Council
approve it. That is what the ordinance calls for. I haven't seen
any of these come up in the year. . .
City Manager: There haven't been any, that is why.
City Attorney: That is what I am asking. There haven't been any
or have we ,just not been doing it by bringing it to the City Council.
Councilman Lowry: We only built one house last year.
Councilman Russo: Well, the City being as old as it is we have a
lot of cituations that aren't addressed in here. Like the one
the Mayor just mentioned. What do you do in those situations.
Councilman Mitchell: You don't have enough - (balance of comment
unintelligible due to other voices overriding)
Councilman Russo: I know, but this isn't going to solve the problem
folks.
City Manager: I am sorry I missed the situation you are speaking of.
Councilman Russo: Well, the situation he is speaking of - you have
two developed pieces of property, and you have a vacant lot in the
middle, each one of those has sidewalks. The guy in the middle
comes in and wants to develop his property and he won't put side-
walks in.
City Manager: Well, that is true, but I don't know of any like that.
Councilman Russo: What about on Palm Avenue I think there are some.
City Manager: The curb is one thing, we are talking sidewalks right
down.
Councilman Russo. There are sidewalk situations too through the
City.
City Manager: Very little. That is why I say in the interest of
the uniformity of application, there are virtually no requirements
for the sidewalk in the old section of town. Maybe it should have
been by reason of what is shown on the law, but it hasn't been
done, and I think, frankly, it is really not needed.
Councilman Mitchell: I have been reading this over very carefully,
and almost anything is improvement, and I am going to make a
'motion if I may. That in 204.3, 490 be amended by - in 204.3,
including number two, execute an agreement with the City, that the
property owner shall install required street improvements at the
time requested by the City. Such agreement shall be secured by a
lien against the property. Should the curb, gutter, sidewalk and
match -up paving improvements exist adjacent any vacant lot because
the improvements were constructed using the agreement form speci-
fied above, then any new development shall be required to reimburse
the City for the cost of such improvements based upon the Engineer's
News Record Construction Cost Index, including the cost of meeting
new improvement standards. This provision shall last ten (10)
years from the date improvements were installed. I move that be
Page 15
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
adopted as an amendment to Ordinance 490.
City Manager: You can't move that tonight. What we suggested is
that, if that is what you want to do, then you move that the City
Attorney draft that in ordinance form. That is what this whole
thing is here for. All you are moving at the present time - all
you are suggesting at the present time is that what has been pro-
posed be written up in ordinance form so you can adopt it.
Because you read exactly what is here, if that is your intent
then that is your motion.
Councilman Mitchell: My motion then would be to have the Attorney
draw the amendment in conformity with Exhibit "A" for adoption at
the next meeting.
Mayor Thompson: Do I hear a second.
Councilman Russo: I will second it.
Councilman Mitchell: Call for the question.
Councilman Lowry: In other words, we will then consider that
ordinance at the next meeting. Whether we want it or don't want
it. May I make an amendment to that.
Mayor Thompson: Councilman Lowry, the question has been called.
Councilman Lowry: Okay.
Councilman Mitchell: I will accept an amendment. I made the
motion.
Mayor Thompson: You called for the question didn't you Mr. Mitchell.
City Clerk: Yes he did.
Mayor Thompson: Roll call please.
Let the record show the action taken was as follows:
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to have
the Attorney draw the amendment in conformity with Exhibit "A" for
adoption at the next meeting.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION CARRIED.
The Public Hearing was continued to the next regular meeting to be
held on Tuesday, September 11, 1984, at 8:54 P.M.
3. Out of Sequence.
Appeal of Planning Commission Action Filed by Ruben H. Manzanares
Regarding Off -Site Improvement Requirements.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to con-
tinue this agenda item until the determination of the public
hearing, to be returned to the Council at the next regular meeting.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 16
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
5. General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3 and Pre - Annexation Zone Change
No. 84 -RZ -2.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:55 P.M.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: Mr. Mayor and members of the City
Council, the City received a request from Far West Developers for
a consideration of a General Plan Amendment, 84 -GP -3, and also
Pre- Annexation Zone Change, 84 -RZ -2. The General Plan amendment
would be to designate approximately 147 acres residential planned
unit development, specific plan required, since there is no
General Plan designation on the property at the present time.
And the second item was a pre - annexation zone change from County
W -2 and C -P to City R -T, Mobile Home Subdivision, and C -2,
General Commercial. An initial study was prepared and a Negative
Declaration has been recommended. The property is within the
Beaumont Sphere of Influence, but has not been General Planned
by the City and that is the need for the General Plan amendment.
Approval of this application will provide zoning standards,(set-
backs, lot size) and a General Plan designation for the site.
The General Plan designation proposed for the property will re-
quire the preparation of a specific plan. State law prescribes
the content of specific plans and the Beaumont General Plan
requires the preparation of such a plan to be consistent with
state law. The purpose of such a plan is to design the ultimate
development of the site, indicate how it will proceed from one
phase to the next, the type of public improvements (streets,
water, sewer) necessary to provide for the contemplated development,
and proposed development standards, i.e., setbacks and building
height. As such, the plan when prepared actually becomes the
General Plan designation and zoning standards for the property.
This is in reference to the need for the specific plan which
would come with that General Plan designation.
The Planning Commission found in a number of areas, as far as the
analysis that the proposed General Plan amendment is consistent
with proposed and existing land uses. Residential development
exists to the north and east of the site. Residential subdivisions
are proposed to the south of the site in the City, as well as
property zoned for commercial uses. North of Cherry Valley Blvd.,
and east and west of Beaumont Avenue are a number of existing
retail and office uses. The Residential Planned Unit Development
Section of the General Plan states that residential development
is considered as the primary use for these areas, although
ancillary support commercial uses self- sustaining parks, street -
scopes and other ancillary uses would be allowable. Therefore,
residential development with some related commercial areas would
be compatible with the surrounding area.
Existing or proposed streets in the area are adequate to carry
the traffic generated by the proposed use. The Beaumont General
Plan Circulation Element designates Beaumont Avenue a Special
Design Street and Brookside Avenue as a Secondary (88 foot right -
of -way). Development adjacent to these streets would require
half the street right -of -way to be fully improved and dedicated
to the standards listed above. Since this area is currently
not designated by the City's General Plan, it is impossible to
determine the potential increase in traffic volumes. The
Residential Planned Unit Development designation permits no more
than 8 units per acre. The street improvements proposed would
provide for four (4) lanes of traffic on each street and should
be adequate to meet potential demand.
Another finding was that the proposed amendment is consistent with
existing zoning designations. The proposed pre- annexation zone
change requested by the applicant, permitting primarily residen-
tial uses with limited commercial areas, is consistent with the
General plan designation of Residential Planned Unit Development.
Page 17
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact upon the
environment. The General Plan designation requested will require
the preparation of subsequent plans and City approvals. The
General Plan designation, although permitting up to 8 units an
acre, confers on the applicant no vested right to develop at that
density. Once site plans are submitted, then the environmental
impact of the proposal can be more reasonably judged.
Concerning the pre- annexation zone change, the change is compatible
with existing and proposed uses and provides for a logical transi-
tion of land uses. Mobile home parks, (Cherry Mobile Home Parks
and Royal Coach) and commercial uses exist to the north of the
site, and property zoned for mobile home subdivisions and commer-
cial development to the south of the site. The proposed zoning
pattern will provide for a continuation of this pattern.
The change is compatible with the General Plan. The proposed
General Plan Amendment to Residential Planned Unit Development
permits primarily residential uses with ancillary commercial
uses. The proposed zone change to R -T and C -2 is compatible with
the proposed General Plan designation.
This change will have no significant impact upon the environment.
The proposed zoning will either remain or be modified as part of
the specific plan approvals required by the General Plan. As
such, the specific plan must provide infrastructure and services
which meet the needs of the development.
Attached to the report was some information as far as what the
specific plan requirements include. The recommendation of the
Planning Commission was to adopt the Negative Declaration and
recommend City Council approval of the General Plan Amendment
84 -GP -3, designating the proposed area Residential Planned Unit
Development, and recommend approval of Pre - Annexation Zone Change
84 -RZ -2 from County W -2 and C -P to City R -T and C -2.
Are there any questions.
Mayor Thompson: Not at this time. We will reserve right to come
back and talk to you and ask questions. Do you have anything
that you want to ask at this time?
Councilman Mitchell: I believe this was taken up at the LAFCO
meeting.
City Manager: Gentlemen, may I suggest that your public hearing
should precede any comments by the Council because you are tending
to get input in which shouldn't be there during a public hearing.
Mayor Thompson: Mr. Herman Fleischer.
Mr. Herman Fleischer, 9657 Avenida San Timoteo, Cherry Valley:
I am the Chairman of the Research and Cooperation Committee,
Pass Acres and Neighbors. I want to say to you gentlemen of the
City Council that we protest this ordinance on the grounds that
You are in violation of environmental laws which require proper
environmental review. And further, you are in violation of the
annexation laws. It is our feeling that the procedures followed
by the City of Beaumont is inadequate. This also applies to 84-
ND-19, 84 -GP -3 and 84 -RZ -2. We therefore respectfully request
that all procedures and ordinances relative to this proposed
annexation be set aside at this time so that adequate due process
can be followed by this City. Thank you.
Mr. Phil Messrah, 38915 Cherry Valley Boulevard: Personally I
find it quite distressing to think that the City is tending to
jump up into an area which has been quite peaceful and going to
develop on its own some day, and the way or the Council, or
maybe the company would like to have it, chunked into the City to
make it easier for them to develop I think is not right. Its not
consulting your neighbors, and, personally, we have gotten along
Page 18
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
very well in the past for a long time, and I would like to see us
get along well in the future. And by trying to chunk into a
community that is quite stable and quite happy the way they are
wouldn't make good friends and neighbors. Thank you.
Mayor Thompson: Do I have anyone else of the public who wishes
input.
Gary Gitz, Far West Development, 16168 Beach Boulevard, Huntington
Beach, California: Basically I just wanted to state that we do
agree with the staff report and that I am here to answer any
questions that you might have. I think the specifics of the pro-
ject itself will be addressed by the specific plan. At this time
there is not a layout or a hard proposal that could be looked at
and that would come in the future. This is, obviously, a first
step. But if I can answer any questions I am available. Do you
have any now.
Mayor Thompson: We may come back to you in a minute. Anyone else
in the audience. Is there anyone else out in the audience who
wishes to have input on this particular matter. Okay. Gentlemen,
do you have any questions.
Councilman Lowry: Have you closed the public hearing.
Mayor Thompson: No we haven't closed it. This is still part of it.
Councilman Lowry: I move we close the public hearing.
Councilman Mitchell: May I ask this gentleman a question.
Mayor Thompson: Just a second Councilman Mitchell. Mr. Lowry has
made a motion that the public hearing be closed. Do I hear a
second. Do I hear a second. Do I hear a second. Motion died for
lack of a second. You have a question.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes, I would like to ask you if I may. When
you first acquired this land were you cognizant of the fact that it
was not in the General Plan of the City of Beaumont.
Gary Gitz: Yes, that is correct. I knew it was not General Planned
at this time.
Councilman Mitchell: Did you make any overtures to the County for
a development plan.
Mr. Gitz: No, basically, because we did check with the County and
realized that it was General Planned at one unit per acre. The
problem basically - excuse me, the property basically has two pro-
blems. It needs sewer, and it has a possible flood hazard. And,
in order to get the sewer we have got to get into the City of
Beaumont, and to solve the flood hazard problem, we have got to
have enough people that can purchase the property in order to
generate the funds that will solve this problem. And at one unit
per acre we are talking 147 units, and it is just not enough
people physically to resolve the flood problem that could exist
out there.
Councilman Mitchell: Well, then the three reasons to come into
the City of Beaumont was because you wanted a higher density than
that allowed by the County. You wanted a sewer service that was
not available by the County. And you needed a density that would
bring enough people in there to pay for a major flood control
through your property. Is that correct.
Mr. Gitz: I wouldn't say to pay for a major flood control problem.
Councilman Mitchell: It would alleviate the problem.
Mr. Gitz: Somehow we have to resolve the problem, that is correct.
Page 19
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: But those are the three basic reasons for
this application.
Mr. Gitz: That is correct. And it does match up with the City of
Beaumont as it is now proposed on the southerly boundary.
Councilman Lowry: I move that the public hearing be closed.
Councilman Russo: Second.
Mayor Thompson: It has been moved and seconded that the public
hearing be closed. Any other discussion.
(Councilman May was excused at 9:10, returning to his chair at 9:12.)
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to close
the public hearing.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
The Public Hearing was closed at 9:12 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -55 - Approving an Amendment to the City of
Beaumont General Plan (84 -GP -3)
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -55.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
f NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
} ABSENT: None.
MOTION CARRIED.
Consideration of Approval of Pre - Annexation Zone Change No. 84-
RZ-2.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
Pre- Annexation Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -2, from County W -2 and C -P to
City R -T and C -2, based upon the aforementioned findings.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
6. Tentative Tract Map No. 20011. Applicant: CM Engineering,
Location: North of Cougar Way, east of the intersection of
Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way.
The Public Hearing was opened at 9:25 P.M.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: Mr. Mayor and members of the City
Council, the important portion, of course, of the tentative tract
map and conditional use permit are the conditions that were sub-
mitted by the staff and the various agencies that were reviewing
the tentative map. The conditional use permit is a moot factor.
You do not have to take any action on that since that was adopted
by the Planning Commission, and simply enables condominium units
to be constructed there are no conditions applicable to that.
The conditions that we have for the proposal are part of your
packet I believe. The proposed subdivision is to divide 32 acres
into 133 lots and in order to construct 164 condominium units.
The property is located north of Cougar Way, 568 feet east of the
intersection of Beaumont and Cougar Way. The surrounding land
uses include R -T zoning to the north, and all of the properties
in that vicinity are vacant at the present time. To the south,
R -3, to the east R -MH, residential mobile home, to the west R -1 and
R -3.
Page 20
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Applicant proposes this division of land which would provide for
single and multi - family dwelling units. The lots within the
multiple family portion of the project are proposed for condominiums.
All condominiums lots will have vehicular access available through
200 foot wide alleys at the rear of the lots, or rather 20 foot
wide alleys at the rear of the lot. While this will effectively
hide vehicles behind eventual units, it does provide for additional
entrance and exit points along the street identified as Johnathan
Avenue. Johnathan Avenue will not be in existence. That will be
Orange Avenue per the circulation element. The City should not
be responsible for any maintenance of these alleys. And the pro-
posed conditions to the tract are included and include additional
information as far as the flood control district, the City Engineer
and the Fire Department. Those items are by attached memorandums
and letters under Condtiions No. 5, No. 6 and No. 7. Most of the
rest of the conditions are standard conditions. The Planning
Commission approved all of them, but did make a change to No. 10
of the Engineer's conditions. That is attached to the other condi-
tion, so you will have to look at that separately. The condition
as proposed by the City Engineer was that a box culvert providing
full master plan capacity shall be designed and constructed
across Cougar Way. Channel improvements shall be constructed
within the development. Transitions in easements may be required
as approved by the City Engineer and shall be designed to protect
the box culvert upstream and reduce velocity downstream. All
improvements will be subject to approval by the City Engineer and
Flood Control.
The Planning Commission saw fit to recommend that it be changed to
read as follows: The developer shall deposit with the City an
amount to be allocated by the City Engineer as pro rata fair share
of the cost of the construction of Marshal Creek Channel crossing
of Cougar Land pro -rated to each developmental phase. All four
properties cornering in the area of the crossing shall be included
in this development procedure. All improvements will be subject
to approval by the City Engineer and the Flood Control District.
City Manager: Gentlemen, where he said Cougar land, that is a
mis- spelling, that should be Cougar Lane.
Mr. Larson: Are there any questions concerning the development or
the conditions. I believe the applicant is here in the meeting
this evening.
Mayor Thompson: This has been an on -going project for quite a
while.
Mr. Larson: That is correct. There have been several tract maps
up in that area, at least two specifically that I am aware of,
and this is another one that will be a continuation of the one
that was previously approved north of the project site.
Mayor Thompson: This is an additional to AB- KOV /DEVCO. This is
another one.
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
Mayor Thompson: To the east of that or to the west, I mean to the
north.
Mr. Larson: I believe it is to the west of Devco.
Councilman Lowry: Devco is right on Beaumont.
Mr. Larson: Okay, then it is to the east. Ab -Kov is on Beaumont
and then there is another one to the north, this one is to the
south. That same quandrant.
Mayor Thompson: Was the Ciraolo property?
City Manager: No.
Page 21
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Mayor Thompson: It is not the Ciraolo property. I am just trying
to picture where it is.
City Manager: It is right adjacent, west of the Ciraolo property.
Mayor Thompson: Any questions gentlemen. Once you read this you
don't really have many questions.
City Manager: You might ask the developer if he concurs, and I
think they worked long and hard in working these out. Hopefully,
he does concur.
Steve Pleasant, CM Engineering, representing AB -KOV: We concur
with the conditions as recommended to you by the Planning
Commission. Yes, this is a continuation of AB -KOV's property.
Mayor Thompson: It is an on -going thing.
Mr. Pleasant: Right. This, however, is just the residential
portion of the development. Are there any questions.
Mayor Thompson: No, it is quite - the conditions in the report
are quite comprehensive.
Mr. Pleasant: Yes they are.
Mayor Thompson: You have quite a tremendous flood channel problem.
No, this is not the piece of property I am thinking of. Yours of
north of Cougar. It is not the one behind the Bank of America
and 14th - no that is a different piece of property. Do you have
a very bad flood control problem?
Mr. Pleasant: I think putting a value judgment on it would be
very difficult to do that. I think the main part of our project
is fairly free of flood hazards. The fact, however, there is a
flood hazard problem southeast corner of our property, and it is
addressed in the County of Riverside's Flood Control District's
master plan for realignment of Marshal Creek at that location,
and it was our feeling and recommendation to the Planning Commis-
sion that, contrary with the City Engineer's recommendation was,
that the improvement be installed at a time when all properties
were ready to put that together. We concur with the conditional
requirement that we deposit a one - fourth fair share amount for
that improvement, however, that was not our recommendation, but
we concur with it.
Mayor Thompson: Are there any other questions gentlemen. Any
other questions. Thank you very much.
Councilman Mitchell: I move the public hearing be closed.
Councilman Lowry: I second it.
Mayor Thompson: It has been moved and seconded that the public
hearing be closed at 9:33.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -18 and further to approve Tentative
Tract Map No. 20011.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Page 22
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
7. Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -3. Location: North of I -10, South of 6th
Street, between Pennsylvania Avenue and Xenia Avenue.
The Public Hearing was opened at 9:35 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: The area in question is east of Pennsylvania,
between Pennsylvania and Xenia just north of the I -10 right -of-
way, the vacant land back there behind Circle K, the RV sales
area out there, the Elks lodge - that is the area. Adjacent to
the freeway behind those particular businesses on 6th Street.
Councilman May: It goes only to the Beaumont Tire.
Mayor Thompson: Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to
speak on this particular request for zone change. Anybody in the
audience who would like to speak regarding this zone change. It
is already commercial - I am sorry. It is already M -1, which is
light manufacturing and R -MH.
Councilman Lowry: I move the public hearing be closed.
Mayor Thompson: Wait just a minute. Anybody else in the audience
who wishes to speak on this zone change. Mr. Mitchell you had a
question.
Councilman Mitchell: In the event this is changed will it negate
the other uses in that particular area. We have some M -1 and M -2
uses.
City Manager: Ron, would you come up and speak to the ability of
some of these uses to continue as non - conforming uses.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: Right. The uses that are there
presently now that came in under an M -1 zoning, those which are
permitted uses in the C -2, General Commercial zone, some of them
probably, I believe, would come under a Conditional Use Permit,
but they will be permitted to stay as a use permitted by right.
Any others that are permitted in the M -1 zone, but not in the C -2
zone would become legal non - conforming, and those would be per-
mitted to stay there and operate as they have, but they would not
be permitted to enlarge or to add to their use unless the City
saw fit to re -zone it back to M -1.
Councilman Mitchell: That non - conforming use, I believe, in our
ordinance last for twenty years, does it not.
Mr. Larson: I am not certain what your ordinance has on that.
Mayor Thompson: I think it is longer than that.
Mr. Larson: I am not familiar with that. Most of the non - conforming
uses that I am familiar with are indefinite. There is no speci-
fied limitation of time.
Councilman Mitchell: We have one in there of 20 or 25 years. I
ksked that question because the question was asked of me. I knew
the answer but I wanted to have it in the record.
Councilman Lowry: Well I moved to close the hearing because we
talked about this in the study session and I was assured of the
same thing you are telling them.
Mayor Thompson: George, do you really need a motion to close a
public hearing. You don't. Okay, it is the concensus of the
Council, if you have no objections, we will close the public
hearing at 9:40 P.M.
Page 23
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -20 and further approve Zone Change
No. 84 -RZ -3.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
8. Report re: Bids Received for Fuel Dispensing System and Request
for Award of Bid. (Continued from August 13, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
accept the report and to award the bid to Cal -Petro for Fuel
Dispensing System with the stipulation that the "Gas Boy System"
be used so as to meet the specifications of the bid. The Mayor
is authorized to sign contract for the award of bid.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
9. Report re: Reimbursement for Damages or Costs Incurred Due to
Sewer Back -Up.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to grant
the request for reimbursement.
t'1 AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
10. Request from Redlands Federal Savings and Loan for Reimbursement
of Sewer Connection Fee.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to deny
request for reimbursement of sewer connection fee.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
11. Report from City Attorney re: Use of District Attorney Prosecution
Services.
It was the concensus of the City Council that the handling of
these matters would remain as they have been handled in the past.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -52 - Adoption of Use of Consent Calendar.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -52.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
13. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of August 13,
1984 and Adjourned Council Meeting of August 20, 1984.
Page 24
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
b. Acceptance of Planning Commission Minutes of August 7, 1984.
C. Approval of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of August 27,
1984, in Llie amount of $90,661,26; and Payroll of August 9,
1984, in the amount of $30,814.47.
d. Ordinance No. 606 - Second Reading - To Amend Title 17 of the
Beaumont Municipal Code by Amending the Zoning Map to Provide
Land Annexed to the City with Interim General Commercial (I -C2)
and Interim Mobile Home Subdivision (I -RT).
e. Ordinance No. 607 - Second Reading - To Amend Zoning Ordinance
490 and Beaumont Municipal Code Title 17 by adding Certain
Sections to Provide for Residential- Housing Development (R -HD)
Commercial General (C -G) and Planned Unit Development (PUD).
f. Resolution No. 1984 -53 - Proclaiming National Fire Prevention
Week.
i. Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of August 21,
1984.
j. Request for Budget Adjustments:
1) To replace broken water closet at Swimming Pool.
3) To cover construction costs for First Street Sewer Lift
Station and Force Main Project.
4) Payment of Deductible to Insurance Company re Claim of
Donald Hershey.
k. Negative Declaration No. 84 -ND -21 - Mini- Storage Facility.
Location: 1315 - 6th Street.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Consent Calendar Items 13.a, b, c, d, e, f, i, and j.l, j.3 and
j.4, with Ordinance No. 606 and Ordinance No. 607 being adopted
by reading of title only, with items g, h and j.2 being removed
from the consent calendar for discussion.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Ordinance No. 606 and Ordinance No. 607 were read by title only
by the City Clerk.
14. Report from J. F. Davidson Associates re: San Timoteo Waste-
water Treatment Plant.
This report was accepted for filing.
15. Request for Budget Adjustment to complete retaining wall, slab
and steps for Public Works Office.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
approve budget adjustment in the amount of $600.00 ($300.00 from
Account 3250 -6085 and $300.00 from Account 4050 -4070 - total of
x.$600.00) to Account 3100 -6020, to complete work on the Public
Works Office for retaining wall, slab and steps.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 25
Beaumont City Council
August 27, 1984
Consent Calendar Item No. g. Resolution No. 1984 -54, Providing
for the Destruction of Records was continued until the next re-
gular meeting on September 11, 1984.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:26 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
City Cl k, City of Beaumo q t
D n cr n 9r,
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
SEPTEMBER 11, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Tuesday,
September 11, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Dr. Walter Price, First Southern Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Lowry.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May was excused.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Judd Inman, 749 Magnolia, addressed the Council, asking
why his delinquent sewer /sanitation bill had been placed on
the tax rolls with no notification to him personally, and
why the City refused to accept his check when he offered to
pay the bill.
Mr. Inman was informed the City had complied with the law
so far as notification was concerned, and all delinquent
bills in excess of $50.00 on August 10, 1984 were placed on
the tax rolls to be collected as part of the property tax
bill for 1984 -85. Additionally, once this has been turned
over to the County the City cannot accept payment for the
delinquent bill.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of August 27,
1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting
of August 21, 1984.
C. Approval of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of September
11, 1984, in the amount of $46,164.90; and Payroll of August
23, 1984, in the amount of $33,784.88.
d. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -54 - To Provide for the Destruction of
Records Pursuant to State Law.
e. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -56 - Incorporating Amendments to Resolution
1984 -01 into One Document.
f. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -57 - Accepting Grant of Easement, Executing
Agreement Therefor, and Ordering Recordation Thereof with
County Recorder (Assessment District 1983 -1).
g. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -61 - Ordering the Annexation of Territory
Known as Beaumont 84- ANX -1 -33 and as LAFCO No. 84 -26 -3 to the
City of Beaumont Without Notice of Hearing. (Beaumont Garden
Apartments, Xenia and 8th Street).
h. Negative Declaration 84 -ND -24 - Project: Elmwood Tract
Development. Location: Olive, 9th and 10th Place, west
of Elm Avenue.
i. Appointment of Commissioners to Fill Existing Vacancies on
Senior Center Advisory Commission.
j. Report of Action of Planning Commission at Meeting of September
4, 1984.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
Consent Calendar Items 2.a through 2.j simultaneously.
Page 1
I
3.
4.
5.
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
AYES: Councilman Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
ORDINANCE NO. 602 - FIRST READING - Establishing a Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission. (Reconsideration at Request of Mayor Thompson).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to grant
the request of Mayor Thompson for reconsideration of Ordinance
No. 602; directing the City Attorney to review the suggested amend-
ments to the ordinance submitted by Mayor Thompson, incorporating
them into the Ordinance if acceptable; with the Ordinance to be
returned to the Council for reconsideration with the City Attorney's
recommendations concerning the amendments at the next Council
meeting to be set for Thursday, September 27, 1984.
AXES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ORDINANCE NO. 609 - FIRST READING - Rezoning Certain Property from
County W -2 and C -P to City R -T (Mobile Home Subdivision) and C -2
(General Commercial) - 84 -RZ -2.
A letter from Mr. Herman Fleischer, of Pass Acres and Neighbors,
protesting Ordinance No. 609 was entered into the record.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to pass
Ordinance No. 609 at its first reading by reading of the title
only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
ORDINANCE NO. 610 - FIRST READING - Rezoning Certain Property from
M -1 and RMH to C -2 (Change of Zone 84 -RL -3, City Initiated).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to pass
Ordinance No. 610 at its first reading by reading of title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: 8:00 P.M.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 608 - FIRST READING - Amending Municipal Code Section
17.12.400, to Require Off -Site Improvements in Residential Areas
and to Permit Agreements for the Provisions of Future Off -Site
Improvements. (Continued from August 27, 1984).
The Public Hearing was re- opened at 8:05 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: To give the members of the audience an idea of what
we are talking about here, I believe the Planning Department, Ron,
would you give a little background on this one for the benefit of
the audience.
Ron Larson, Planning Director:. This is a proposed zoning amendment
to the existing code which provides for provision of off -site im-
provements for properties which are improved or expanded, particularly
to expansion of property - additions to existing structures in excess
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
of 300 square foot of area or for new structures on properties in
order to provide for curb and gutter improvements, and under the
existing code only the curb and gutter is required to be provided
for residential properties other than new subdivisions. Sidewalk
improvements are not required, and, also, match -up paving or pave
out from the curb and gutter to the existing pavement is not re-
quired. The engineering and planning departments determined that
this particular ordinance should be amended.in order to provide
that curb, gutter, sidewalk and match -up paving should be required
on all development and on additions to structures greater than 300
square feet of living area. Also, to provide for a third alterna-
tive to putting the improvements in at any one point of time. The
existing ordinance provides that the property owner shall deposit
with the City Clerk the amount of the cost of installation of curbs
and gutters and, of course, now we are adding sidewalks and match -
up paving, and - or to improve the - put the improvements in at
the time of - the property is improved. The staff added a third
one which was to execute an agreement with the City that the
property owner shall install required street improvements at the
time requested by the City. Such agreement shall be secured by a
lien against the property. This would be a situation where if we
didn't want to have the property owner - or the property owner .
didn't want to install them at the time that he made other improve-
ments to his property, they could be deferred until a more appro-
pritate time or whenever the City, and in particular the City
Engineer, felt it was appropriate to put them in probably along
with other improvements in a single block.
The third portion was deleted in order to - which says, notwith-
standing provisions of Section 204.3a, except for new subdivisions
sidewalks shall not be required.in any residential zone. Sidewalks
shall be required for new subdivisions and all zones other than
residential. Staff felt that sidewalks were something that should
be provided in all zones and so they recommended to amend the
ordinance to make that provision.
Mayor Thompson: You said curb, gutter and sidewalk are now required.
Mr. Larson: Curb, gutter and - curb and gutter are required in
residential zones - existing residential areas which are not new
subdivisions are not required to have sidewalks, and they are
required in other zones, manufacturing and commercial, and in new
subdivisions. Staff felt it would be more consistent just to make
the requirements the same in all zones.
Mayor.Thompson: So, basically, you are adding sidewalks and match -
up paving.
Mr'. Larson: Right.
Mayor Thompson: Anybody have a question.
City Manager: Mayor Thompson, just from this part of the staff's
point of view, and I do not concur in the other - in the engineering
and planning staff point of view - this is an old City, if the City
were to - for instance - go to a 1911 or 1915 Act program to put
curb and gutter in this City, and to then also go to sidewalk, you
would be putting in a lot of sidewalk where presently curb and
gutter now exists, and I would think that would create a horrendous
a4ministrative problem trying to administrate - or administer a
program where you would have one dollar amount applying to a certain
lot, and another applying to another for other construction costs.
I really feel in old cities where they have not constructed side-
walks, they really are not needed in this day and age because
people tend to utilize the streets for their strolls and their
bicycle riding and so on, and I personally would recommend to the
Council that you strike the sidewalks from the request, and that
you also strike paragraph two, which is the lien.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Anything else. Anything else from the Council.
Page 3
I
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
Since this is a public hearing, and Ron's remarks was for information
for you to know what we are basically talking about. Is there any-
one from the audience who wishes to speak in opposition to these
recommendations.
Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania: I don't know if this is opposition
or for the issue. I think curbs and sidewalks are necessary in this
town, but I think the public might be interested in finding out if
you went to an assessment district exactly how that would work. At
some point in time your tax bill is going to be assessed a certain
amount.of money, but is that money all due at one time or can it be
paid over a series of payments. How would it affect people.. I
understand people on fixed income - which a lot of people live in the
older section of town -,if they got hit with a $600.00 bill in one
tax bill it would be devastating, but if they only had to pay $30.00
or $40.00 a year on that tax bill, it would be a considerably
different matter. So an explanation might help.
Mayor Thompson: May I answer that for you, Larry. Orange Street
from approximately 12th to 14th, when I came to town Orange Street
was a dirt street, and after a while the property owners got
together and we signed a petition.and we brought it'to the Council
asking for Orange Street to be paved under the 1911 Improvement Act.
The Council concurred, they worked on it', they passed it, they did
whatever was required, we got the street paved and it appeared on
our tax bills over a period of ten years. Does that answer your
question?
Mr. Gordon: Yes, that. . .
Mayor Thompson: Now that is for a street. I am sure this would work
the same way.
Mr. Gordon: People would be less apprehensive about being involved
with a - I think a figure of $7.50 was mentioned as curb and gutter.
Match -up paving, I don't know what that would cost because some
streets you might have to go out ten feet, and others you might not
have to go out at all. But if we are talking, most lots I suppose
are what - 50 or 60 feet in this town - around a $500.00 bill, if
that is paid over ten years would be much less impact on people
than $500.00 bill every year.
Councilman Mitchell: That, of course, would carry interest every
year too.
Mr. Gordon: Well, yeah, but it is what - 3% on a tax bill.
Councilman Mitchell: No, anywhere from 10 to 12% depending on what
they sell the bonds for.
Mayor Thompson: Anyone else in the audience that would like to speak
in opposition to this proposal.
City Attorney: Before we go any further, I note that the Planning
Director stated that his recommendation was that sidewalks be
included in residential zones. You will note on Page 2 of the
ordinance we have prepared, pursuant to direction, that is not the
case. We got the Planning Director's recommendations. We also had
recommendation that that not.be done, therefore, Subsection (b) states
that notwithstanding.the provisions of Subsection (a) of this section,
except for new subdivisions, sidewalks shall not be required in any
residential zone, and that is as the ordinance presently stands.
So the only thing that would need to be striken is the lien portion.
City Manager: Gentlemen, I think oneother point that I meant to
mention that was brought up in the study session and not really
fully discussed . . .
Page 4
I
Mayor Thompson: Are you for or against.
who are against. . .
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
We are listening to people
Councilman Mitchell: Is this still a public meeting.
Mayor Thompson: Just a minute Mr. Davis. Is there anyone else in
the audience who wishes to speak against. Okay. Is there anyone
out there who would like to speak for this proposal. Okay. Do
you want to continue with your discussion Mr. Davis.
City Manager: Yes. I was just going to suggest, on line 22 of the
first page, gentlemen, I think Councilman Lowry brought up the pro-
blem of time there and I certainly would concur there that you ought
to insert within six months or one year, whatever you choose to do.
Strike a reasonable time, and put something precise in there. In
addition, I would suggest up there in line 18, if you want to con-
sider it, deposit with the City Clerk such amount - and then insert
"in cash or.letter of credit ", in other words utilize the two means
that you have already authorized in the City.
Mayor Thompson: That is already in existence isn't it. That is
the way it is done, either cash or letter of credit. Do you have
to spell it out again, or is it standard policy to do it that way.
City Manager: It states such amount - and this almost looks like
only cash, whereas, if you put in cash or letter of credit, then
you are utilizing both procedures that you currently have.
Councilman Mitchell: Is the public hearing over?
Mayor Thompson: Okay. There has been opportunity for both pro and
con on this from the public. Now we will bring it up to the Council
level and we will talk from the Council level right now. Mr.
Mitchell.
Councilman Mitchell: I would like to ask Mr. Larson a question. You
have been working on this ordinance have you. You have been working
on this with the engineer.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: Actually, I haven't been working with
it. My predecessor did work with the City Engineer on it. I came
and I presented it to the Planning Commission and to the City Council.
But I did not have any real part in putting together the proposed
changes.
Councilman Mitchell: Then to your knowledge you don't know if the
engineer gave any input on this. To your knowledge.
Mr. Larson: Only second hand. He did indicate to me that he did
want to see the provisions, particularly for the sidewalk and match -
up paving, to be included.
Councilman Mitchell: In other words, that is the one we voted down.
Mayor Thompson: We haven't voted on it yet.
Councilman Mitchell: Well, I mean, that is the one that has been
changed in the ordinance at the moment. That is not in there at
the present time.
Mr. Larson: I believe so. I haven't seen a copy of the one pre-
pared by the City Attorney.
Councilman Mitchell: Did you, at any time, have the opportunity to
go around the City and see how various older areas, where some
streets are up like this and some are down like this. Did anyone
come in with what they would do with the engineering to be sure
that - let us say that the curb and gutter was put in the middle
of the block, there was no curb or gutter on either side, how they
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
would shoot that to make it a common flow, when and if, in ten or
twenty years, the rest of the curb would be put in.
Mr. Larson: No I didn't go through the community looking at that
particular aspect of it. That is strictly an engineering matter.
All I did was observe the areas in town where you do have gaps in
sidewalks, particularly around school areas.
Councilman Mitchell: Well that is the same thing all over. The
thing I am trying to get out is, has there been an engineering
study of the areas where a spotted curb and gutter would not be
practical to have it matched up to the highway. To your knowledge
that study has not been done.
Mr. Larson: No. It hasn't been made to my knowledge.
Councilman Mitchell: That is my major opposition to this entire
ordinance.
Councilman Russo: We discussed several times. At the last meeting
.and in study session the possibility of an assessment district, the
point was raised again from the floor. I would hope that we could
pursue that, at least the possibility of it, and see what it would
cost the City to do something like that. What it would cost indi-
vidual property owners, at least to get the ball rolling, before
we make the decision.
Councilman Lowry: I would go along with that also.
Councilman Russo: Presently - in the ordinance presently established,
we are addressing this aren't we, the off -site improvements.
City Manager: Not really, because as it was pointed out by the
engineer, and although by policy we are presently requiring people
to put in match -up paving, because when I came in here, as an
example, and Councilman Lowry will recall, we were being pressured
for about two years to do the match -up paving on.two houses over on
Michigan, was it Councilman Lowry? Anyhow, we eventually got in
there and did those, plus maybe a half a dozen other spots in town
because people had put their curb and gutter in did nothing but
leave a big.hole between the existing -.the curb they built and the
existing pavement, and there were several others in town which we
have gone out and paved subsequently. So I think - I would urge
you to go ahead and adopt this with the changes that have been
noted and give us about a month - at least a month to come back to
you with a report to you on utilizing the 13 or 15 act to do some
improvements in the City, because it is going to take some time to
get you some answers, and in the meantime, if we have any construction,
you know, here we still got the same problems existing, which is. .
Councilman Lowry: It is the City Engineer's responsibility to set
grades, is it now, on these curb and gutters, and he has got to
establish some kind of line from one end of the block to the other,
tentatively at least. Does he make any kind of a . . .
City Manager: Well, at least since we have our own engineer I am
sure that is what is happening. I am not so sure what happened
before but I really don't know of any real problem anyplace in the
City and there could well be, I don't say there aren't any, but I
don't of any.
Councilman Lowry: Okay, now you made mention that it stated on line
22, within a reasonable time should be deleted and within six months
or a year be added. I would suggest six months, and one other thing
bothered me here, and that is lines 27 - starting on 26, and such
agreement shall be secured by a lien against the property in an
amount equal to the estimated cost of such installation as deter-
mined by the City Manager. And the problem of inflation bothers me.
page 6
I
n
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
Whenever we say an estimated cost, and people are putting up money,
for a period of maybe five or six years, we don't know what in-
flation is going to do, and then who is going to make up the
difference. I think we ought to add on line 29, after City Manager,
plus increases or decreases as realized in construction costs.
City Manager: Well, Councilman Lowry, if you struck Paragraph (2)
you would take care of the whole problem, but if you don't choose
to strike it, then maybe you ought to do what you are suggesting.
Councilman Lowry: Well, up in line 19 you say the estimated cost
of such - deposit with the City in cash or letter of credit. There
again we have the problem of inflation, it is covered in two places.
City Manager: Yes, but, if you do it though within six months or
a year you don't really have that problem.
City Attorney: The depositing with the City of an amount to cover
the estimated cost.does not bind the City only to that amount. Of
course, you may have collection problems as to the balance, but you
can still attempt collection as to the balance.
Councilman Lowry: You can write a lien on taxes later on, or what
do you do.
City Attorney: There are various procedures allowed on the statutes.
Councilman Mitchell: But if they are required to put up a cash bond
for the whole thing. . .
City Attorney: It is a deposit. You don't have a bond under here
though.
City Manager: That becomes firm.
Councilman Mitchell: Then they may as well go ahead and do it. The
point I am getting at is not the cash deposit, not the bond or any-
thing else. What I am getting at is to force a short term curb and
gutter in a place that cannot be cleaned by a street sweeper unless
he sweeps a block of dirt. That cannot be maintained. That - you
wanted to match the pavement, if it matched the pavement there would
be places where that is a hump along the curb line, and. . .
City Attorney: You are thinking along the lines of an assessment
district then.
Councilman Mitchell: I am thinking along the line of some common
sense to have a waiver into the ordinance stating that in those
areas where it is not feasible of a general common thinking man,
that this would be of general benefit to that area. That it is a
waiver without making people come back with an appeal. Like if we
had curbs and sidewalks. How would you have put the curbs and side-
walks in on Elm Street Norm? You would have had a mess. And there
are many other places in the same category. You know where I am
talking about Larry. So, the thing has to have - based upon reason-
ableness and economic feasibility that should be a part of the
ordinance instead of making people come running back here on an
appeal, and let that be up to the determination.of the Planning
Department. Give them that prerogative. Or give the engineer that
prerogative.. Then, if he doesn't.go, then they can.make the appeal
here, but give them the prerogative at the lower level.
Mayor Thompson: They have that already.
Councilman Russo: Getting back to my original question here, and
maybe you answered it. . .
Councilman Mitchell: Not unless they ask for a variance Mr. Thompson.
Councilman Russo: I didn't hear - at least it didn't strike me -
Page 7
Bea ont City Council
September 11, 1984
what presently is in force for off -site improvements if a person
wants to go out and build a home. We are not addressing it at all.
City Manager: Curb and gutter.
Councilman Russo: Curb and gutter. The only thing that is lacking
is match -up paving, right now.
Councilman Mitchell: Matching paving and sidewalk.
Councilman Russo: Well sidewalks is not included in the older parts
of the City as it is addressed in the ordinance. It is not included
in this. That is taken out back there in the last section. But,
what I am saying, I don't understand why pass this now if we are
going to consider an assessment district, why not wait to see what
the feasibility of an assessment district is before we do anything,
and do what we have done in the past.
Councilman Lowry: Residential. It is not included in this ordinance.
Mayor Thompson: What do we do in the meantime.
Councilman Russo: Do what we have done in the past. We have already
got curb and gutter, Norm said maybe in thirty days he can bring back
some information on it.
City Manager: That is only a report. Even if you decided to move
very expeditiously, it would still be a year or more down the road
before you ever achieved anything.
Councilman Russo: By the same token, if we were to decide to go
with an assessment district, as Mr. Mitchell said, then, in the
meantime, between the time we adopt the assessment district and
actually have it functioning, and now we are going to have develop-
ment happening throughout the City. We are going to have people
putting in these short pieces of curb and gutter, and then at some
other point in time we are going to come back through and match them
all up again. You know, there is no doubt there is going to be
some problems with that.
Councilman Mitchell: If we would just make a one year's situation.
City Manager: I really don't think so because basically the curbs
are being put in at an alignment that has been approved by the
City engineer who is going on the basis of the crown in the street,
and your crown in your street and the top of your curb should match.
That is the key. So, you know, as long as you do that and you have
got a basic flow line out there in that crown, and they establish
that over there at the curb line - it really isn't that big a pro-
blem, and I really don't think there are problems, and in terms of
whether or not it has done any good in the City I really think it
has, because if you make a conscious effort to look in the City,
you will find curb and gutters maybe in four out of five lots, or
five out of the six.lots in a block in many blocks, and yet in those
blocks there may have been only one new home built in the last ten
or fifteen years. What has happened is that a lot of older homes
in those blocks have gone in and extended that curb and gutter at
a time when a new home was built. Obviously that has happened
because it is all over the City that way. I know there are many,
many, many blocks that have virtually been built out. Not totally,
but virtually been built out, and maybe only one or two new homes
built in the block.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes, and.Mr. Davis, there are many, many places
where there has been one improvement, nothing on either side. It was
like putting a diamond in a goat's ear. It didn't help the diamond
and it didn't help the goat.
City Manager: I recognize that there are those, and yet if this
ordinance that the Council passed back in the sixties, or whenever
Page 8
i i r.
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
it was done, had not been done there would be no curb and gutter in
this town, and it would look far worse than it does look, and it
would be much more difficult to maintain our streets than it is at
present. And that is the real key. Those curb and.gutters make
those streets much easier to maintain. They preserve the integrity
of the street, both as to sweeping and as to the maintenance of
the street itself.
Councilman Mitchell: If it fills a full block, Mr. Davis. If it is
one little piece it doesn't do a blessed bit of good.
Councilman Lowry: Well, a sweeper can - he maneuvers - your argu-
ment about that doesn't hold water Mr. Mitchell. He sweeps in to
the curb and gutter then comes back out when there isn't curb and
gutter. . .
Councilman Mitchell: Yes I have seen them sweep dirt all over town.
Don'-t tell me my argument doesn't hold water. I have watched them.
I have followed them.
Mayor Thompson: Just a minute. I think we are getting a little
off line here. Basically what we are asking, what is.being asked
here is that the curb and gutter ordinance that we have existing
be amended to include match -up paving and a method of delayed
installation. That is all that is being asked.
Councilman Mitchell: But your method of delayed installation does
not accomplish anything that I can see that is beneficial to the
City.
Mayor Thompson: Well, in my estimation which would be beneficial
to the City is to have the off -site improvements installed at the
time of construction prior to occupancy.
Councilman Mitchell: Okay. Then just have them go ahead and do that
the same as we have in other places that didn't do a blessed bit of
good. If people would just start to understand, Mayor Thompson, that
this is a small agricultural town by the name of Beaumont. It is
not San Jose and it isn't Fresno, or it isn't Sacramento. We are
a small town. There are a lot of little people who have lived here
for years and years that have a small lot somewhere they maybe want
to build on, maybe for their kids, but it is in an area that curb
and gutter is not compatible to the area.
City Attorney: Maybe I can clear something up,.Mayor Thompson. Sub-
section Two was included with the intent to provide perhaps exactly
for what Mr. Mitchell is concerned about. In other words, subsection
one requires that you are going to have to put in the curbs and gutters
when you do your improvement or a reasonable time thereafter. And
then you are going to have this spotting effect that Mr. Mitchell is
talking about. Subsection two allows for the execution of agreement
with the City that the property owner will install these at the re-
quest of the City at some time in the future and that performance
will be secured by a lien. The major intent there is so that if
you have one person developing he is not going to be required to put
those improvements in until the others are developing when the City
can then ask all of them to put in curbs and gutters.
City Manager: That can never happen in a City that is built out.
Councilman Mitchell: It has happened in many. Do you want me to
name a few Mr. Davis.
City Manager: Please, I would like to know.
Councilman.Mitchell: Folsom is one. The City of Folsom. They
carried covenants. The City of Placerville. They carried covenants.
The City of Vacaville, carried covenants. The City of Davis carried
covenants. Instead of doing spot deals, the covenant ran with the
Page 9
4yZ.
land that they would join in any
effort with the City at the time
at the time they could build in,
a higher cost. But the covenant
required to build when it goes i
accept the assessment district.
and it works.
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
assessment district or
they built and if they
or they could wait and
is with the land where
ato assessment the land
That is all the thing
any joint
wanted to
build at
they are
has to
.mounts to
City Attorney: That could be done but that is not being required
under this ordinance.
Councilman Mitchell: A covenant should be required in the ordinance.
When you just say a lien for a certain dollar amount Mr. Lowry is
right, with inflation and so forth it doesn't work. With a covenant
that follows the land that you will improve and shall join in with
the City or anyone else when they decide to finish the entire block,
the covenant requires you to go in or it goes as a lien against
your property for a specific figure and that takes care of the
inflationary factor. If they want to do it now they would not be
faced with inflation. If they don't want to do it now they could
wait until the whole street is done and then be assessed for it.
It is just a little too logical I am afraid.
Mayor Thompson: Let me ask a question. If we are seriously con-
sidering implementation of a citywide assessment district for curb,
gutter, sidewalks and match -up paving, what is going to happen
between now and the time this thing is implemented. Are you going
to have any building going on.
Councilman Mitchell: There will be some building as I said Mr.
Thompson.
Mayor Thompson: Are we going to have any off -site improvements put
in prior to occupancy.
Councilman Russo: Do we have them now.
Mayor Thompson: You have curb and gutter.
Councilman Russo: We already have it now.
Mayor Thompson: All this thing is asking then is that you add to the
curb and gutter requirement the match -up paving requirement.
Councilman Mitchell: That is fine, Mr. Thompson. But the thing that
I am saying is set it as an covenant if they don't want to do at the
time. Then if it never develops in that area the covenant stays
with the land and if it ever does develop in the future the covenant
will be there if it is fifty or a hundred years from now.
Councilman Lowry: What would it require the City Attorney to change
this mention of a lien to a covenant to go with the land.
City Attorney: Just rewrite the ordinance. I guess I am missing
the point somewhere along the line. We have already got an ordinance
on the books. All we are.asking for - we are not asking for - but
all this ordinance is providing is that match -up paving be done and
that the improvements be allowed to be delayed until a point in the
future. That is what the amendment is requesting. But you have
already got an ordinance in place for - well, requiring curb and
gutters, and curb and gutters to be done within a reasonable time
of the new construction. That is already on the books.
Councilman Mitchell: So make it a covenant, instead of a demand for
a reasonable time.
City Manager: If you are going to allow the delay why require it at
all, because if you put it on there as a covenant who is going to
ride herd on that covenant. Who is going to resurrect it.
Page 10
Beau.nont City Council
September 11, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: Administrative capacity would have no trouble
whatsoever.
Councilman Lowry: When you do entire blocks is what they are saying
Norm.
City Manager: It will never happen though Councilman Lowry. That
is what I am saying. In.a community of this nature where you have
got it 70% built out in virtually every block. Who is.going to go
out and agitate for any extension. Nobody. It will never happen.
Councilman Mitchell: 70% isn't built out on most every block.
City Manager: I have done a lot of looking for lots in this communi-
ty. . .
Councilman Mitchell:
pictures.
City Manager: I will
10:00 in the morning.
Councilman Mitchell:
Mayor Thompson: Okay
Do you feel there has
I advise you to take a ride with me and take
make an appointment with you right now for
Okay. Bring a camera.
in the meantime, you would like Ordinance 608.
been enough discussion on it.
Councilman Mitchell: I move it be set aside until the attorney has
an opportunity to determine whether to use Ordinance 608 or to
amend the other ordinance with the basic things we were talking about.
I am requesting specifically, before we go into any vote on this,
that in number two that it says that match -up paving at the time re-
quested by the City, and such agreement shall be secured by a
covenant against the property in an amount - no - a covenant against
the property to make the improvement at the time the balance of the
block is improved. That doesn't tie it down to a price.
City Attorney: That does create a problem though, because you don't
secure it'with a covenant, you secure it with a lien. You would
have to have a covenant requiring it, you would also have to have a
lien securing the price.
Councilman Mitchell: You cannot secure a price on something that
you don't know. If it comes in ten years from now you cannot have
a price of seven and a half.
City Attorney: Well then perhaps a bond is'in order.
Councilman Mitchell: You can have a covenant that runs with the
land stating that they will join with the rest.
City Attorney: But you still have to provide a way for calling
those covenants in. If and when the time comes. That can be done.
I am not arguing with that. . .
Councilman Mitchell: It can be done with very, very little trouble
because the covenant states that they will join into any assessment
district when that thing goes without having - being the blockage
point of it. Many times an assessment will die because of blockages.
Mayor Thompson: What are you going to do in the meantime. Between
now and - we go out and do the match -up paving.
Councilman Mitchell: Just what you are doing now. Put in the match -
up paving when all the rest of them do it.
Mayor Thompson: The City puts in the match -up paving when they put
in the curb and gutter.
Councilman Mitchell: No if they put in the curb and gutter they
Page 11
n
Beau_ -)nt City Council
September 11, 1984
put in the match -up paving. There is no argument there.
Councilman Lowry: Could we pass this with the time limit of six
months until we can get a - I am in the middle of a question now -
could we put that qualification on this and pass this ordinance
with a time limit of six months to give the City . . .
Councilman Mitchell: What qualification.
Councilman Lowry: That it is in effect for six months from the
day of . . .
Councilman Mitchell: The way it is written here.
Councilman Lowry: Right. And, to cover these.problems, and give
the time for the 1911 Act information to be developed and other
considerations. That covers all things.
Councilman Mitchell: It covers absolutely nothing.
Mayor Thompson: Matt, you have a question.
Councilman Russo: Yes. For the attorney. In Municipal Code
Section 17.12.400. Isn't most of this language already in here.
City Attorney: Yes.
Councilman Russo: So the only thing we want to do - I think what
is confusing to me, and I don't know if it in to anybody else, is
to have all this verbage in here to include match -up paving.
City Attorney: Well, no. There is several things. Number one,
you are adding match -up paving. Number two, you are allowing for
the execution of an agreement so that the improvements, instead of
being required within a reasonable time of your construction, you
can now agree to have it doner�t some later time when the City wants
it all done at once. So you /actually accomplishing two things with
the amendment.
Councilman Russo: So, presently, we are asking for it to be done
when the construction takes place.
City Attorney: Within a reasonable time of when the construction is
completed.
Councilman Russo: Presently, as constituted.
City Attorney: What the amendment is doing is allowing the City to
call it in later.
Councilman Russo: That is what I am being confused by.
City Manager: Presently, before you get a notice of final completion
you have to have your curb and gutter in.
Councilman Russo: Okay. Right now that is what is required. What
we are doing in here is giving the developer an option to do it at
some later date. Is that correct.
City Manager: If you adopt either Paragraph one or Paragraph two
you would be doing that, right. Or if you adopt both of them.
Councilman Russo: And what we are really accomplishing here more
than anything else is taking the burden of doing the match -up paving
off the City's back and putting it on the developer.
City Manager: The thing that I have advocated is that you do only
that and that you chuck the other two items.
Page 12
F
Councilman Mitchell:
In number two. . .
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
Councilman Russo: Can I ask you a question. I am still not sure
what your main objection to this is. Are you concerned about the
match -up paving.
Councilman Mitchell: No, I am not concerned about the match -up
paving.
Councilman Russo: Just the other two items.
Cpuncilman Mitchell: I am concerned about putting a piece of
garbage in the middle of the street that won't be used for twenty
years.
Mayor Thompson: Mr. Mitchell, what I think that what you are looking
for there is a repeal of the curb and gutter ordinance.
Councilman Mitchell: You know that is not true Mr. Thompson.
Mayor Thompson: Well, that is what you said.
Councilman Mitchell: That is not what I said. Not at all.
Mayor Thompson: That is what I heard.
Councilman Mitchell: The way this is written now it is a complete
subjective ordinance. And such agreement shall be secured by a lien
against property in an amount equal to the cost of installation.
Mayor Thompson: Well, if you don't like that then delete it.
Councilman Mitchell: Just a minute. And the match -up paving at
the time requested by the City. You could make a deal with a guy
and say tomorrow afternoon, I don't like you, put it in. Or if it
is a friend of yours, well that's alright Joe, you are a good kid.
I don't like subjective ordinances.
Mayor Thompson: Well, then let's have them put it in at the time of
completion. Don't give them an option. Build a house and put it in.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes, and I have seen businesses move out of
town because of that.
Mayor Thompson: This isn't in a business area. This is in a
residential area.
Councilman Mitchell: I have seen people go some place else because
of it.
City Manager: How could they. I just enforce this. I question, how
could they because every other jurisdiction has got this or a
stronger requirement.
Councilman Mitchell: Every other jurisdiction.
City Manager: Every other one, yes. People say no, but I am talking
about every other City. You name me a City that doesn't have this
requirement. There is none. There are none. Period.
Councilman Mitchell: Absolutely none.
City Attorney: If there are some, they are few.
City Manager: Certainly not around here in Southern California.
Councilman Mitchell: I will name you one right around close. A
town by the name of Norco.
Mayor Thompson: Just a minute. Let's get back to what we are
Page 13
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
supposed to be talking about. Do you want to continue this public
hearing, or close the public hearing, and. .
City Clerk: I thought you closed the public hearing.
Councilman Lowry: Let's close the public hearing. I move we close.
Mayor Thompson: Did we close it.
Councilman Russo: At 8:20.
City Clerk: At 8:19.
Councilman Mitchell: I would like to continue the public hearing.
Get some language in here that we can all live with.
Mayor Thompson: You can live with this. That is all you are doing
is adding match -up paving to something that is already existing.
Councilman Lowry: I move we close the public hearing.
Mayor Thompson: I understand it has already been closed at 8:20.
Councilman Mitchell: The public hearing is closed. Now we say if
we set it over or if we vote on it. I move we set it over.
Mayor Thompson: Do I hear a second.
Councilman Russo: Second.
City Clerk: Do you have a date you are setting it over to.
Councilman Mitchell: Why don't we set it for the first meeting in
November. I mean October.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, that
Ordinance No. 608, first reading, be held over until October 8.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
MOTION FAILED.
7. Appeal of Planning Commission Action Filed by Ruben H. Manzanares
Regarding Off -Site Improvement Requirements.
Continued to next regular meeting to be held on September 27, 1984.
8. Tentative Tract Map 20337 (Residential Tract Map 84- TM -2). Applicant:
Redlands Federal Financial Services, Inc. Location: South of 12th
Street on Olive Street.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:50 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: Is.there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak
against the tentative tract map 20337. Anyone in the audience wish
to speak against tentative tract map 20337.
Councilman Lowry: Is the developer here?
City Manager: No.
Councilman Lowry: I wanted to ask him some questions.
City Manager: As I say I am sure he figured there weren't going
to be any since the Commission and the Council has already approved
this once. It would be a blow I would tell you gentlemen.
Councilman Lowry: The problem is, Norm. You say the Council has
approved it once. I keep telling you, in my memory what the Council
approved is not what is stated in here as far as those drainage holes
Page 14
9.
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
in that wall. Four of them - if they get grass cuttings or some-
thing in a four inch hole, blocking them up, they are going to get
flooding down there. Now Dick Hammel and I went down there and
looked that thing all over and there were more than four holes going
to be provided in that wall along that property, and I know that.
City Manager: Councilman Lowry, I don't think in.the conditions
either previously or in this one there is any provision for any
holes. Now if I am wrong, I don't see them.
Councilman Lowry:
I read it to you.
City Manager: You read it in a flood control letter that has nothing
to do with the conditions. This is what I am telling you. I think
gentlemen, that another provision was made to take care of this
water and it has nothing to do with any holes in the wall, because
the Three Rings Ranch refused to accept any water off of this pro-
perty, so the provision was made to hold it on the property or take
it another direction.
Councilman Lowry: Oh, is that what the outcome was, because it was
going to drop it over on the Ring property. That wasn't brought
out in the study session when I brought this same thing up.
City Manager: No,.I didn't say that there, but what I did say was
that you had approved what the Commission had recommended pre-
viously and this is the same thing that they are recommending once
again.
Councilman Mitchell: Allow me to ask.
Mayor Thompson: Do you want to close the public hearing for discussion.
The public hearing has been closed at 8:53 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
Tentative Tract Map 20337.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
General Plan Amendments 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2. Location: Citywide.
Affecting R -3 Zoned Properties.
The Public Hearing was opened at 9:00 P.M.
City Manager: Just very briefly, gentlemen, this is - one new amend-
ment to the General Plan has been added and that is high density,
well I shouldn't say that either, it is low- medium has been added.
The high density category has been changed to increase to a maximum
of 32 units, with the other three representing the former categories
of use up from one to five, five to eight - I should say up to five,
up to eight and up to sixteen, and then the highest is up to thirty -
two. With the application of the low - medium being made to the former
medium density area, and the high density being applied in the
existing R -3 zones within the City of Beaumont. In a nutshell that
is the essence of it.
Mayor Thompson: Anyone in the audience wishing to speak in opposition
to the amendment to the General Plan as so stated.
Harold Blackaby, 662 Maple: How many.amendments to the General Plan
can you make legally, and how many have been made in this time
period.
Ron Larson, Planning Director: Four per year are permitted, and we
at the present time - you are permitted to make as many as you want
to at one point in time during the year. So far, counting the other
ones which are on your agenda tonight, there will be one. So we
still have four changes.
Page 15
I
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
Councilman Mitchell: Is that fiscal year or calendar year.
Mr. Larson: Calendar year.
Mayor Thompson: You are talking of four amendments to the General
Plan. Does that mean four per element, or for the whole plan.
Mr. Larson: For the whole.plan. In other words, tonight you have
84 -GP -1 and 2, you also have 84 -GP -4 and you have - maybe that is
all you have tonight. And those count as one change, and will be
the only ones that you have had during the year.
Mayor Thompson: Let me ask one other question, can we include 84-
GP-4 with 1 and 2.
Mr. Larson: Yes, they are deemed to be approved in one motion if
you do it all in the same period of time this evening.
Councilman Mitchell: What is GP -3.
Mayor Thompson: We don't have a GP -3 tonight. We have a GP -6
tonight, can we include that one also in this one.
Mr. Larson: Oh yes, that is the one I was looking for. 84 -GP -6
will also be included with GP -1, 2, 4 and 6.
Councilman Mitchell: What are the numbers we skipped.
Mr. Larson: Those are the ones which still - let's see - either they
have already - maybe they have already been approved at a previous
meeting.
Councilman Mitchell: I would like to find out.
Mr. Larson: Let me think now. There was the - they were either
approved at a previous meeting or coming up at a future meeting.
Councilman Mitchell: Well they are included then.
Mr. Larson: No, they would not be included with this.
Councilman Mitchell: Well if they were approved that would make
this number two.
Mr. Larson: Number two, right.
Unidentified speaker: Number three was Far West Development.
Mr..Larson: That's right. I believe Far West was approved at a
previous meeting.
Mayor Thompson: GP -3 was Far West.
Councilman Lowry: This would be amendment number two then.
Mr. Larson: Yes, this would constitute then a total of two General
Plan amendments for the year.
Councilman Mitchell: Is GP -5 in here.
Mr. Larson: No.
Councilman Mitchell: What was that.
Mr. Larson: I don't recall.
Councilman Mitchell: Does anyone recall what GP -5 was.
Mr. Blackaby: Mr. Mayor, the reason for my question was I understood
there were limits to plan amendments in each year, and we have had a
lot of them it seems to me.
Page 16
I
r
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
City Manager: You.have just heard how many we have had, and when
the limit has arrived there can't be any more. That is up to the
Planning Department to keep track of and if they fail to keep
track of them then they are in trouble.
Mayor Thompson: Did you say calendar year.
Mr. Larson: Right.
Councilman Russo: Question, how are we numbering these. Are we
numbering these by fiscal year or by calendar year.
Mr. Larson: By calendar year - 84. The 84 designates the calendar
year.
Councilman Mitchell: I think we had some - are you positive Ron?
Mr. Larson: That is the way the numbering system was set up. Every
application taken in after the first of the year is given that year's
designation.
Councilman Mitchell: Then there wasn't one General Plan change prior
to tonight for the year.
Mr. Larson: That would be correct - That would have been the Far
West.
Mayor Thompson: Okay, General Plan amendment on 4 was the circula-
tion element, and 6 is the Noble Creek Association at 8th and Xenia.
Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania: I would like somebody to describe a
change to me. What is a change. Are you saying that you can put 100
different items on that agenda and call it one change.
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
Mr. Gordon: Why do you number them consecutively if it is one change.
Mr. Larson: Because they can deal with several different items and
different properties. Basically, because the State Law provides
that you can take more than one action in a particular time period
and be able to count that as one General Plan amendment. And the
numbers that they are given corresponds to whether they are - the
differentiation between each of the different cases, whether they
are different pieces of property, whether they are textual amend-
ments to the ordinance or whether they are changes to the - to
different elements of the General Plan. So they are numbered differ-
ently for that reason, but they can be taken . . .
Councilman Mitchell: They don't need to be in one ordinance.
Mr. Larson: No. They are not done by ordinance, they are only done
by - General Plan amendments are only done by resolution.
Mr. Blackaby: In other words you are telling us that you can change
the whole General Plan if we. . .
Councilman Mitchell: Do it in one night.
Mr. Blackaby:. . .put it all under one wing as one amendment.
Mr. Larson: That is correct. That is essentially what you did when
you adopted the General Plan. You adopted the General Plan Land Use
Element. You adopted several other elements to the General Plan all
in one action. And that is essentially what we are doing now, we
are making several different changes to different portions of the
General Plan and its elements, but we are doing it all as one
action. This was provided for by the State of California Government
Code.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Let's see. Number 10 was the circulation
element, and item 11 here was the Noble Creek Association at 8th
and Xenia, and I have this letter regarding the development of the
Page 17
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
property at 8th and Xenia.
Councilman Lowry: Are you going to consider all three at the same
time. Is that what you are doing.
Mayor Thompson: I think what - do you want to consider them all
three at one time are individually.
Councilman Lowry: We have separate public hearings. Don't we have
to take each one.
City Manager: No, you can call all your hearings at one time.
Councilman Lowry: Oh, okay, fine.
City Clerk: Do we want to re -open the public hearing to include
item 10 and 11 please.
Mayor Thompson: Well, we opened the one on item nine at 9:00.
City Clerk: Right. Now we are including 10 and 11.
Mayor Thompson: We are including 10 and 11.
City Clerk: Thank you. The public hearing on all three was opened
at 9:00.
Councilman Mitchell: This is a public hearing now.
City Clerk: It has not been closed. It is still open on all three.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. Is there anyone else in the audience have
any questions.
Donna Kyle: Mayor Thompson.
Mayor Thompson: Come on up here Donna. I have your letter here in
my hand.
Donna Kyle: That is all I wanted to know. I just wondered if you
would answer those.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. This is a request from Donna Kyle. The
questions are - the corner of 8th and Xenia floods during moderate
and heavy rains. Are there plans by the developer and /or the City
to alleviate this problem? What are the plans and will they be com-
lpleted at the same time as the development? Do the plans include
a.safeguard for the homes east of Xenia on 8th?
City Manager: Nothing that property is going to do will affect
any of the waters flowing where they flow presently.
Councilman Lowry: They flow south on Xenia
Mrs. Kyle: It flows into our property.
City Manager: That is because it is coming off the property to the
north of you.
Mayor Thompson: Donna, come on up to the microphone and get your
name on the record. These questions are more properly asked at
the time, go ahead. . . give us your name and address.
Donna Kyle, 40571 E. 8th, Beaumont.
Mayor Thompson: These questions that you are asking are more pro-
perly asked at the time that the plans - the development plans are
submitted to the Planning Commission and the Planning Department.
Mrs. Kyle: We would like them included in the planning. The one
Page 18
® r
BeaL..int City Council
September 11, 1984
The one thing they used to do before we moved, and I think Council-
man May mentioned it one time, they used to take a bulldozer and
cut into our property to let the water drain from that big field
across the street when it would break over it would go into the
property, and when we moved in we asked that they not do that any
more, and I know that created a problem but I didn't think that
was really our problem.
City Manager: Well, that is the County's problem. It is not really
the City's, we were the recipient of it down at 6th and Xenia, but
it is not our problem up where it is created.
Mrs. Kyle: Except that now it is breaking over right across from
where that development will be and I am afraid. . .
Mayor Thompson: Well there is a program underway at this time in
cooperation with the County to upgrade the flood control channel
on 6th Street in cooperation with the County so that that water
that comes down Xenia across 8th Street in the area you are talking
about can be more properly handled. They are surveying now. They
are taking elevations.
City Manager: Well it is not going to correct any part of the pro-
blem over where Mrs. Kyle lives.
Mrs. Kyle: Except that the flooding has changed. I didn't know if
the City was aware of that. You know it used to flood down closer
to our house. Now, lately, it has been breaking closer to what
is going to be in your part of the City - on that chunk of Xenia.
Mayor Thompson: I know we fussed at the County and they came up
and did something, I don't know what it was.
Mrs. Kyle: I think they just pushed the dirt aside that the cows
come down and trample.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. But these questions that you are asking are
more properly asked at the Planning Department level.
Mrs. Kyle: Will they go there or do I have to re- submit.
Mayor Thompson: We can see that the planner gets a copy of these
questions.
Mrs. Kyle: Thank you very much.
Mayor Thompson: Do you want to close the public hearing. The Public
Hearing is closed at 9:15 P.M.
For the record, following is a listing of all agenda items being
considered at this time and on which the motion will be made.
9. General Plan Amendments 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2. Location: Citywide
Affecting R -3 Zoned Properties.
a. Adoption of Negative Declaration 84- ND -22.
b. Resolution No. 1984 -58 - Approving General Plan Amendments
84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2.
10. General Plan Amendment 84 -GP -4 Amending the Circulation Element.
a. Adoption of Negative Declaration 84- ND -23.
b. Resolution No. 1984 -59 - Approving General Plan Amendment
84 -GP -4 Amending the Circulation Element.
11. General Plan Amendment 84 -GP -6. Applicant: Noble Creek Associa-
tion, Inc. Location: Southwest corner of 8th Street and Xenia.
a. Reaffirm Negative Declaration 84 -ND -8 as approved by Council
on January 3, 1984.
Page 19
'IL
I f
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
b. Resolution No. 1984 -60 - Approving General Plan Amendment
84 -GP -6.
C. Ordinance No. 611 - First Reading - Rezoning Certain Property
from County R -3 to City R -3 (84- RZ -4).
Motion.by Councilman Lowry, second by.Councilman Russo, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84- ND -22, Negative Declaration 84- ND -23,
and to reaffirm Negative Declaration 84 -ND -8 as approved by the
Council on January 3, 1984; further to adopt Resolution No. 1984-
58 approving General Plan.Amendments 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2, Reso-
lution No. 1984 -59, approving General Plan Amendment 84 -GP -4
amending the Circulation Element, and Resolution No. 1984 -60,
approving General Plan Amendment 84 -GP -6; and to pass Ordinance
No. 611 at its first reading by reading of the title only.
'y Ordinance No. 611 was read by title only by Mayor Thompson.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
12. Request to Place Jazzercise Sign on City Property.
Motion by Councilman Russo to deny the request to place a Jazzer-
cise sign on City property died for lack of a second.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to grant the request to place a
Jazzercise sign on City property died for lack of a second.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to deny
the request to place a Jazzercise sign on City property.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
13. Written Communication re: Beaumont Stor -All.
At the request of Beaumont Stor -All this agenda item was continued
until the next regular scheduled meeting to be held on September
27, 1984.
14. Request by Robert Bridges for Funding of Separate Legal Counsel.
At the recommendation of the City Attorney, this agenda item was
continued to the next regular meeting pending receipt of a letter
from Mr. Bridges' attorney Martin Mayer stating that a conflict
exists.
15. Request from Inland Disposal, Inc. to Waive Requirement for a
Performance Bond.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, to deny the
request of Inland Disposal, Inc. to waive the requirement for a
�., Performance Bond.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
16. Request for Additional Funding, Community Involvement Program.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman} Mitchell, to auth-
orize three additional Community-Involvement Program meetings, with
appropriate funding as provided in the past, with the two remaining
Councilmen hosting one of the meetings, and the third meeting all
Councilmen attend.
Page 20
Beaumont City Council
September 11, 1984
6
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
17. Adjourn to Executive Session for Litigation Discussion at 10:06 P.M.
Reconvene to Regular Session at 10:23 P.M.
Let the record show the City Attorney presented items pertaining
to pending litigation with no action taken by the Council in the
Executive Session.
Date set for next regular Study Session, Thursday, September 27, 1984
at 6:30 P.M., in the City Manager's Conference Room.
Date set for next regular Council Meeting, Thursday, September 27,
1984, at 7:30 P.M., in the City Council Chambers.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned until Thursday, September 27, 1984, at 7:30
P.M.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
CITY CLER
FTY OF BEAUMONT
Page 21
f
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
SEPTEMBER 27, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Thursday,
September 27, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand W. W. Brewer, Ist Assembly of God.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Thompson.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Mitchell
and Mayor Thompson. Councilmen May and Russo were excused.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Ms. Patricia Renna, 987 E. 14th Street, Beaumont, addressed
the Council asking them to direct the Police Department to
enforce the violations of crosswalk right -of -way of the
pedestrian.
Ms. Renna was informed that orders had already been issued
to this effect, but since they are apparently still allowing
these violations of the law, that additional measures will
have to be taken to make sure they listen to the directives
that have been issued to them.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of City Council Meeting of September 11, 1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of September
4, 1984.
C. Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
September 27, 1984, in the amount of $44,177.62; and Payroll of
September 6, 1984, in the amount of $31,949.24.
e. ORDINANCE NO. 610 - SECOND READING - Rezoning Certain Property
from M -1 and RMH to City C -2. Change of Zone 84 -RZ -3. Location:
South of 6th Street, between Pennsylvania Avenue and East of
Xenia Avenue.
f. ORDINANCE NO. 611 - SECOND READING - Rezoning Certain Property
from County R -3 to City R -3. Change of Zone 84 -RZ -4. Location:
Southwest corner of 8th Street and Xenia Avenue.
g. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -62 - Providing for Defense by County Counsel
of Actions Brought by Certain Railroads Against the City.
h. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -63 - Accepting Grants of Easement -Sewer and
Ordering Recordation Thereof with the County Recorder. Assess-
ment District 1983 -1 - Cougar- Brookside Property Owners.
1. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -64 Amending Resolution No. 1972 -17, Section
13 -H to Provide for Standing in Alleys in the Commercial Zones
to Unload Commercial Goods.
j. Authorization to File Claim for Article 8 (Streets and Roads)
Funding.
k. Permission for Councilman May to be Absent from the State for a
Period of Ninety Days.
1. Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of September 1.8,
1984.
Page I
Bea�_.tont City Council
September 27, 1984
Let the record show Consent Calendar Item No. (d) - Ordinance No.
609 - Second Reading - was removed from the consent calendar and
continued to the regular meeting set for October 8, 1984.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to
approve the Consent Calendar as presented with the exception of
Consent Calendar Item No. (d), with Ordinance No. 610 and Ordin-
ance No. 611 being adopted at their second reading by reading of
the titles only.
The titles of Ordinance No. 610 and Ordinance No. 611 were read
by the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchel]. and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
3. ORDINANCE NO. 602 - FIRST READING - Establishing a Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission. (Continued from September 11, 1984).
Mayor Thompson gave a brief summary of the changes which had been
made to this ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to pass
Ordinance No. 602 at its first reading by reading of title only,
with the amendment made that the provision that this ordinance
shall apply to those parks of 100 or more rental spaces be elimi-
nated, Section 13.16.040, Paragraph (a), and all typographical
errors be corrected.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
4. ORDINANCE NO. 608 - FIRST READING - Amending Municipal Code Section
17.12.400, to Require Off -Site Improvements in Residential Areas
and to Permit Agreements for the Provision of Future Off -Site
Improvements.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to pass
Ordinance No. 608 at its first reading by reading of title only,
with the following amendments, Page 1, Line 22, insert the words
"not to exceed six months" after 'to so install within a reasonable
time'; and on Page 2, Line 10, after the word "subdivision" the
word "in" be changed to the word "and ", with all typographical
q errors to be corrected.
Councilman Lowry asked to re -state his motion. Councilman Mitchell
withdrew his second in deference to Mr. Lowry.
Motion by Councilman Lowry to pass Ordinance No. 608 at its first
reading by reading of title only, with the following amendments,
Page 1, Line 22, insert the words "not to exceed six months" after
"to so install within a reasonable time'; Page 1, Line 26, to
insert a period after the word "City ", and then deleting the balance
of Line 26, all of Line 27, Line 28 and Line 29, thereby eliminating
the provision for a lien against the property; and Page 2, Line
10, after the word "subdivision", the word "in" be changed to the
word "and ", with all typographical errors to be corrected.
MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN BY COUNCILMAN LOWRY.
This agenda item was continued until October 8, 1984.
5. Appeal of Planning Commission Action Filed by Ruben H. Manzanares
Regarding Requirement for Off -Site Improvements. (Continued from
September 11, 1984).
This agenda item was continued until October 8, 1984.
Page 2
Beat .)nt City Council
September 27, 1984
6. Zone Change No. 80 -RZ -1. Applicant: Stuart L. Buckalew. Location:
Between 8th and 6th Streets, bounded by Xenia Avenue on the west
and Allegheny Avenue on the east. Change of Zone from R -1 to R -3.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:25 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: We have exhibits showing that the public hearing was
duly noticed in a newspaper of general circulation. It was dated
9- 1.7 -84, and according to the report from the Planning Department,
this is primarily - well let me read it. This project is essentially
a "housekeeping" item since the application was received with fees
at an earlier time but was not processed. The former property owner
sold the property for taxes. The present owner of record is Nick
and Gary W. Przester, 644 Edgewood Drive, Goleta, California, 93117.
Since the property was intended to be R -3 upon annexation, staff feels
it is suitable to finish the processing on this property although
there are no eminent plans for development. So it is basically
following through on an application that was presented to the City in
1980, and it kind of got lost in the shuffle.
Are there any opponents to this zone change. Does everybody know
where it is. County property is on the north, City property is on
the south. This is where it is. This is 8th Street, Highland Springs
Road, this piece of property right in here has access on 8th Street
out, and back in 1980 they asked for R -3 zoning, paid their fees, and
everything had gone through, and they didn't follow up on it. Any-
body opposed to it. Anybody opposed. Anybody opposed to the zoning
change from R -1 to R -3 on 80 -RZ -1. Let the record show there were
no opponents to the zone change request. Under those circumstances
we will close the public hearing at 8:30 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to adopt
Negative Declaration No. 84 -ND -26 and pass Ordinance No. 612 at its
first reading by reading of title only.
Ordinance No. 612 was read by title only by the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
7. ORDINANCE NO. 613 - FIRST READING - Adding Chapter 9.30 to the Beaumont
Municipal Code Prohibiting the Discharge of Firearms in the City Limits.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to pass
Ordinance No. 613 at its first reading by reading of title only.
AYES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
Let the record show Ordinance No. 613 was read by title only by
Mayor Thompson.
8. Request by Robert Bridges for Funding of Separate Legal Counsel.
(Continued from September 11, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to approve
the request of Robert Bridges for separate legal counsel with a li-
mitation that the fee of his attorney per hour will be no greater
than the fee we are paying the law offices of Martin J. Mayer, who
jil was representing he and the other three people in the action on this
suit.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
Page 3
Beaur,)nt City Council
Sept _oer 27, 1984
9. Written Communication re: Beaumont Stor -All. (Continued from September
11, 1984).
This agenda item was continued until the City Attorney can submit a
report to the Council and a public hearing set sometime after November
15, 1984.
10. Request of Councilman Mitchell for CompI.ete Disclosure of Sewer
Construction Funds for Fiscal Years 82 -83, 83 -84 and 84 -85.
This agenda item was continued with Councilman Mitchell requested to
submit his request with precisely what he wants.
11. Offer of Dedication of Street Right -of -Way for Beaumont Avenue by
Nathan Guerriero.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to accept
the Offer of Dedication and Direct that it be recorded with the
County Recorder.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
12. Award of Bid - First Street Lift Station and Force Main Project.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to accept
the bid of Blackman Plumbing, Inc. for both schedule "A" and "B ", as
recommended by J. F. Davidson Associates' Report of September 21,
1984, and award the bid for the First Street Lift Station and Force
'v
Main Project for the amount of $138,834.40.
�� AYES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen May and Russo.
13. Request from Riverside County Fire Department for City Participation
in Hazardous Material Response Program.
This agenda item was continued until the regular meeting scheduled
for November 12, 1984. Let the record show November 12 is a City
holiday, therefore, this agenda item will be heard on November 13,
1-984.
14. Request to Purchase Cal -Trans Property.
This agenda item was continued to the regular meeting scheduled for
October 8, 1984.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:35 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
CITY CLERIC U
Page 4
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
NOVEMBER 26, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
November 26, 1984, in the City Council Chambers with Mayor Thompson
presiding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand Del Boatman.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
There were no requests to address the Council under Oral Communi-
cation.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of November 13,
1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting
of November 7, 1984.
C. Approval of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of November
26, 1984, in the amount of $39,320.18; and Payroll of November
159 1984, in the amount of $29,905.62.
d. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -72 - Amending Resolution Employing Engineers,
(Assessment District No. 1983 -1, Cougar- Brookside).
e. Report from City Attorney: Non - Conforming Use in the Residen-
tial Zones.
f. Report: Action of Planning Commission at Meeting of November
20, 1984.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to approve
Consent Calendar Items No. (a) through (f).
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. OUT OF SEQUENCE.
Appointment of Members of Mobile Home Rent Review Commission.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to appoint
Bob Miller and Thomas Parker as regular members to represent the
park owners and Marcia Schnippel and John D. Vaught as regular
members to represent the mobile home owners, with Lucille Rowe
appointed to serve as the alternate member representing the
mobile home owners.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to vote only on the regular members at this time, with a vote on
the alternate members at a later date DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page I
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
15. ADD ITEM.
Appointment of Fifth Member of Mobile Home Rent Review Commission.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to appoint
the Administrative Officer as named in Ordinance No. 602, as an
interim mediator until such time as the first petition is filed.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
_ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
3. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M.
Adoption of New Zoning Ordinance Text, Title 17 of the Beaumont
Municipal Code.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:15 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: There has been a public notice printed in a news-
paper of general circulation concerning the adoption of the new
zoning ordinance text. We will now open the floor for discussion.
Basically what Title 17 is, it has been working in the City for
about - how long, Ron - do you know. How long has the Planning
Commission been working on this ordinance. Three years. Two or
three years?
Ron Larson, Planning Director: About three years.
Mayor Thompson: It started as Ordinance No. 590, which was to re-
place Ordinance No. 490. It has now come to our attention, sent
up by the Planning Commission with a recommendation of adoption.
Ron do you have any input on this that you want for the public's
benefit. Any basic. . . Come on up and give us your name.
Ron Larson, Planning Director, City of Beaumont: The resolution
contains most of the requests of the City Council is to hold the
public hearing in accordance with law in the same fashion that
the Planning Commission has already held their hearings, and they
are requesting that the Negative Declaration be considered before
adoption of the Ordinance and that an ordinance amending Title 17
in its entirety providing for new land use, planning and zoning
regulations, also affixing of the proposed new zoning classifica-
tions to all property within the City of Beaumont and third, the
adoption of the new official zoning map reflecting those zoning
classifications.
The reason, primarily, that I see for the need for the new zoning
ordinance is to bring the zoning into consistency with the General
Plan. Up until the time of the consideration of this ordinance,
the zoning designations are different from the General Plan designa-
tions, and the standards that are recommended by the General Plan
have been incorporated into the new zoning text. So that is the
purpose. We basically want to update the ordinance, make it compa-
tible with the General Plan and to not only adopt the text, but
also apply those new zoning designations to the areas of the City
which have the most similar type of use - for instance, the R -1
would become RSF, Residential Single Family, and so on.
Mayor Thompson: The boundaries of those zones will remain essen-
tially the same.
Mr. Larson: The boundaries will remain the same, only the titles
will be changed.
Mayor Thompson: In spite of all the other deficiencies that you
have picked up already, it would be your recommendation that we
proceed, adopt it, and then surgically remove the warts as we go
along.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
Mr. Larson: Right. At the present time there are a pretty good number of
typographical errors in the ordinance which we have been going through in
the master text we have changed all through page 80, and we are continuing
to go through and edit the text to get rid of the typos and the portions
that are incorrect. Nothing of any substance will be changed, unless
requested by the City Council.
Mayor Thompson: Primarily, though, this ordinance has no surprises so far
as changing of zone boundaries or things like this.
Mr. Larson: No, there is no consideration of changing of boundaries. The
boundaries will stay the same.
Mayor Thompson: The basic use within those given zones is essentially the
same as it has been in the old zoning ordinance.
Mr. Larson: In some cases they are expanded, additional uses were pro-
vided; in other cases the list of uses may have shrunk, and then the
other uses are - there are more uses in the Conditional Use section which
require a show of proof for performance standards. One thing that the
ordinance does is provide for more performance standards, and updates the
- a lot of the requirements that are normally made today, but puts them
into writing into the code rather than, for instance, developers and
applicants having to find them when they get to the meetings. It stan-
dardizes most all the requirements.
Councilman Russo: Ron, when this is approved how long will it take to
revise the zoning map and have those available.
Mr. Larson: The zoning map - I am having a draft zoning map made up at
the present time. It has already been sent to the printers for them to
begin that, and all that they are doing is just taking the designations -
certain designations won't be changed at all, for instance, the RA stays
the same, and a few others, but those designations are being put on the
map and all it involves is just simply placing the - instead of an Rl it
will be called an RSF - instead R3, it would be RHD and manufacturing the
same way. Those designations are changed. I won't say the uses are
identical to what is in the code now because there were some changes, and
there were some uses that were eliminated, particularly in the manufacturing
zone.
Councilman Russo: What plans, if any, are we making to address along with
the zoning map descriptions of the zones and their uses. Will that be
available on the map also. Are we going to make a map that is going to
be packageable for somebody coming into the City that wants a zoning map,
will they be available to someone.
Mr. Larson: What we are planning - what I am planning to do is to get the
new zoning map adopted. Also have reductions made which are a more manage-
able size for persons that come in and purchase them - also they will be
cheaper. And then also have excerpts of the code available, so that if
somebody wants information on the commercial section they don't have to
buy the whole zoning code in order to find out the information that they
need for it. And we will have various portions of the code made up that
way.
Mayor Thompson: Does anybody else have a question for Ron.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Larson. What your basic plan is - I read
through the revised ordinance. There are a number of areas in there that
I believe need further modification, but in the light of expediency to
get the conformity with the General Plan, I can see no harm in adopting
with the thought in mind of making those other corrections as to the
volume of parking and so forth. There are a number of those that are a
little bit on the weak side, and so if we go ahead with those. And then
you are going to try to follow similar to other jurisidetions of giving
a package for each specific one that comes in so they have it along with
their application so that know what the rules and regulations are.
Page 3
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
Mr. Larson: Correct. It helps the applicant and it also helps us because
we get it in more correctly.
Councilman Mitchell: I believe if you had done the whole thing it would
have been better. But you got in in the middle of it.
Mr. Larson: Right. I frankly didn't go through and make any major changes
to the ordinance because I felt that since the Planning Commission had been
considering it for such a long period of time that I wasn't going to in-
terfere with it to that extent. There may be some other changes that I
may be recommending in the future though.
Mayor Thompson: Anyone else.
Councilman Lowry: Well, he and I had a long discussion today, so he has
got notes.
City Attorney: Tonight is the first chance I have had to look at it. In
adopting the ordinance are we also adopting the zoning map.
Mr. Larson: Yes. That is what the resolution from the Planning Commission
- we are requesting that the ordinance text - that the - a rezoning action
be taken to apply the zone classifications to the parcels in the City and
also adopt the zoning map. It may not be possible to do that all in one
action.
City Attorney: They can all be done in one action. My only concern is
if there is not a zoning map that you can look at, and you have indicated
there are some changes of substance, can you adopt a zoning map that
isn't put before the body.
Mr. Larson: Yes. Part of the staff report that was written on it I lined
out the uses that would be - and the changes that would be made. If these
are designated to be the designations of changes, say, Rl to RSF, RMH to
RMF, R3 to RHD, if this is stated as part of the ordinance to implement it
- all that would be necessary is the adoption of the map in accordance
with these designations.
City Attorney: So there are no changes of current zones in the sense the
boundaries are already established - you have not moved you have merely
redesignated existing zones with either more restrictive or less restric-
tive classifications depending on the definitions.
Mr. Larson: Right. The ones that are shown here are virtually identical
to the existing zones. But they do have additional standards.
City Attorney: Okay. Then there is no problem. That was why. . .
City Manager: I was just going to add that what Ron is really saying is
that there is no consistency zoning here by this action with the General
Plan. All he is doing here is making this new zoning ordinance conform,
or he is bringing the existing zoning map into conformance with the new
zoning designations, and not applying zoning designations differently
than what already exist.
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: Mr. Larson. In essence you are changing the basic
identification of each of these zones - Rl, R3 and so forth and so on -
to other numerical designations - or letter or numerical designations.
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
Councilman Mitchell: This is the portion that is being changed on this
map.
City Attorney: Are there, at this time then, zone classifications which
are not assigned anywhere in the City.
Page 4
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
Mr. Larson: There are zone classifications in the text of the ordi-
nance which will not be assigned because they are not presently -
or nothing similar to them - is presently existing. For instance,
the residential planned development zone. There is not any area
in the City presently zoned that so we will not be applying that.
City Attorney: So we are not attempting to conform with the
General Plan in the proposals therein in doing this - to the
extent of actually changing the map.
Mr. Larson: That is correct.
City Manager: Not in this action.
City Attorney: Then any question that I had about the map I withdraw.
That was my concern.
Mayor Thompson: Any other questions. Any member of the audience who
wishes to speak on this subject. Do members of the audience under-
stand what was said up here - what was going on - what Mr. Larson
said and the Attorney. Members of the Council do you have any
questions or comments. The recommendation is that the Title 17 -
the proposed amendments to Title 17 be adopted in its entirety.
Do you have any questions on that. Any further comment. Hearing
no further comment we will close the public hearing at 8:30 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to adopt
Negative Declaration No. 84- ND -29, and to pass Ordinance No. 590
amending Title 17 of the Beaumont Municipal Code in its entirety
�rf providing new land use, planning and zoning regulations, affixing
new zoning designations to all property within the City of Beaumont,
at its first reading by reading of the title only, and further
adopt the official zoning map as set forth in the recommendations
to conform with the new designations.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
Negative Declaration 84- ND -30. Applicant: Mini -Max Company.
Location: 1535 - 6th Street between 6th and Freeway.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:33 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: We have a notice of public hearing published in a
newspaper of general circulation dated 11- 16 -84. For the informa-
tion of the public the subject is a mini - warehouse storage facility
consisting of five buildings with a total of 127,425 square feet of
area and 227 parking spaces, landscaping and block wall. 84- SP -11.
The applicant is Mini -Max Company, John Harding, Agent, Rancho
California Road in Temecula. Location of the property is 1535 East
6th Street between 6th Street and the freeway. Is that the one
right next to the vacant land next to Stater Brothers out there.
City Manager: No. Next door to the existing swap meet.
Mayor Thompson: The next one up - east?
City Manager: East.
Mayor Thompson: Okay. You had a question. Oh, okay, I thought
he had a question. We have the recommendation of - or the report
from the Planning Commission on this, which has been extensively
gone through hasn't it Ron.
Councilman Lowry: The only question I have is that I don't see a
55 foot setback.
Page 5
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
Mayor Thompson: That is part of the public hearing. We will bring
that up in a minute. This has been extensively researched, gone
through, everything complies with the zoning and everything like
that.
Mr. Larson: That is correct and the conditions were applied to
the property which includes all the fire department conditions.
The site plan was approved by the Planning Commission. Unless the
City Council wants to appeal it to themselves that is the final
action except that the negative declaration is what is being re-
quested to be approved by the City Council.
Mayor Thompson: The Negative Declaration.
Mr. Larson: The reason for that is that in order to allow sufficient
time for public review of the negative declaration, this way by
having the City Council review and approve all of the negative
declarations, whether or not the case - like a site plan or some-
thing else - which is normally approved - or a CUP which is
normally approved just by the Planning Commission, it allows
sufficient time for public review, and also then the Notice of
Determination can be made. So it is primarily the environmental
that we are asking you to review and approve.
Mayor Thompson: Is there anyone from the public that wishes to have
input in this public hearing concerning the Mini -Max - mini - warehouse
facility at 1535 E. 6th Street. Anybody in the audience that wishes
to have input. You had a question, Bill.
Councilman Lowry: Well, in the study session we asked a question
about what the setback was, and the City Manager said it was 55
feet, and the plan only says 25 feet. It seems to me that that is
in conflict with our ordinance on the setbacks in the City. Unless
the City Manager was mistaken about the setback on 6th Street.
City Manager: The setback on all commercial is 55 feet.
Councilman Lowry: 55 feet.
City Manager: Unless otherwise provided by the Commission. They
don't have any buildings within this 55 feet do they.
Councilman Lowry: Sure. Here is the property line. I don't know
what this is back to the wall, unless that is five feet. Then it
is 25 feet to the front of the building. It is either 25 feet or
30 feet. It is probably 30 feet.
Mayor Thompson: We are talking about a negative declaration for
environmental purposes right now.
Councilman Lowry: Well if we approve this, we will have approved
the action of the Planning Commission and it becomes an approved. . .
Mayor Thompson: George, maybe you can answer his question.
City Attorney: The approval of the site plan is up to the Planning
Commission. According to what Ron has stated it has already been
approved by the Planning Commission.
City Manager: Unless jurisdiction is transferred to yourself.
City Attorney: Yes. Unless you request that you want to handle
it.
Councilman Lowry: Well what if it is in conflict with an ordinance
though, which states that the setback is 55 feet. I am just asking
a question.
City Attorney: Have we established that it is definitely in conflict.
I think the Planning Director is better equipped to answer that than
I am.
Page 6
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
Mr. Larson: This is the reason for the site plan review. That you
review it to see if it is in accordance with code, and if there is
any reason for it not to be - the variance, for instance, if they
had requested - if a side yard setback, or rear yard setback, or
even if parking wasn't sufficient, it would still be approved by
the Planning Commission and the variance would be built into it.
In this particular case there was no good reason to have a 50 foot
setback in the front yard area, because this type of a use is
totally different from the type where you would normally want to have
a setback in order to have room for parking at the front of the pro-
perty.
Councilman Lowry: Well that is one analysis. The other analysis
is the aesthetic value of the thing and I made a comment in the
study session that over in Calimesa they have these, a number of
them, along the freeway. But the property along Calimesa Boulevard
they are not allowed to build it right out - you know. And if they
had a 55 foot setback they could put an office building or something
in that 55 feet, possibly - trying to hide it, because, let's face
it, it don't help the aesthetic value of the City. I am not against
having the improvement to the City except, as I say I want to bring
up that point so that everybody is aware of it.
Councilman Russo: Under the new Title 17 that we just passed, what
would be the zoning. C -2 - the same.
Mr. Larson: C -G - General Commercial.
,Councilman Mitchell:
applicant shall make
sewer system. Now t
Mr. Davis, that runs
serve that property,
conform to "a".
There is another point here in 13.3. The
application and hook -up to the Beaumont City
he gravity line, I was told this evening by
down to the lift station, which would have to
is uphill from the property. Now how does he
Mr. Larson: Okay. This would be applicable if and when sewer is
available.
Councilman Mitchell: The sewer is there now. We spent $318,000
to put a sewer there.
Mr. Larson: Within 200 feet.
Councilman Mitchell: Within about 75 feet, but it is uphill.
Mr. Larson: I see.
Councilman Mitchell: According to what Mr. Davis told me in study
session.
City Manager: But it is not available.
Councilman Mitchell: Well, that should be eliminated. Why should
a man make an application, put up $1,000 to hook into a sewer that
he can't hook into.
City Manager: You can't make him hook into something he can't use.
Councilman Mitchell: Why should he make application. It shouldn't
be in there.
Mr. Larson: That is correct. That should have been taken out.
Councilman Mitchell: No. "a" should be deleted.
Mayor Thompson: Anything else.
Councilman Mitchell: There is another one I would like to ask you.
On this particular condition, on 13.2(a). Prior to the issuing of
a building permit the following conditions - improvement plan shall
Page 7
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
be submitted and approved for sidewalks, concrete curb /gutter and
match -up paving, and driveway approach along 6th Street. All
plans shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and shall
be done in accordance with the detailed drawings of Riverside County
road improvement. Now our engineer has all determination points.
He has all specs and everything else. Why should these people be
required to have a civil engineer to do the work that can be
furnished by our engineer and we can bill them for our engineer
doing that particular work. Instead of the duplication of their
doing the engineering, then have him look at it, and then they
both look at the same book and it comes directly out of the book
exactly what has to be done. It seems like it is putting an un-
reasonable burden, and I believe the developer would be willing to
pay a reasonable fee to our engineer for doing that particular
section.
Mayor Thompson: George.
City Attorney: My concern with that - first comes to mind is
whether or not if the City did that we would not then be assuming
an additional liability in the event of improper design.
Councilman Mitchell: The County of Riverside does it.
City Manager: No they do not.
Councilman Mitchell: I beg your pardon. I will bring in some
maps tomorrow if you want to see it.
City Manager: That is not true, Mr. Mitchell.
Mayor Thompson: You said that this could incur an excess of liability
to the City.
City Attorney: That was my initial concern, yes.
Mayor Thompson: Okay.
Councilman Mitchell: If it is drawn to the specifications of the
Riverside County, then would not everyone be potential liability
if they follow exactly those plans, which the engineer will be
required to do.
City Attorney: Are those plans laid out that specific.
Councilman Mitchell: Yes, they are specific.
City Attorney: I thought the requirement was that the engineer
also planned lay -out the entry way, the driveway and other
approach items that I shouldn't think would be included in the plan.
City Manager: Riverside County will accept absolutely no plans from
anyone that are not completed by a registered civil engineer of your
own choosing, and definitely not performed by the County of Riverside.
They will only be checked by the County of Riverside.
Councilman Mitchell: May I make one observation, and I will bring
it in for you to see. Encroachment plans, sidewalk, curb and
gutter that were drawn and made a condition out in Cherry Valley,
right across from the shopping center, and the County gave us those
and said this is exactly what you are going to do, and we never had
an engineer and we accepted their drawings. That is why I say we
could do the same thing here and save a great deal of problem and
a great deal of back and forth. . .
Councilman Russo: Can't we resolve this by just looking into and
seeing if it is possible.
Mayor Thompson: We adopted the Riverside County Road Improvement
Standards many years ago.
City Manager: It is just not done in any jurisdiction.
Page 8
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
Mayor Thompson: Basically, what we are doing here is adopting a
negative declaration. The conditions of approval were - which
.one was it that we were talking about that - under these conditions,
Ron, which one was it.
Mr. Larson: The condition pertaining to the sewer.
Mayor Thompson: Are there any other questions on this. Anybody from
the public who has any questions on this. Let's close the public
hearing - any objections to closing the public hearing. Let's
close the public hearing at 8:47 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84- ND -30, subject to attached standards.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to amend
4 Councilman Russo's motion, to direct the City Manager to notify the
,'developer of the problem of the fire flow water.
a'
(Councilman May left his seat at 8:49, returning at 8:50 P.M.)
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
5. PUBLIC HEARING - Change of Zone 84 -RZ -6 from R -3 Multi - Family Resi-
dential to RMH, Mobile Home Park. Applicant: Thomas Shelton.
Location: Southeast corner of Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way.
6. PUBLIC HEARING - Tentative Parcel Map 20539. Applicant: Michael
and Guitana Baldi. Location: 448 feet south of 13th Street ex-
tending between Euclid and Beaumont Avenue.
Agenda Item No. 5 was continued to the regular Council meeting of
December 10, 1984.
Agenda Item No. 6 was continued to the regular Council meeting of
January 14, 1985.
7. Confirmation of Declaration and Certification of Election Results
for the Special Consolidated Municipal Election Held on November 6,
1984 and Call for Special Municipal Election to be Held February 5,
1985; and Order of City Clerk Fixing Candidate's Regulations, Per-
taining to Special Municipal Election of February 5, 1985.
The City Clerk read all Declarations and Orders pertaining to the
Special Consolidated Municipal Election held on November 6, 1984
and the Special Municipal Election to be held February 5, 1985
into the record in their entirety.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to confirm
the Declarations and Orders of the City Clerk as read into the
record.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Page 9
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
The City Clerk read the Order of City Clerk Fixing Candidate's Re-
gulations, Pertaining to Special Municipal Election of February 5,
1985 into the record in its entirety.
Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman May, to confirm the
order of the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
8. Waiver of Encroachment Permit Fees.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to direct
the City Attorney to amend Title 12 of the Municipal Code to provide
that the City Engineer may waive encroachment permit fees for a
non- profit public district utility subject to appeal to the City
_, Council in the event of denial by the City Engineer.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
9. The report from the City Manager concerning the contract for Waste-
water Design Services was ordered filed.
10. Proposed County Wide Meeting. Appointment of Representative to
Attend Special Meeting.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to support
a county wide meeting to be scheduled for January 18, 1985, and
to appoint the City Manager to attend this meeting as representa-
tive for the City of Beaumont.
u.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
t% NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
11. Request to Bid Block Retaining Wall at City Lot on Orange Street.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
continue this request to the first meeting in January.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
12. Report: Financial Services for Wastewater Treatment Plant #2.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to con-
tinue this agenda item until the first meeting in January.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
13. Request for Reconsideration of Ordinance No. 608 by Councilman
R Mitchell; Report from City Attorney.
^r Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to grant the
j request for reconsideration of the first reading of Ordinance No.
608.
Page 10
Beaumont City Council
November 26, 1984
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney was directed to make the changes discussed and
bring Ordinance No. 608 back for its first reading at the next
regular meeting.
16. Cal Petro Pre - Payments.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, that pre-
payments to Cal Petro be authorized as follows:
1. To Cal Petro and Gas Boy, for $13,000.00 plus.
2. To Cal Petro and PDI, for $25,000.00 plus.
3. To Cal Petro and Marvin Biggers, for $3,800.00.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mayor Thompson announced that since the second Council meeting in December
falls on Christmas Eve, the second meeting has been tentatively set for
Thursday, December 20, 1984.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was
adjourned at 9:37 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Irene J ed S eeney, City Clerk
Page 11
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 10, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a Regular Meeting at 7:30 P.M., Monday,
December 10, 1984, in the City Council Chambers with Mayor Thompson presiding.
The Invocation was given by Pastor Dean Belleau.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Thompson.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman Lowry was excused.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
There were no requests to address the Council under Oral Communication.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of November 26,
1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting
of November 20, 1984.
C. Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
December 10, 1984, in the amount of $136,446.56; and Payroll
of November 29, 1984, in the amount of $32,156.25.
d. Request for Budget Adjustment for Additional Funds Required
to Complete Installation of New Fuel Dispensing System.
e. Request for Budget Adjustment for Cost of Installation of Seven
Backflow Prevention Devices per State Health Code.
f. Approval of Payment of Warrants for Assessment District 1983 -1.
g. Report: Action of Planning Commission at Meeting of December
4, 1984.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to approve
Consent Calendar Items (a) through (g).
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
3. ORDINANCE NO. 608 - FIRST READING - Amending Municipal Code Section
17.12.400, To Require Off -Site Improvements in Residential Areas and
to Permit Agreements for the Provision of Future Off- -Site Improve-
ments.
V Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to pass
Ordinance No. 608 at its first reading by reading of the title
�✓ only.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
4. r_. ORDINANCE NO. 614 - FIRST READING - Adding to Municipal Code Section
12.12.160, To Allow for a Waiver of Fees for Non - Profit Public
Utilities District.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to pass
Ordinance No. 614 at its first reading by reading of the title
only.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
6. OUT OF SEQUENCE.
RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -73 - A Resolution of Intention to Order Aban-
donment of Portion of Chestnut Avenue, Setting Time and Date of
Public Hearing.
'Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -73, with the inclusion to read from 5th Street
1
to 13th Street on Chestnut Avenue.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
7.' Request from Mr. and Mrs. Joe Vrzal for Reimbursement for Cleaning
Expenses Due to Sewer Back -Up.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to continue
this agenda item until the next regular Council meeting so that
Larry Laws may be present to respond to questions.
AYES: Councilmen May and Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
MOTION FAILED.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to reimburse the $125.00 to Mr.- Vrzal
and the problem to be solved in the future DIED FOR LACK OF A
SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Russo to deny the request DIED FOR LACK OF A
SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to continue
this agenda item until the first meeting in February after the spe-
cial election (February 11, 1985).
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
8. Request from Mr. and Mrs. Don Hinze for Reimbursement for Cleaning
Expenses Due to Sewer Back -Up.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to continue
y++, this agenda item until the first meeting in February after the spe-
cial election (February 11, 1985).
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
" NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
5. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Change of Zone 84 -RZ -6 from R -3 Multi
Family Residential to RMH Mobile Home Park. Applicant: Thomas
Shelton. Location: Southeast corner of Beaumont Avenue and Cougar
Way. (Continued from November 26, 1984).
The Public Hearing was re- opened at 8:10 P.M., and at the request
of the applicant was continued to the regular meeting of December
20, 1984. Hearing continued at 8:11 P.M.
Page 2
9. Report: Bid Received for Materials Storage Building, Public Works
Yard.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to continue
this agenda item until March 1, 1985.
AYES:
041: NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
10. Request to
Councilmen May, Russo and Mitchell.
Mayor Thompson.
None.
Councilman Lowry.
Hire Temporary Engineering Assistance.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May to approve
request of the City Engineer for temporary engineering assistance,
and further approve budget transfer as requested.
4�
11\�, Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Russo's motion
., that the appropriation for the temporary engineering assistance
be $12.50 DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
11. Request from Councilman May for Consideration of Walkway /Bikeway
on 6th Street.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to continue this agenda item until
the first meeting in March DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
This agenda item was referred to the City Engineer for a report to
be brought to the Council the first meeting in January.
12. Request for Authorization to Retain Book Publishing Company to
Prepare Supplements for Beaumont Municipal Code.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to continue this agenda item until
the first meeting in March DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
- }} Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to grant the
request to approve entering a contract with Book Publishing Company
for providing supplements to.the municipal code.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
13. Request from Mayor Thompson for Reconsideration of Agenda Item No.
12 from November 26 agenda - Financial Services for Wastewater
Treatment Plant #2.
The request for reconsideration was withdrawn by Mayor Thompson.
14. Notification from CableVision of 1985 Rate Increase was ordered
filed.
15. Negative Declaration 84- ND -33. Project Name: RV Sales and Service.
Project Location: 1375 East 6th Street.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84- ND -33.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1 r'
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
,,ABSENT: Councilman Lowry.
1 �y
Page 3
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 20, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:30 P.M., Thursday,
December 20, 1984, in the City Council Chambers with Mayor Thompson pre -
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Russo.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Thompson.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Russo, Mitchell
and Mayor Thompson. Councilmen Lowry and May were excused.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Richard A. Testerman, 749 Michigan Avenue, addressed the
Council reading from a prepared statement concerning the en-
vironmental impact of All Pure Chemical Company and Westinghouse,
which statement was given to the City Clerk and is a matter of
record in the file.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of December 10,
1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting of
December 4, 1984.
C. Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
December 20, 1984, in the amount of $30,020.52; and Payroll of
December 13, 1984, in the amount of $30,028.65.
d. ORDINANCE NO. 590 - FIRST READING - Amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code in its Entirety, Providing New Land Use Planning
and Zoning Regulations, Affixing New Zoning Designations to all
Properties Within theCity of Beaumont, Adoption of Official Map
Reflecting Same, and Repealing all Previously Adopted Provisions
of Title 17 and Ordinance No. 490. 1 1
e. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -74 - Transferring a Portion of the Private
Activity Bond Allocation of the City of Beaumont, California.
f. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -75 - Consenting and Authorizing Submittal
of Annexation Application of Uninhabited Territory (Beaumont
Annexation No. 84- ANX -5 -36) Hemsley /Mariani.
g. Request for Budget Adjustment - Drafting and Reproduction
Services for General Plan Update and Zoning Map Update.
h. Request from Management Bargaining Group to Re -Open Negotiations.
i. Report: Planning Commission Action at Meeting of December 18,
1984.
NOTE: Councilman Mitchell requested that Item 2.c - Approval of
Warrants and Payroll - be removed from the Consent Calendar
so that it may be voted on separately.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item 2.c.
AYES: Councilmen Russo,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
and May.
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
December 20, 1984
2.c Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
December 20, 1984, in the amount of $30,020.52; and Payroll of
December 13, 1984, in the amount of $30,028.65.
Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Russo, that
warrants as audited per warrant list of December 20, 1984 and
payroll of December 13, 1984, be approved as submitted.
AYES: Councilman Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry and May.
3. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -76 - Approving Agreement for Sharing Cost of
State Highway Electrical with the State of California Acting by
and Through the Department of Transportation for Cost Sharing of
State Highway in the City of Beaumont.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -76.
C.! h
AYES: Councilmen Russo,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman Lowry
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
and May.
4. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. - Change of Zone 84 -RZ -6. Applicant:
Thomas Shelton. Location: Southeast Corner of Beaumont Avenue
and Cougar Way. (Continued from December 10, 1984).
a. Adoption of Negative Declaration 84- ND -31.
b. Review of Change of Zone 84 -RZ -6.
At the request of the applicant, this public hearing was continued
until the regular meeting of January 14, 1985.
5. Appeal of Planning Commission Action of December 4, 1984. Site Plan
84- SP -13. Applicant: All Pure Chemical. Location: B Street and
Minnesota.
a. Adoption of Negative Declaration 84- ND -34. (Continued from
December 10, 1984). }
b. Review of Site Plan 84- SP -13.
Members of the audience speaking to this issue are as follows:
Mr. Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania, Beaumont.
Mr. Martin F. Young, 2290 So. Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Springs.
Ms. Carolyn Taenjes, 1863 Park Drive, Palm Springs.
Mr. Scott Harris, 870 Michigan, Beaumont.
Ms. Dolly Irwin, Banning, Ca.
Their testimony is a matter of record on the tape of this meeting
and is available should a transcript of this testimony be desired.
Motion by Councilman Russo to refer this agenda item to counsel
for a legal opinion as to what options the City has open in
relationship to denying a negative declaration, DIED FOR LACK OF
A SECOND.
Motion by Councilman Russo to hold the matter over until the next
regularly scheduled council meeting DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Motion by Mayor Thompson to adopt Negative Declaration 84 -ND -34
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
At this point Mayor Thompson requested the Council to review the
site plan, as he had appealed the Planning Commission action.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
December 20, 1984
Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Russo, to return
the site plan to the Planning Commission for consideration of
. the circulation element on B Street in regard to emergency vehi-
cles and ingress and egress to the site.
AYES: Councilman Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry and May.
As no decision could be reached on Negative Declaration 84- ND -34,
this matter was ordered continued to the next regular meeting on
January 14, 1985 by Mayor Thompson.
6. Consideration of Allowing Either Half Day or Full Day Holiday on
December 24 for Employees (1984 only).
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
allow one -half day holiday on December 24 for employees for
1984 only.
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry and May.
7. Assignment of Martinelli vs City of Beaumont to Legal Counsel.
Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Russo, that assign-
ment of Martinelli vs the City of Beaumont be to the firm of
Martin J. Mayer with reservation of rights per recommendation of
the City Attorney.
AYES: Councilman Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry and May.
8. Request of Officers Van Buren, Acosta and Augustyn that City
Provide Legal Counsel in Martinelli vs City, et al.
Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Mitchell, that the
City provide legal counsel in the case of Martinelli vs City, et
al., to Officers Van Vuren, Acosta and Augustyn by the firm of
Martin J. Mayer, with reservation of rights.
AYES: Councilmen Russo,
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
and May.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 8:45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
J 'd -4 4 J_A - �Jfi'
Deputy City Clerk
Page 3
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
JANUARY 9, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
January 9, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Pastor Dean R. Belleau, Seventh Day Adventist
Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman May.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of December 27, 1983 and Adjourned
Meeting of December 29, 1983, were approved as submitted.
2. There being no objections, the Minutes of Regular Planning
Commission meeting of December 20, 1983, were accepted as submitted.
3. On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, warrants
as audited per Warrant List of January 9, 1984, in the amount of
$27,075.81; and Payroll of December 29, 1983, in the amount of
$27,237.44, were approved for payment as audited.
4.
5.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
a. Mr. Steven W. Douglas, 826 Maple, #4, addressed the Council
regarding the current economic situation in the community,
and expressing the fact that if the prison is going to help
Beaumont with additional revenue and jobs into the community,
then he is for the prison.
b. Mr. Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania Avenue, addressed the
Council asking the City Attorney if a ruling concerning the
$2,700 given to the Chamber of Commerce had been made, and
was advised by the City Attorney that a ruling had been made,
although it had not been reduced to writing at this time, but
it was his determination that the law as submitted by Mr.
Mitchell was correct as phrased, however, the facts of this
particular situation does not indicate that the Council
committed an illegal violation.
ORDINANCE NO. 572.1 - SECOND READING - Amending Ordinance 572 to
Include Commercial and Industrial Zones.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 572.1 at its
second reading by title only.
AYES: C
Councilmen Lowry, M
Page 1
6. ORDINANCE NO. 587 - SECOND READING - To Codify the Ordinances of the
City of Beaumont.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 587 at its
second reading by title only.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 1983 -63 - Regarding Policies and Procedures Governing
Conflicts of Interest of City Officials and Employees. (Continued
/ from December 27, 1983).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1983 -63.
1, Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion to
delete certain sections of the proposed Resolution.
DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
8. RESOLUTION NO. 1983 -69 - Consenting and Authorizing Submittal of
Annexation Application of Uninhabited Territory (Beaumont Annexation
No. 32). (Continued from December 29, 1983).
V) On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1983 -69.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
MOTION CARRIED.
9. Clarification of Council Action Concerning 6th Street Median Design
Change, Requested by Mr. Bob Miller.
A number of Beaumont business people located on 6th Street, as well
as other interested citizens, addressed the Council regarding this
issue. Since this is not a public hearing their testimony will not
be recorded here, however, it is a matter of record on the tape.
Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, directing
that the 6th Street median be redesigned to leave all existing
crossovers, with the west end of the median project being modified
to allow access to the Rusty Lantern restaurant, incorporating all
safety features necessary.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to amend
Councilman Russo's motion adding that the 6th Street Improvement
contract be renegotiated to consider elimination of curbs and pave
the strip in the center area for turnoffs from Beaumont Tire to
Pennsylvania Avenue, with proper designs to accommodate the merchants
in the area.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: Councilman May.
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO TIE VOTE.
Page 2
10.
11.
12.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: Councilman May.
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
Request for Amendment to Agreement for Sewer Service - Highland
Springs Village, Phase II. (Continued from December 29, 1983).
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the recommendation
of the City Attorney as contained in his letter of December 27,
1983, and further authorizes the City Attorney to mail his
suggested letter.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Request from Councilman Russo to Appoint a Law Review Commission.
(Continued from December 29, 1983).
This agenda item was continued until the regular meeting of January
23, 1984.
Request for Reimbursement of Business License Fee.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
'A City Council of the City of Beaumont authorizes the Finance Depart-
ment to reimburse business license fee in the amount of $60.00 to
Willie Henderson, to be taken from Line Item No. 01- 009 -201.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
13. Request from Cherry Festival Association for Fee - Exempt Use of City
Facilities and Permit for 1984 Cherry Festival Parade.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont grants the request of the
Cherry Festival Association for fee - exempt use of all of Stewart
Park and the.front lawn of City Hall for the 1984, 1985 and 1986
+� Cherry Festivals, with the Cherry Festival Association paying the
City $100.00 to cover utility costs for the carnival at the 9th
Street ballpark; and further gives permission to hold the Cherry
Festival parade on City streets for which the City will provide
f police support; with the Cherry Festival Association to provide a
l` $1,000,000 liability insurance policy naming the City as an
additional insured and providing trash clean -up along the parade
route and the carnival grounds.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. Consideration of Transit Vehicle Maintenance Agreement Between City
of Beaumont and Cabazon Senior Center.
On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont approves the Vehicle Maintenance
Agreement between the City of Beaumont and the Cabazon Senior
�. Center subject to a paragraph containing a hold - harmless clause
and an additional insured clause being added to the agreement.
Page 3
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
15. Consideration of Exchange of Properties with the Beaumont Unified
School District.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman Lowry, it is
directed that Councilman May, Councilman Mitchell and City Manager
Davis make arrangements to meet with the Beaumont Unified School
33 Board as a committee to consider exchange of property with the
h Beaumont Unified School District.
' AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
16. Recommendation on Bid, Project 8307 - Michigan Avenue Improvements.
(Continued from December 12, 1983).
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont directs the City Engineer to
make specifications to do the Michigan Avenue project by the
petromat system so a'competitive bid may be obtained.
r
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
17.
�, i�
.1
no
Acceptance of Cherry Avenue Sewer Project and Authorization for
Recordation of Notice of Completion.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the work performed by
United "M" Construction on Project No. 8302, HUD Project No. B
82UC 060506, and authorizes recordation of the Notice of Completion
and final payment of $17,335.42 upon the expiration of the 35 day
period as required by the specifications.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of January 3, 1984
was ordered filed.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 10:18 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
I ENE JO C9 SWEENEY, CITY 4ERK
Page 4
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
JANUARY 23, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
January 23, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Councilman Russo.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman May.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. There being no additions, corrections or deletions, the Minutes
of Regular Council Meeting of January 9, 1984 were approved as
submitted.
2. APPROVAL OF WARRANTS AND PAYROLL:
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to de-
lete Warrant No. 1821, payable to Beaumont Chamber of Commerce,
in the amount of $2,500.00, from the warrant list.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to withhold payment of Warrant No. 1821 to the Chamber of Commerce
pending repayment of $2,700.00 advanced to the Chamber of Commerce
by the City of Beaumont that were used to influence an election
relative to the redevelopment ballot issue and until such time it
is determined how these funds were issued illegally are to be
repaid by the parties as yet undetermined.
DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON ORIGINAL MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
MOTION FAILED
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, warrants as
audited per Warrant List of January 23, 1984, in the amount of
$88,437.85 and payroll of January 12, 1984, in the amount of
$26,397.85, were approved for payment as audited.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
3. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
Mr. Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania Avenue, addressed the Council
asking if the City Attorney had a written opinion available at this
time concerning the $2,700.00 given to the Chamber of Commerce and
was advised by the City Attorney that for various reasons he had
not been able to complete the written opinion at this date.
4. Request from Councilman Mitchell to Expand Annexation No. 32. (Bar -
Beau Properties).
After lengthy discussion concerning this agenda item, the meeting
was recessed for ten minutes at 8:27 P.M.
The meeting was reconvened at 8:37 P.M.
Page 1
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, directing
the City Manager to plot the areas to expand Annexation No. 32
(Bar-Beau Properties) to extend to the Intersection of Brookside
I -10 and proceed southerly to the western boundaries of the
location marked Danner property, and to return such plot to an
adjourned meeting to be held on January 30, 1984 at 6:30 P.M.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
5. Statement of Negative Declaration for Annexation No. 32.
6. Ordinance No. 586 - An Urgency Ordinance to Amend Ordinance 490
°.i' to Provide Pre- Zoning to Property Requesting Annexation to the
City of Beaumont. (Annexation No. 32 - Bar -Beau Properties).
1 Agenda items 5 and 6 were continued to an adjourned meeting to
be held on January 30, 1984 at 6:30 P.M.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -03 - Consenting and Authorizing Submittal of
nnexation Application of Uninhabited Territory. (Beaumont 84
'`ANX 1 -33 - Xenia and 8th Street).
8 ✓. "� Statement of Negative Declaration for Beaumont 84 ANX 1 -33.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 588 - An Urgency Ordinance to Amend Ordinance 490 to
Provide Pre- Zoning to Property Requesting Annexation to the City
of Beaumont. (84 ANX 1 -33).
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -03;
adopts a Statement of Negative Declaration for 84 ANX 1 -33; and
adopts Urgency Ordinance No. 588 by title only.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
10. ORDINANCE NO. 589 - An Urgency Ordinance to Amend Ordinance 449
(Sales Tax Ordinance) at the Request of the State Board of Equali-
zation.
This agenda item was continued until the adjourned meeting to be
held on January 30, 1984 at 6:30 P.M.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -01 - Establishing a Planning /Engineering Fee
Schedule.
This agenda item was continued until the adjourned meeting to be
held on January 30, 1984.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -02 - Authorizing the Department of General
Services of the State of California to Purchase Certain Items.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Resolution No. 1984 -02.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
�� ABSTAIN : None.
t, ABSENT: None.
13. Request from Councilman Russo to Appoint Law Review Commission.
mmJI On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, the City
OV Council of the City of Beaumont will appoint a Law Review Committee
to review City ordinances under the direction of the City Council,
this committee to serve on a voluntary basis with no compensation.
Page 2
f
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell. -
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
14. Request for Reconsideration of Application to Place Laundromat
in the K -Mart Shopping Center.
On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont grants approval to place a
Laundromat in the Beaumont Village (K -Mart) Shopping Center as
J requested by Pedicini -Bell Development Company.
f AYES: Councilmen May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Councilman Lowry and Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
15. Request from Beaumont Boy Scouts for Permit to Camp Out Overnight
in Stewart Park.
On Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont approves the request of the Beau-
mont Boy Scouts for permission to camp out overnight in Stewart
Park in conjunction with the Boy Scout Fair to be held on May 12,
1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
16. Presentation of Petition by Lorraine Drive Residents Requesting
Abatement of Dust Nuisance Caused by Motorcycle and Moped Riders
on Adjacent Property.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
I*X"council of the City of Beaumont declares a potential health hazard
` caused by dust generated by mopeds and motorcycles on property
contiguous to Lorraine Drive easterly, and instructs the Police
Department to abate the nuisance.
1 Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
amend Councilman Lowry's motion to include the property directly
east of Palm Alley from 13th Street northerly to 14th Street.
t
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
MOTION CARRIES AS AMENDED.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
17. Consideration of Appointment of Mr. Burke Hensley to Fill Vacancy
�,on Senior Citizens Advisory Commission.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont appoints Mr. Burke Hensley to fill
the vacancy currently existing on the Senior Citizens Advisory
Commission.
Page 3
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
18. Request for Waiver of Penalty for Late Purchase of Business License.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont waives the penalty assessed
�+ against National School Studios, Inc. for failure to purchase
Business License when required.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
19. Consideration of City Building Inspector's Letter Concerning Abate-
ment of Substandard Building at 60 Michigan Avenue.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont, after considering the letter of
the City Building Inspector dated November 23, 1984, pertaining
to a building located at 60 Michigan Avenue in Beaumont, California,
finds said building to be a substandard building and a nuisance,
and directs the City Attorney to proceed with the steps necessary
to abate the same.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT:. None.
40.� Consideration of Exchange of Property with Beaumont Unified School
s` District. (Continued from January 9, 1984).
This agenda item was continued until the next regular meeting on
" February 14, 1984.
21. Acceptance of Proposed Service Contract as to Form and Authorizing
City Manager to Use in Employing Firms or Individuals for Depart-
ments as Budgeted.
;a On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the proposed Service Con -
.f tract form as presented by the City Attorney.
y
',,�
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
WAF
�"1 f
Authorization for City Attorney to Attend "The Municipal Attorney in
Federal Court" Seminar.
On Motion by Councilman Russo, second by Councilman May, the City
Council of the City of Beaumont grants approval for the City
Attorney to attend "The Municipal Attorney in Federal Court"
seminar to be held in Newport Beach February 17, 1984.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
NOES:
None.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Page 4
23. Recommendation to Direct the City Attorney to Draw an Ordinance to
^ Provide for a Code Enforcement Officer with Police Officer Powers.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont directs the City Attorney to
% draw an Ordinance to Provide for a Code Enforcement Officer with
l Police Officer Powers.
1 e °'
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
` Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
24. Request by Councilman Mitchell for Redetermination of Resolution No.
1983 -63.
This agenda item was continued until the adjourned meeting to be
held on January 30, 1984.
25. Decision as to What Information should Accompany Planning Commission
Reports and Agendas, Clarification.
. It was determined the Council should receive a copy of the Planning
Director's report, a copy of the site plan and a copy of the map,
to be placed in the Council's mail slots in the City Manager's
office.
26. Reconsideration Concerning Michigan Avenue Bid.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the bid for Project
8307, Michigan Avenue Improvements, from Matich Corporation and
awards the bid to Matich Corporation as the low bidder.
" r AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
' ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
30. Michigan Avenue Improvements.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont accepts the recommendation
of Matich Corporation to recycle existing A.C. in place and use
for base material by grinding; and further authorizes budget trans -
fer from Account No. 01- 310 -506 (Pennsylvania Avenue) in the
amount of $10,000, and from Account No. 01 -310 -650 (Pennsylvania
+' p� Avenue) in the amount of $42,670, to Account No. 01 -310 -500
(Michigan Avenue) for a total transfer of $52,670.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
27. Reconsideration and Clarification - Sixth Street Median Design.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, directing
that on the portion from Xenia to American Avenue, where the two
crossovers are, the orders of the Council should be followed and
provision should be made at Dick's Tire Shop to put the safety
lanes in, since 90 feet would allow for two cars going west with
a short transition which would take the cars out of the main
traffic lane and avoid the possibility of somebody being rear -
ended; further directing that on the section by the Rusty Lantern,
the base of the light standard be taken out and moved back eastward
to the point where the old break was so their parking lot is free,
and then from the point where the light standard is the City put
a painted double line on each side to make a safety lane for cars
to pull in before they turn in or out of the parking lot.
SECOND WITHDRAWN BY COUNCILMAN MITCHELL.
MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Page 5
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
accept Page 5 of 6th Street Median design (revised) as submitted
by the City Engineer.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
.NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ti ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
accept Page 6 of 6th Street Median design (revised) as submitted
by the City Engineer.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
r Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
accept Page 7 of 6th Street Median design (revised) as submitted
Ito, :r' by the City Engineer.
AYES: Councilmen May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to
accept Page 8 of 6th Street Median design (revised) as submitted
by the City Engineer.
h
�U
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
None.
None.
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
accept Page 10 of 6th Street Median design (revised) as submitted
by the City Engineer, with the modification that the striping be
such that on departing from the parking lot of the Rusty Lantern,
they can cross and make a legal left turn traveling east.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
28. REQUEST FOR BUDGET TRANSFERS:
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council approves the following budget transfers:
From Account 01 -145 -252, Contractual Services, in the amount of
$1,200.00 to Account 01 -135 -254, Special Department Supplies.
From Account 01- 110 -226, Office Supplies, in the amount of $29.00
p€ to Account 01 -110 -251, Special Department Supplies.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
29. �UBMITTAL OF REPORTS FOR FILING:
Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of January 17, 1984
and Financial Reports for Period Ending December 31, 1983 were
accepted for filing.
Page 6
'-'AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Lowry,
Thompson.
None.
None.
None.
May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
accept Page 10 of 6th Street Median design (revised) as submitted
by the City Engineer, with the modification that the striping be
such that on departing from the parking lot of the Rusty Lantern,
they can cross and make a legal left turn traveling east.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mitchell.
NOES: Mayor Thompson.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
28. REQUEST FOR BUDGET TRANSFERS:
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the City
Council approves the following budget transfers:
From Account 01 -145 -252, Contractual Services, in the amount of
$1,200.00 to Account 01 -135 -254, Special Department Supplies.
From Account 01- 110 -226, Office Supplies, in the amount of $29.00
p€ to Account 01 -110 -251, Special Department Supplies.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
29. �UBMITTAL OF REPORTS FOR FILING:
Report of Planning Commission Action at Meeting of January 17, 1984
and Financial Reports for Period Ending December 31, 1983 were
accepted for filing.
Page 6
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned to 6:30 P.M. on Tuesday, January 30, 1984,
in the City Council Chambers.
The meeting was adjourned at 12 Midnight.
Respectfully submitted,
1
Itene Jo cq Sweeney, City Clerk
Page 7
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
ADJOURNED MEETING OF JANUARY 30, 1984
(Adjourned from January 23, 1984)
The Beaumont City Council met in an adjourned meeting at 6:35 P.M., on
Monday, January 30, 1984, the meeting having been adjourned from the
regular meeting of January 23, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with
Mayor Thompson presiding.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. Request from Councilman Mitchell to Expand Annexation No. 32.
(Bar -Beau Properties).
The City Manager submitted a map to the Council with the proposed
boundaries of the expanded annexation. The Council reviewed this
map and discussed the proposed expansion at length.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont allows Annexation No. 32
to expand to approximately 2,017 acres, as per map submitted.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
2. Statement of Negative Declaration for Annexation No. 32.
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts a Statement of Nega-
tive Declaration for Annexation No. 32.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
3. ORDINANCE NO. 586 - An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Beaumont, California, To Amend Ordinance 490 to Provide
Pre - Zoning to Property Requesting Annexation to the City of Beaumont
!� (Annexation No. 32).
\1
On Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 586 as
an Urgency Ordinance.
The Ordinance was read in its entirety by the Deputy City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman May.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. ORDINANCE NO. 589 - An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Beaumont, California, Amending Sections 3.24.040 and
3.24.050 of the Beaumont Municipal Code Deleting the Exemptions
From Sales and Use Tax for Operators of Waterborne Vessels.
On Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont will consider adopting
Ordinance No. 589 by title only.
4
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Page 1
On Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Mitchell, the
City Council of the City of Beaumont adopts Ordinance No. 589
as an Urgency Ordinance.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor
Thompson.
:fit -' NOES : None.
��
t ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
5. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -01 - Establishing a Schedule of Fees to be
Charged by the Planning and Public Works Departments for Various
Services and Rescinding All Previous Resolutions in Conflict
Herewith.
After discussion and review of this proposed resolution, with
questions being answered by the Planning Director and City Engineer,
this resolution was continued to the regular meeting set for
February 27, 1984.
6. Request from Councilman Mitchell for Redetermination of Resolution
1983 -63.
After discussion concerning this request, no action was taken by
the Council.
Motion by Councilman May, second by Councilman Lowry, to adjourn
the meeting at this time.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:18 P.M.
n
Respectfully submitted,
Page 2
UTY CITY CLERK
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 8, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:30 P.M., Monday,
October 8, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand Roland Thorwaldsen, St. Stephens
Episcopal.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Larry Gordon, 1284 Pennsylvania, addressed the Council asking
two questions. 1) If the next breakfast meeting has been scheduled,
and 2) is there a charge on new construction that goes to the school
district.
Mr. Gordon was informed there will be a breakfast meeting scheduled
this month.
Mr. Gordon was further informed there is a school impaction fee
of approximately $750.00 which is between the school district and
the builder which is not collected by the City.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of September 27,
1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting of
September 18, 1984.
C. Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
October 8, 1984 in the amount of $59,266.86; and Payroll of
September 20, 1984, in the amount of $31,405.41.
d. ORDINANCE NO. 602 - SECOND READING - Adding Chapter 13.16 to
the Beaumont Municipal Code Establishing a Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission.
e. ORDINANCE NO. 612 - SECOND READING - Rezoning Certain Property
from R -1 to City R -3 (Change of Zone 80- RZ -1). Location: 7.29±
acres between 8th and 6th Streets bounded by Xenia Avenue and
Allegheny Avenue.
f. ORDINANCE NO. 613 - SECOND READING - Adding Chapter 9.30 to the
Beaumont Municipal Code, Prohibiting the Discharge of Firearms
in the City Limits.
g. Request for Budget Adjustment of $126.00 for Office Equipment.
h. Report of Action of Planning Commission at Meeting of October
2, 1984.
Mayor Thompson announced that in Study Session there was discussion
with the City Attorney concerning certain rephrasing of Ordinance
No. 613, as of a result of which, with the concurrence of all Council
Members, Item No. 2.f, Ordinance No. 613, will be withdrawn from
the Consent Calendar.
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
October 8, 1984
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Mitchell, to approve
Consent Calendar Items 2.a through 2.h with the exception of Item 2.f
(Ordinance No. 613) which will be continued until the October 22
meeting, with changes to the Ordinance in Section 9.30.010, deleting
the words "any public street" and replace with the words "within the
City of Beaumont ", and the last sentence on Page 4, Line 14 through
17 which reads - 'As used in this subdivision, "immediate" means the
brief interval before and after the local law enforcement agency,
when reasonably possible, has been notified of the danger and before
the arrival of its assistance' - be deleted entirely, with Ordinances
No. 602 and 612 adopted at their second reading by reading of the
title only.
Ordinances No. 602 and 612 were read by title only by the Deputy City
Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4. OUT OF SEQUENCE.
ORDINANCE NO. 608 - FIRST READING - Amending Municipal Code Section
17.12.400, To Require Off -Site Improvements in Residential Areas
and to Permit Agreements for the Provision of Future Off -Site
Improvements. (Continued from September 27, 1984).
;`Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
1" Negative Declaration 84 -ND -25 as complete and adequate, and to pass
`,Ordinance No. 608 at its first reading by reading of title only.
After discussion of the proposed Ordinance, Councilman Russo withdrew
his second. The motion was then seconded by Mayor Thompson.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to amend Council-
man Mitchell's motion to provide that Subparagraph (a)(2) of Section
I be deleted in its entirety, and the first word in Line 21 be changed
from utilized to utilizing.
VOTE TAKEN ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen Russo and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Ordinance No. 608 was read by title only by the Deputy City Clerk.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry,
NOES: Councilman Russo.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
MAIN MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED.
Councilman Mitchell requested reconsideration of Ordinance No. 608.
Mayor Thompson stated the request for reconsideration of Ordinance
No. 608 would be presented to the City Council at their regular
meeting on October 22, 1984.
3. PUBLIC HEARING - 8 :00 P.M.
Consideration of Tentative Tract Map 20442 (84- TM -3). Applicant:
Turner -Fagot Construction, Inc. Location: South of 14th Street,
approximately 150 feet west of Palm Avenue.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:25 P.M.
Mayor Thompson: I would like to call your attention to the fact that
a notice of public hearing appeared in a newspaper of general cir-
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
October 8, 1984
culation dated 9- 27 -84, giving public notice of the hearing.
This public hearing is for the purpose of considering a Tentative
Tract Map 20442 (84- TM -3). The applicant is Turner Fagot Construction
Inc. Location is south of 14th Street approximately 150 feet west of
Palm Avenue.
The tentative tract map covers a proposed single family subdivision
of 11 lots. Ten new and one existing lot formerly known as Tenta-
tive Tract 18341. Is there anyone opposed to the adoption of the
Tract Map 20442. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to
speak in opposition to the adoption of Tract Map 20442. Will you
note there was no one appearing to speak in opposition to the
adoption of the tentative tract map.
It appears this has gone through the
your pleasure on this gentlemen. Do
You have no further questions on it.
then be closed. Please note in the
and requirements for Tentative Tract
met.
Planning Commission. What is
you have any questions on it.
Okay, the public hearing will
minutes there was no opposition,
Map 20442 appear to have been
The Public Hearing was closed at 8:30 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
Negative Declaration 84 -ND -27 as complete and adequate, and to
approve Tentative Tract Map 20442 subject to the recommended condi-
,'�tions.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
5. Appeal of Planning Commission Action Filed by Ruben H. Manzanares
Regarding Requirement for Off -Site Improvements. (Continued from
September 27, 1984).
This agenda item was continued to the regular meeting of October 22,
1984 when the request for reconsideration of Ordinance No. 608 will
be presented to the Council.
6. ORDINANCE NO. 609 - SECOND READING - Rezoning Certain Property from
County W -2 and C -P to City R -T (Mobile Home Subdivision) and C -2
(General Commercial). 84 -RZ -2. Location: East and West of
/, Beaumont Avenue between Brookside Avenue and Cherry Valley Boulevard.
(Continued from September 27, 1984).
,'` Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to adopt
i Ordinance No. 609 at its second reading by reading of the title only.
The Ordinance was read by title only by the Deputy City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
7. Request to Purchase Property from Cal - Trans. (Continued from Septem-
ber 27, 1984).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
the expenditure of $1,000.00 from 0010- 4050 -4060, contractual
services, for a "de- certification" study by CalTrans of the approxi-
mately fifty -two (52) acres of state owned property known as State
Parcel Number 8373- 01 -02. Such "de- certification" study to de-
termine whether there is a future need for said property by
CalTrans. Further, that the City of Beaumont expresses the desire
and intent to acquire said property from the State of California
to use in conjunction with property the City owns and desires to
use as a wastewater treatment plant site.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Paae 3
Beaumont City Council
October 8, 1984
8. Endorsement of Report on Beaumont Sphere of Influence.
This agenda item was removed from the agenda to be brought back at a
future date if there is a necessity.
9. Request for Authorization to Pay Prisoners for Labor.
This agenda item was removed from the agenda to be brought back at
a future date if there is a necessity.
10. Adjourn to Executive Session for Legal Discussion at 8:45 P.M.
Reconvene to Regular Session at 10:20 P.M.
Let the record show there were two .items discussed in regard to liti-
gation. One concerned the Berens litigation involving Home Insurance.
The attorney recommended that the case be dismissed against Home
Insurance. The other case was a discussion with the attorneys of
the Castellini litigation.
11. Consideration of Recommendation of City Attorney Concerning Berens
Case.
Motion by Mayor Thompson, second by Councilman Mitchell that re-
commendation of the City Attorney in regard to the Home Insurance
litigation claim of the City concerning Mr. Robert Berens, be
dismissed.
AYES: Councilmen May, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Lowry and Russo.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:21 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Deputy
Page 4
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 22, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:35 P.M., Monday,
October 22, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Pro Tem Russo
presiding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand John Hall.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Mitchell.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo. Mayor Thompson was excused.
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Ms. Linda Forrest, 290 N. D Street, San Bernardino, addressed
the Council stating she is a partner in the law firm of
Bristoll and Forrest, the attorneys for Mike Murray and Pat
Renna in a lawsuit against the Chamber of Commerce and certain
City officials. Ms. Forrest then presented a check in the
amount of $2,000.00 (representing the settlement made by the
insurance company for the Chamber of Commerce) to the City
for acceptance.
9. ADD ITEM.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to accept
the check in the amount of $2,000.00 from State Farm Insurance, to
be deposited by the City, with the funds to be placed back in the
bed tax fund for future disbursement as ordered by the Council.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem
Russo.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of City Council Minutes of Regular Meeting of October
8, 1984.
b. Acceptance of Planning Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting
of October 2, 1984.
C. Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
October 22, 1984, in the amount of $97,058.25; and Payroll of
October 4, 1984, in the amount of $31,312.15.
d. ORDINANCE NO. 613 - SECOND READING - Adding Chapter 9.30 to the
Beaumont Municipal Code, Prohibiting the Discharge of Firearms
in the City Limits.
e. Receive List of Paid and Unpaid Assessments from City Treasurer.
(Assessment District 1983 -01)
f. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -66 - Determining Amount of Unpaid Assessments.
(Assessment District 1983 -01)
g. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -67 - Authorizing Issuance of Bonds and Sale
of Improvement Bonds. (Assessment District 1983 -01)
Page 1
h. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -68 - Accepting Proposal of M. L. Stern & Co.
Inc. to Purchase Bonds, and Awarding Bonds. (Assessment District
1983 -01).
1. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -69 - Award of Contract for Construction of
Improvements Subject to Sale of Bonds. (Assessment District
1983 -01).
j. Request for Budget Transfer - Cooperative Street Maintenance
Participation with County of Riverside.
k. Request for Budget Transfer - Calculator for Building Inspector.
1. Report - Revenue Sharing Handicap Non - Discrimination Requirements.
M. Report - Planning Commission Action at Meeting of October 16,
1984.
n. Report - Councilman Mitchell's Request for Information.
Let the record show the following pertaining to the Consent Calendar.
1) Councilman Mitchell stated he would vote no on the Consent
Calendar because he did not agree with the format in which
the warrant lists were being presented to the Council, and
also because information he has requested has not been given
to him. Let the record further show, a no vote on the Con-
sent Calendar reflects a no vote on each item included on the
Consent Calendar.
2) Consent Calendar Item No. (n) will be referred to the City
Attorney for an analysis and a report back on the issue of
non- conforming use in the residential zones and to get a
determination as to what a person can do in the face of the
Ordinance, and what they cannot do, and if they violate the
Ordinance what is the manner of citation and is it a mis-
demeanor or is it an infraction.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to approve
Consent Calendar Items (a) through (n) with Ordinance No. 613
adopted at its second reading by reading of title only.
Ordinance No. 613 was read by title only by the City Clerk.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
3. Decision Regarding City Participation in Hazardous Materials Response
Program.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to accept the
City Manager's recommendation to not participate in the County's
Hazardous Materials Unit.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
The City Attorney was requested to bring a report to the Council by
the last meeting in November regarding an Ordinance prohibiting
trucks carrying hazardous substances from traveling on City streets.
Page 2
4. Request by Councilman Mitchell for Reconsideration of First Reading
of Ordinance No. 608 (Off -Site Improvement Requirements).
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman May, to reconsider
the first reading of Ordinance No. 608 with a report from the City
Attorney concerning the possible amendments to be brought to the
Council the second meeting in November.
AYES: Councilmen May, Mitchell and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Lowry.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
5. ORDINANCE NO. 608 - SECOND READING - Amending Municipal Code Section
17.12.400, To Require Off -Site Improvements in Residential Areas.
This agenda item will be held until the second meeting in November.
6. Appeal of Planning Commission Action by Ruben H. Manzanares Regarding
Requirement for Off -Site Improvements. (Continued from October 8,
1984) .
This agenda item will be held until the second meeting in November.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -65 - Amending Resolution 1972 -17 which Amended
Ordinance No. 369 to Provide for 30 and 40 Mile Per Hour Speed Limit
on 6th Street; 45, 30, 40 and 50 Mile Per Hour Speeds on Beaumont
Avenue; 40 Mile Per Hour on 14th Street; and 35 Mile Per Hour on
Palm Avenue.
1
7�,i'Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to adopt
Resolution No. 1984 -65.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
8. Request for Authorization to Purchase Equipment for Police Department.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman May, to authorize
,f
the purchase of 13 NOVA XR5000 Stun Guns as requested.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell to amend Councilman Lowry's motion
to purchase only five stun guns.
MOTION TO AMEND DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE TAKEN ON MAIN MOTION:
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, May and Mayor Pro Tem Russo.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Thompson.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:02 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
r /
I ene Joy e /Sweeney, City Clerk
Page 3
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
SPECIAL MEETING OF OCTOBER 25, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a Special Meeting at 7:00 P.M., Thursday,
October 25, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, May,
Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
1. Report on Alleged Election Law Violation.
The City Manager read a report from the City Attorney regarding an
alleged election law violation, with the City Attorney's recommenda-
tion that a Resolution be adopted.
The City Manager then read Resolution No. 1984 -70 in its entirety.
2.
RESOLUTION
NO. 1984 -70 - To require "Concerned Citizens
of Beaumont"
A Private
Organization, Gladys Bell, Its Treasurer, and
"Moneysaver"
from Continued
Publication of Any Simulated Ballot in Violation of
California
State Law.
Motion by
Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo,
to adopt
Resolution
No. 1984 -70.
AYES:
Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES:
Councilmen May and Mitchell.
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the
meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
• i I 'JF--
uty City Clerk
BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF
NOVEMBER 13, 1984
The Beaumont City Council met in a regular meeting at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday,
November 13, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Mayor Thompson pre-
siding.
The Invocation was given by Reverand Richard Ashley.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilman Russo.
On Roll Call the following Council Members were present: Lowry, Russo,
Mitchell and Mayor Thompson. Councilman May was excused.
1. An informational memo regarding the status of the Special Municipal
Election was read into the record by the City Clerk. She basically
stated the election would be set for February 5, 1985 contingent
upon receipt of the Official Certification of the Vote from the
Registrar of Voters.
2. ORAL COMMUNICATION:
a. Mr. Lyman Burhop, 1162 Pennsylvania, addressed the Council
regarding Item No. (f) of the Consent Calendar asking why
this work was being done prior to other flooding problems
in the City. Mr. Burhop was informed these schedules are
set by the Riverside County Flood Control District, and
that other projects are in the design stage at this point,
with the Flood Control District being requested to set the
Orange Avenue flooding problem as a number one priority
for this next fiscal year.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR:
a. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of October 22,
1984 and Special Council Meeting of October 25, 1984.
b. Acceptance of Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of October
16, 1984.
C. Approval of Payment of Warrants as audited per Warrant List of
November 13, 1984, in the amount of $91,399.49; and Payroll of
November 1, 1984, in the amount of $29,848.76.
d. Approval of firm of Ernst & Whinney to conduct the Federal
Revenue Sharing Audit for year ended June 30, 1984.
e. RESOLUTION NO. 1984 -71 - Opposing the 1985 Rate Increase Request
Submitted by General Telephone Company of California to Public
Utilities Commission.
f. Request for Budget Adjustment to Allocate Funds for City Parti-
cipation in Storm Drain Construction Costs for Cherry Avenue
Channel and Authorization for Mayor to Execute Agreement with
County of Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation
District.
g. Request for Budget Adjustment to Replace Microphones in Council
Chamber.
h. Report of Action of Planning Commission at Meeting of November
7, 1984.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
Consent Calendar Items No. (a) through (h), with amendments to the
agreement with County of Riverside Flood Control and Water Con-
servation District, Item (f) as follows:
Page 1
Beaumont City Council
November 13, 1984
1) On Page 5, strike the complete sentence beginning on
Line 21, continued on Line 22 and 23, in its entirety.
2) On Page 7, correct the address shown for the City of
Beaumont to read: 550 E. 6th Street, P. 0. Drawer
158, Beaumont, Ca., 92223.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
4. Request for Waiver of Fee for Use of Gymnasium by Banning- Beaumont
Elks Lodge.
Motion by Councilman Mitchell, second by Councilman Lowry, to
waive the facility fee for use of the gymnasium by the Banning -
t'') Beaumont Elks Lodge, subject to a fee of $25.00 for the custodian
to open and close the building and a cleaning deposit of $50.00
!' refundable to the Elks Lodge if the facility and building left
in a clean condition.
a.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
5. Consideration of Request to Secure Appraisals and Invite Bids
for Sale of City Owned Property.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
the City Manager to secure appraisals on the three pieces of pro-
perty at this time, and do not invite bids until a future Council
meeting.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
6. Consideration of Request for Authorization to Advertise for Bids
for Materials Storage Building.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to authorize
the Purchasing Officer to advertise for bids as requested and that
-the date for the receipt of bids be set for December 4, at 2:00 P.M.,
with report to City Council on December 10.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
7. Consideration of Request for Authorization for Additional Engineering
Services - Wastewater Treatment Plant #2.
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
the request of J. F. Davidson Associates for an additional $22,160
for engineering services as specified in their letter of October 18,
1984.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: Councilman Mitchell.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
Page 2
Beaumont City Council
November 13, 1984
8. Approval of Disbursement List for Assessment District 1983 -1
(Cougar- Brookside Property Owners).
Motion by Councilman Lowry, second by Councilman Russo, to approve
disbursement list for Assessment District 1983 -1.
AYES: Councilmen Lowry, Russo, Mitchell and Mayor Thompson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Councilman May.
There being no further business to come before the Council the
meeting was adjourned at 8:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
J��
IR NE JO E TWEENEY, CITY LERK
Page 3