City Council Meets Tuesday: E-Verify, Continuing Life Communities, Decorum

The meeting begins at 6 p.m. in San Juan Capistrano's City Hall at 32400 Paseo Adelanto.

E-Verify, a retirement community at Rancho Capistrano and the decorum of local elected officials will be among the topics the San Juan Capistrano City Council takes up Tuesday evening.

is .

Under his proposal, named the "San Juan Capistrano Right to Work Act," employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants could see their business licenses revoked by the city.

Also on Tuesday, the City Council will consider how it might set aside acreage at for public and recreational use. A developer plans to build a 415-unit senior continuing care retirement community on the ranch property, just off the 5 freeway at the north end of town.

The council may consider whether to maintain an agreement it struck in 2009 with the developers, . The agreement gives the city the option to buy 116 of the 150 acres CLC is buying. The purchase price for the 116 acres would be $10 million.

The last item on the night's agenda is to discuss what action the council should take—if any—to observe appropriate decorum. Councilman .

"When such things occur it is incumbent upon the council to take immediate action to ensure it does not continue," said.

To view the agenda in its entirety, visit the city's website. The meeting begins at 6 p.m. in, 32400 Paseo Adelanto.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the acreage the city may choose to buy from Continuing Life Communities under a 2009-option agreement.

Jenna Chandler September 20, 2011 at 05:12 AM
Thanks, Mark. I've corrected the story. What are your thoughts on the city retaining that 2009 agreement? And, have you had a chance to look at the five options city staffers have proposed in the staff report—are there any you favor?
Mark Nielsen September 20, 2011 at 05:50 AM
Jenna, I strongly urge the City to retain the option at this point. There is no compelling reason to give up this public asset, as at the very least it gives the City greater leverage in negotiating a final project plan that retains adequate open space without the burden of proving some nexus to the project impacts. Option 1 in staff report - No good. Gives up option and puts City at distinct disadvantage. Option 2 - OK to pursue an alternative agreement as long as not giving up option in advance. Option 3 - Table or continue indefinitely is also OK to pursue meetings with all interested parties (CLC, Mercedes, City of Laguna Niguel, etc.) to see if an acceptable alternative can be reached. Option 4 - Appraisal of option value is not appropriate, as the City's goal is not to get some payment, but rather to preserve open space and active recreation fields for use by our youth sports teams. Option 5 - Development Agreement is similar to Option 2, as long as the option is not waived until have new agreement that preserves vital open space and fields. Bottom line - no alternative that requires the early waiver of the option makes sense until we have guarantees of open space preserved in sufficient acreage to meet the original intent of the deal with CLC.
Clint Worthington September 20, 2011 at 03:35 PM
Mark Nielsen forgets that the City nor the Re-Development Agency have 10 million dollars to spend. The Utility Department cannot even issue the 18 million dollar bond that Mark Nielsen wanted so badly because the financials are so very poor. Our City's bond rating has been down graded. Mr. Nielsen, you just don't get it. Financially, the City cannot afford to spend one more penny. Presently, the City is trying to dig itself out of the whole that you spent four years creating. It is decisions that you made, such as hiring a $324,000 a year City Manager that have gotten us into this mess.
SJCfamily September 20, 2011 at 04:40 PM
Jenna- Even if we did have money to spend on this, what Nielsen conveniently left out is that the "110 acres" includes many acres of sliding hillsides - you know, the ones that you can see from the freeway that are so unstable that no one can build on them. The acreage is also bi-sected by the creek which is so severely eroding that it looks like a mini Grand Canyon which eventually threatens to undermine the train tracks (who wants that liability?). Go out there and look at it - you'll see what I mean. The only property worth buying is one or two flat parcels, which might be used for soccer fields. The problem is that Nielsen already voted to spend our entire $30 million Open Space Bond ($27.5 for the property and millions in "improvements") on the purchase of the RMV Riding Park which will be a park for the Ranch, not for us. SJC residents' property taxes were raised for the next 20 yrs to pay for the bond, but we can't even use the property (we have to pay to use the soccer fields on "our" property!). Be very careful about any deal proposed by Nielsen. While on council, he promoted and voted to raise our water rates to an unaffordable level; he promoted and voted for the RMV Riding Park which is the biggest boondoggle in San Juan history and his votes while on council contributed enormously to the more than $150 million debt that our city now has. Thank goodness he's not on council anymore.
rick lyons September 20, 2011 at 06:34 PM
Puhhhhleeaase Mark Nielsen we really don't need your advice anymore. Don't you think you have done enough damage?


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »