• Special City Council Meeting June 2017

The special city council meeting had one basic theme on the agenda, the two year budget for Fiscal Years 2017-18/19. 

It did start with a brief proclamation: Parks Make Life Better Month — July 2017.

Councilmember Bridgette Moore read the proclamation and posed with Daniel Torres and Janet Morales afterward.

 
Public Comments (on non agenda items)
• Kenny Mayes discussed the posted room occupancy (193) and asked if it was accurate in light of the recent planning commission meeting when there was only room for 140 seats, and it was stated that the meeting couldn't go forward until everyone found a seat.
• Joseph Morabito: I spoke about the coming city council meeting that will be dealing with the Camelia Townhouse Project. I suggested a special meeting, since it's sure to be more than two hours long. I also went on record saying I thought the libelous chatter on social media about the three commissioners that voted in favor of the project, and Stan Smith in particular, was as odious as it was destructive. Let's see if any of those brave keyboard commandos will turn their libel into slander during their public comment allotment at the impending Camelia Townhouse Project city council meeting.


Consent Calendar
Several items were pulled and discussed. In my estimation, the only one worth the council's time was 1.3. 

Three of the others had our resident oracle of misinformation, Kenny Mayes, toss in his 200 cents, just to have them tossed right back at him.

My favorite example of such was item 1.4. 

It was in reference to the city seeking to purchase a .46 acre lot on Lemon St. near the freeway, for $35,000. 

He went over a litany of reasons why he thought this was a bad idea, and then recommended that the city not purchase the property.

Among his concerns were the following: No environmental conditions mentioned in the agenda packet, and that "growing up near freeways stunts children's breathing capability for a lifetime —significant increases of risk of serious lung and heart diseases later in life according to researchers who've monitored thousands of Southern California children for up to 8 years." 

Let me just stop you right there Kenny. Great speech, but what are you going on about? Did you actually think that such a parcel was going to be for a city run orphanage or something? Why would you think ANY child would ever even step foot on that property, much less spend any real amount of time where they'd end up developing such medical conditions?

He went on to lament "this is a horrible purchase," as he bemoaned that there wasn't a title report or soils report and the potential for elevated concentrations of lead in the shallow soil due to vehicle emissions, as it's near the freeway.

.43 acre Parcel in question.

Once he finished his spiel, Councilmember Moore took him to task, and for good measure Councilmember Swanson helped in the process too. (video link is below)

To clarify, this is what the staff report says. 

Staff has identified parcels of interest throughout the city that would benefit the public's direct use, enhance public services in the area, areas of street and storm drainage, maintenance, recreation, parks, trails, and civic administration. As these properties become available for acquisition, staff requests authorization to acquire the property.

This [acquisition of this] parcel isn't saying this is for all that. It's just saying that these properties that become available COULD BE for [any of those reasons].

Bridgette Moore

Moore then asked City Manager Gary Nordquist to speak about the title report. In short he explained that item 1.4 was a request for the authority to sign the preliminary documents (in other words, to get the ball rolling for the acquisition of this property). 

Once the process starts in earnest, that's when the various reports get delivered. Depending on what the reports say, that will determine whether the city will go forward or not with the purchase. 

The staff has done their due diligence. We don't own a lot of land. We don't even own this building (city hall), we own three parks. Having the availability to purchase a little piece of land for public works, for $35,000, is a good deal.

Bridgette Moore

 

It is [a good deal]. When I saw the price I thought, "if the city doesn't buy it, that's not a bad piece [to buy]." It isn't a good piece to live on, or for a house, but there are neighbors that live right there. The next parcel over has got a manufactured home on it, and they live there. They're happy there. 

The contract, when you buy a piece of property, indicates it's contingent on the preliminary title report. It is contingent on an NHD report, which is a Natural Hazard Disclosure that the seller has to pay for. There are lots of things that are in that contract that are contingent on, but we can't move forward until we take the first step and say "let's open escrow" then we'll do our due diligence and check all of these items. 

Council Member, and real estate professional, Marsha Swanson

Why am I getting a bee in my bonnet over a throw away public comment on a pulled item from the consent calendar?

It's because many people out there only are aware of one facet of Kenny Mayes, Kenneth to those over at Nextdoor.com, where he is the maven of all facets of life in Wildomar. Posting information about parks events, library programs, articles from the various news sources in the area, and city agenda items too. 

Not to mention digging into people's personal lives looking for things buried in their past, or current things that are immaterial to the facts at hand. I'm not even going to dignify his bizarre ramblings during the meeting, by mentioning the details, that bordered on slander... I guess he was too clever (cough) to use actual names in his diatribe, but others could rightly read it as cowardly. 

Imagine their consternation when they realize who they've been using as a trusted source.

I have to acknowledge that he puts an inordinate amount of time into researching things, but more times than not he reaches erroneous interpretations. 

Is it just bad luck that he craps out so often, or does he know that his conclusions will be shown to be fallacious once the experts weigh in, but enjoys the reactions he gets just the same? 

Or, is it that he actually thinks he's the only guy that understands the complexities at hand, and everyone else (especially the paid professionals) just don't get it? Either which-way, ouch!

This one's for you Ken...
I upgraded the Cantankerotti Corner cartoon, and included your hat this time.

Don't get me wrong here. On whole, I think Ken is an asset to the process. 

Yes, seriously!

We need more people that are interested in the things that are happening in our city. It just would be nice if accuracy was as important to him as posting his half baked opinions (or spouting them from the lectern). If Trump were to weigh in here, he'd be labeling Ken Mayes as Fake News. 

The other items weren't of much consequence. I did have my eye on Item 1.3 about adopting Rosenberg's Rules of Order where it wanted to remove the ability for one public speaker to donate time to another. 

The only city meetings I've been to in the last 40 years are the ones in Wildomar, so I have no other points of reference. In other areas of this valley, according to mayor Tim Walker, there are NOT such donations of minutes at all.

Still, since some of us made a fuss about not changing that provision, a compromise was reached where a public speaker can get a ONE time donation of 3 minutes for a total of 6 minutes. 

The way I see it is that we spoke, they listened, and chose a reasonable compromise. A veritable Win-Win. The video below is of the short discussion the council had on the matter.

The rest of the meeting was dedicated to the details of the two year budget. Interesting, but not compelling for people that don't consider doing their taxes as the highlight of their year. 

The agenda package is just one column & row of numbers after another, if you'd like to peruse it yourself, follow this link and jump down to page 594. Link to Report

It was full of awesome things like, projected sales and property tax revs. Detailed reports from each part of the city government. 

The budget outlook did NOT include the SB 130 funds (the returned VLF money that Governor Brown took from us five years ago). When that money gets here, that will be an added bonus, but most of it will get gobbled up by the public safety sector.

The current contract with the RSO covers 40 man hours a day. There is a proposal to increase that to 87 hours a day. They're also looking to get a dedicated traffic cop to patrol city hot spots. 

Just remember, the people that usually get nabbed in such traffic stops are the very people that live in the neighborhoods being patrolled. 

This isn't including any projected revenues from retail establishments that haven't broken ground yet. It also isn't including the VLF funds that are supposed to be coming back to Wildomar.

The new city website, which was first mentioned in this blog a year ago, is due to come online before the end of July. Something that is also on the list of things to do is set up a way to live stream city meetings. 

I've been wanting that for a long time, and even if they just start off simply, with one fixed camera that delivers clear sound, that will be satisfactory.

From the planning department.

Approved projects that haven't broken ground yet. Nearly a half million square feet of retail, and 1000 residential units are in the works. 

There were tons of other notes, but enough is enough. 

Well, one more... we do own the fire station and there are several things that the fire chief would like to upgrade there. I nearly choked when they wanted $40K to remodel their kitchen. That just seems steep to me. I'm glad that there wasn't enough money in the budget to green-light any of the wish list stuff.

•          •          •

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. 
– Winston Churchill

Wildomar Rap loves tall tales, just not during city meetings or when discussing another person's personal business.