The item is Consent Calendar 18.F, Resolution 2026-147, Staff Report #26-298. Staff lists nine 2027 Ford Police Interceptor Utilities, including one K9 unit; one 2026 Ford Maverick; and two 2026 BMW RT-P motorcycles.

Funding would come from the adopted fiscal 2026-27 budget: $687,000 from the Vehicle Replacement Fund and $342,000 from Measure U, account 115.09.1000.65400. Staff wrote that no new appropriation is required. The packet cites a budget appropriation of $1,029,000 for the purchase.

Vendors listed in the packet include Peoria Ford, Tim Moran Ford of Hemet, BMW of San Marcos, AEP for upfitting, and Dungeon Wraps for decals.

Unless the item is pulled for discussion, it would be voted with the rest of the consent calendar Tuesday night.

This story does not report a vote. The council has not yet acted on the resolution.

The post Hemet consent calendar includes $342,000 Measure U for police fleet appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The hearing is Item 16.A on the regular agenda, Staff Report #26-279. Closed session is listed at 4 p.m. Regular session is at 6 p.m. CivicWeb lists the chambers at 450 E. Latham Ave. The city’s public-hearing notice and fee page also list City Hall chambers at 445 E. Florida Ave.

Ordinance No. 2081 would amend Chapter 58, Article IV, to implement the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency’s 2026 nexus study, adopted by the RCHCA board July 9.

Staff’s fee table lists:

Individual single-family residence on a single legally created lot: $250 flat, unchanged.

Agricultural development: $500 per gross acre, simplified from a prior formula of $100 or 1 percent of valuation, capped at $500 an acre.

All other development: $900 per gross acre, up from $500 an acre.

Surface mining would stay under a separate calculation. Qualifying nonprofits could still receive up to a 75 percent reduction.

Beginning July 1, 2027, the ordinance would adjust the fee annually by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County region. Staff wrote that the fee would take effect 60 days after adoption under Government Code section 66017.

Staff recommends that the council open the hearing, introduce the ordinance by title and waive full reading, and authorize the city manager to bring it back for second reading and adoption. The agenda recommendation lists Sept. 22 for that return. The staff report discussion lists Sept. 23. Both dates appear in the packet.

Staff’s fiscal note says there is no direct General Fund impact. Fees are paid by applicants and remitted to RCHCA.

Written comments were due to the City Clerk by 2 p.m. the day of the meeting, subject line “SKR Mitigation Fee.” Contact listed on the city page: Jilleen Ferris, P.E., (951) 765-2360, jferris@hemetca.gov.

This story does not report a vote. The council has not yet acted on the ordinance.

The post Hemet council to hear kangaroo-rat fee hike Tuesday appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Tuesday, Sept. 8

Hemet City Council, 6 p.m., Council Chamber, 450 E. Latham Ave. (the Aug. 7 public-hearing notice also lists City Council Chambers at City Hall, 445 E. Florida Ave.). The Sept. 8 agenda packet is posted.

Item 16.A is a public hearing on Ordinance No. 2081, amending Chapter 58 of the Hemet Municipal Code to update Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fees. Staff report #26-279 says the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency adopted the 2026 SKR HCP Nexus Study on July 9, 2026. Proposed fees in the staff report: individual single-family residence, $250 current and $250 proposed per residence; agricultural development, variable calculation now and $500 per gross acre proposed; all other development, $500 current and $900 proposed per gross acre.

A footnote says the prior agricultural formula was $100 or 1 percent of building valuation, whichever greater, not to exceed $500 per gross acre, simplified to a flat $500. Nonprofit projects may qualify for up to a 75 percent reduction. Surface mining stays on a separate calculation under Section 58-99.

Staff recommends the council introduce the ordinance and return it for second reading and adoption at the Sept. 22 meeting. Written comments may go to the City Clerk with subject line “SKR Mitigation Fee.” Contact listed on the city fee page: Jilleen Ferris, P.E., (951) 765-2360, jferris@hemetca.gov. Nexus study materials: hemetca.gov/1375/Stephens-Kangaroo-Rat-2026-Fee-Update.

Thursday, Sept. 10

San Jacinto Unified School District Board of Trustees, 6 p.m., Board Room, 2045 S. San Jacinto Ave. Regular meeting. A district public-hearing notice dated Aug. 24 says the board will take community input on whether each pupil has or will have sufficient textbooks or instructional materials for fiscal 2026-27 consistent with the curriculum framework. Questions: Dulce Noriega, (951) 929-7700, ext. 4260. The full board packet was not confirmed posted when checked Monday morning.

Mt. San Jacinto College Board of Trustees, 4 p.m., Board Room TA-301, Temecula Valley Campus, 41888 Motor Car Parkway, Temecula. Regular meeting listed on the college events calendar.

Agendas post on the Diligent Community portal no less than 72 hours ahead; the Sept. 10 packet was not confirmed posted when checked.

Tuesday, Sept. 15

Hemet Planning Commission, 6 p.m., 450 E. Latham Ave. A Sept. 1 cancellation notice said the Sept. 1 meeting was cancelled for lack of agenda items and that the next regular meeting is Sept. 15. No Sept. 15 packet is posted.

San Jacinto City Council, 6:30 p.m. open session (closed session typically 5:30 p.m.), Community Center, 625 S. Pico Ave. Regular meeting on the city calendar. No packet is posted, so no item list is available.

Riverside County Board of Supervisors, 9:30 a.m., 4080 Lemon St., 1st Floor Board Chambers, Riverside. Regular meeting. Valley items cannot be confirmed until the packet is posted.

Wednesday, Sept. 16

Eastern Municipal Water District Board, 9 a.m., Board Room, 2270 Trumble Road, Perris. The board meeting is listed on EMWD’s site. Public-notice pages list Sept. 16 as the meeting date for board action related to the Menifee and Watson Road II Booster Pump Station and Matthews Transmission Pipeline Project (comment period ended June 29) and the Quail Valley Subarea 4 Programmatic EIR (comment period ended May 18). The detailed Sept. 16 agenda packet was not confirmed readable when checked.

Lake Skinner Regional Water Transmission System draft program EIR comments remain open through 5 p.m. Oct. 8; that is a comment deadline, not a hearing on this calendar.

Thursday, Sept. 17

Lake Hemet Municipal Water District. The Aug. 20 board agenda listed Minute Order item 7 as cancellation of the Sept. 17 meeting and adjournment to Thursday, Oct. 15, at 3 p.m., 26385 Fairview Ave., Hemet. August 20 minutes confirming that vote were not separately posted when checked.

Monday, Sept. 21

Valley-Wide Recreation and Park District Board, 5:30 p.m. or soon thereafter, Board Chambers, 901 W. Esplanade Ave., San Jacinto. The Sept. 21 CivicWeb packet is not posted. A Press-Enterprise notice published Aug. 22 states that on Aug. 17 the board adopted a resolution of intention for Winchester Community Facilities District Zone 33 (San Pedro Farms) and set this public hearing. Written protests may be filed with the Clerk of the Board; interested persons may speak at the hearing.

The Aug. 17 staff report (primary packet) described two noticed matters for this date, at the petition of KB Home Cal Management Services, LLC, Tract 36467, north of Holland Road, east of Leon Road, west of Eucalyptus Road, south of Ano Crest Drive, Winchester — 396 single-family and 110 multifamily equivalent dwelling units:

• Hearing A / Resolution 1469-26: Winchester CFD Zone 33 for parks and landscaping operations and maintenance. Maximum annual special tax $1,697 per single-family EDU and $1,018 per multifamily EDU; estimated maximum collection about $784,014, base year fiscal 2027-28. Escalation each July 1 starting July 1, 2028.
• Hearing B / Resolution 1470-26: CFD 2020-1 Annexation 14, Tax Zone 15, for stormwater / WQMP operations and maintenance. Maximum annual special tax $175 per single-family EDU and $105 per multifamily EDU; estimated about $80,850, base year fiscal 2027-28, with the same July 1, 2028 escalation start.

Tuesday, Sept. 22

San Jacinto Planning Commission, 6 p.m., Community Center, 625 S. Pico Ave. Regular meeting on the city calendar. No packet is posted.

Hemet City Council, 6 p.m., 450 E. Latham Ave. Fourth-Tuesday date. Staff’s Sept. 8 recommendation would return Ordinance No. 2081 for second reading here if introduced Sept. 8. No Sept. 22 packet is posted yet.

The post Upcoming hearings this week: Hemet SKR fees, school textbooks, Winchester CFD taxes appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The item is CZ2600012, Ordinance No. 348.5056. Staff’s Form 11 framed Sept. 1 as introduction and public hearing. The recommended motion was to introduce the ordinance, waive further reading, and adopt it on successive weeks. The minutes for that meeting have not been published. The ordinance’s signature and adoption-date lines in the packet are blank. This newspaper does not treat the ordinance as adopted.

Staff wrote that the amendment would reorganize Article XIXj of Ordinance 348, update ADU and JADU rules, and add SB 9 units “consistent with State law through January 1, 2026.” The county claims a CEQA exemption.

As drafted, the ordinance would apply to all unincorporated Riverside County. Housing types listed in Article XIXj would include ADUs, JADUs, SB 9 units, second units, guest quarters, ranchets, and multiple-owner group units.

The Form 11 says the ADU maximum size would go to 1,600 square feet, from 1,000. Attached ADUs would be limited to 50 percent of the primary dwelling or 1,600 square feet, whichever is less, but the 50 percent cap would not preclude at least 1,000 square feet. A detached ADU on a single-family lot could be 1,600 square feet.

On a lot with an existing multifamily dwelling, the draft would allow up to eight detached ADUs, not more than the number of existing units.

Owner occupancy would not be required. The draft text says property owners “shall not be required to occupy, or reside within, either the primary dwelling or ADU located on the same lot.”

The draft would legalize some unpermitted ADUs and JADUs built before Jan. 1, 2020, under Government Code section 66311.7. Manufactured homes could count as ADUs. A JADU would be limited to 500 square feet, entirely within a single-family dwelling.

SB 9 units would implement Government Code sections 65852.21 and 66411.7. Twelve zones are listed as single-family residential for SB 9 purposes: A-1 (2.5 acres or less), R-1, R-1A, R-A, R-D, R-R, R-T, R-T-R, R-T-R-1, SP, W-2, and W-2-M. The packet says inclusion of a zone does not by itself establish eligibility. Urban lot splits would be handled separately in Ordinance 460.

Second units would remain separate from ADUs. On lots of 20,001 square feet to 2 acres, the second-unit maximum would rise from 1,200 to 1,600 square feet. Guest quarters would remain accessory, not independent dwellings. Ranchet and multiple-owner group rules would remain limited to the Eastern Coachella Valley.

A new section would let the planning director, or a designee, elevate a Director’s Hearing item to the Planning Commission if there are significant policy questions, public controversy, or substantial community impacts.

If later adopted, the ordinance would take effect 30 days after adoption, according to the draft.

The Planning Commission recommended the amendment 4-0 on July 8, 2026, according to the Form 11 background. That is not a Board of Supervisors vote.

The next listed Board meeting is Tuesday, Sept. 15, 9:30 a.m., 4080 Lemon St., Riverside. When checked on Sept. 2, that agenda page did not list Ordinance 348.5056. No second-reading date is printed in the Sept. 1 packet.

The post County considering larger ADUs and SB 9 units in unincorporated valley appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Today, Wednesday, Sept. 2

Riverside County Planning Commission, 9 a.m., 1st Floor Board Chambers, 4080 Lemon St., Riverside. Packet is posted.

A new public hearing, item 3.1, is GPA210111, CZ2100121, and CUP210126 in the 3rd District, Highway 79 Policy Area, north of Keller Road, west of Coventry Lane, and east of Winchester Road (State Route 79). The application is for about 113,915 square feet of mini-warehouse space and outdoor storage for 165 RVs on 11.12 acres, APN 472-110-038. Staff lists an intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration. The planner is Cynthia Burgos, (951) 955-6836, cyburgos@rivco.org.

Item 3.2 is a new public hearing on the 2026 Climate Action Plan Update, countywide.

Speaker requests are due at least 24 hours ahead at rivco.gov/constituent-speaking-request. Written comments may go to the planner or planninghearings@rivco.org at least 24 hours ahead.

Tuesday, Sept. 8

Hemet City Council, 6 p.m. The city has noticed a public hearing on an ordinance updating Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fees and amending Chapter 58. The Sept. 8 council packet is not posted. CivicWeb does not yet list a Sept. 8 meeting object.

The city’s fee page lists: individual single-family home on a single parcel, $250 now and $250 proposed, a flat fee; agriculture, $100 now and $500 proposed per gross acre; all other development, $500 now and $900 proposed per gross acre. A city footnote says the existing agriculture charge is $100 per development or 1 percent of valuation, not to exceed $500 an acre, and that the proposal would simplify that to $500 an acre. Nonprofits may qualify for up to a 75 percent reduction.

The public-hearing notice lists City Council Chambers at City Hall, 445 E. Florida Ave. CivicWeb’s standing council language uses 450 E. Latham Ave. Written comments go to the City Clerk, subject line “SKR Mitigation Fee.” Contact listed on the city page: Jilleen Ferris, P.E., (951) 765-2360, jferris@hemetca.gov.

Thursday, Sept. 10

San Jacinto Unified School District Board of Trustees, 6 p.m., Board Room, 2045 S. San Jacinto Ave. The calendar lists a regular meeting and a noticed hearing on whether each pupil has or will have sufficient textbooks for fiscal 2026-27, consistent with the curriculum framework. The packet was not posted when checked. Questions: Dulce Noriega, (951) 929-7700, ext. 4260.

Tuesday, Sept. 15

Hemet Planning Commission, 6 p.m., 450 E. Latham Ave. A Sept. 1 cancellation notice said the next regular meeting is Sept. 15. No Sept. 15 packet is posted.

San Jacinto City Council, 6:30 p.m. open session (closed session typically 5:30 p.m.), Community Center, 625 S. Pico Ave. Regular meeting. No packet is posted, so no item list is available.

Riverside County Board of Supervisors, 9:30 a.m., 4080 Lemon St., Riverside. Regular meeting. The Sept. 15 packet is not posted, so valley items cannot be confirmed.

Wednesday, Sept. 16

Eastern Municipal Water District Board, 9 a.m., Board Room, 2270 Trumble Road, Perris. The event is posted. The agenda page was not readable when checked.

Thursday, Sept. 17

Lake Hemet Municipal Water District’s Aug. 20 agenda listed cancellation of the Sept. 17 board meeting, with adjournment to Oct. 15 at 3 p.m., 26385 Fairview Ave., Hemet. August 20 minutes were not posted, so that cancellation is not confirmed as a vote.

Monday, Sept. 21

Valley-Wide Recreation and Park District Board, 5:30 p.m. or soon thereafter, Board Chambers, 901 W. Esplanade Ave., San Jacinto. The Sept. 21 packet is not posted. An Aug. 17 staff report noticed two public hearings for this date. Whether the board adopted the resolutions of intention on Aug. 17 is not confirmed; those minutes were not posted.

Hearing A, as described in that Aug. 17 report: Winchester CFD Zone 33, San Pedro Farms, Tract 36467, petition of KB Home Cal Management Services, LLC, north of Holland Road, east of Leon Road, west of Eucalyptus Road, south of Ano Crest Drive. 396 single-family and 110 multifamily equivalent dwelling units. Maximum annual special tax $1,697 per single-family EDU and $1,018 per multifamily EDU, estimated maximum collection about $784,014, base year fiscal 2027-28, for parks and landscaping operations and maintenance.

Hearing B, same tract and applicant: Community Facilities District 2020-1, Annexation 14, Tax Zone 15. Maximum annual special tax $175 per single-family EDU and $105 per multifamily EDU, estimated about $80,850, for stormwater / WQMP operations and maintenance. The Aug. 17 report said the tax would escalate each July 1 starting July 1, 2028.

The Aug. 17 header listed a request-to-speak process, three minutes. Written protests go to the clerk.

Tuesday, Sept. 22

San Jacinto Planning Commission, 6 p.m., Community Center, 625 S. Pico Ave. Regular meeting. No packet is posted.

Hemet’s fourth-Tuesday council date, Sept. 22, is not listed on CivicWeb. No packet is posted.

Lake Skinner Regional Water Transmission System draft program EIR comments remain open through 5 p.m. Oct. 8, according to EMWD’s public notices. That is a comment deadline, not a hearing on this calendar.

The post Upcoming hearings: Hemet SKR fees, Winchester parks tax, San Jacinto council appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The award was Consent Calendar item A3 on the regular meeting agenda at the San Jacinto Community Center, 625 S. Pico Avenue. No council member pulled the item for separate discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Clarisa Sanchez moved approval of the consent calendar; Councilmember Alonso Ledezma seconded. After electronic voting, the clerk announced that all votes were in and that the motion passed 5-0.

How They Voted (consent calendar, including A3)

Roll call at the start of open session showed all five members present.

Staff’s written recommendation, requested by Chief Innovation Officer Derek Williamson and approved for the agenda by Interim City Manager Travis Randel, asked the council to award the agreement to SDI Presence, authorize the city manager to execute it subject to city attorney approval as to form, and authorize the city manager to approve amendments or change orders when appropriations allow and city procurement rules are met.

The staff report says the city’s financial-management system is more than 25 years old and its utility-billing system has been in use for more than 10 years. The city issued a request for proposals and received 10 proposals; staff said SDI Presence received the highest overall score. The initial contract covers needs assessment, functional and technical requirements, and procurement support for evaluating replacement systems. Staff wrote that implementation management for selected software is not included in the initial award and would require separate authorization later. The agreement “does not commit the City to the purchase of any software, hardware, implementation services, or other related technology expenditures,” the staff report states.

Staff’s fiscal-impact statement says the Professional Services Agreement is not to exceed $102,625 and that “Funding for these services were included within the City’s FY26/27 adopted budget.” The staff report does not list a general-ledger account number.

Open session adjourned at about 7:32 p.m., per the mayor’s closing on the official AgendaLink recording.

The recorded open session did not include a discussion of when the FY 2026-27 adopted budget or the latest annual financial report would be posted to the city’s Finance page.

The post San Jacinto awards SDI Presence $102,625 needs-assessment contract appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2026-27 operating budget on June 23 by Resolution 2026-105. Combined General Fund and Measure U revenues are budgeted at $86,535,000. Combined expenditures are budgeted at $96,123,000. The difference is $9,588,000, a $9.6 million use of fund balance.

Those figures come from the adopted budget tables. They are the city’s official plan for the year ending June 30, 2027.

Across all city funds, the adopted budget lists $150,757,303 in revenue and $154,184,303 in expenditures.

The combined General Fund is two pots. Fund 110 is the city’s main operating fund. It is budgeted at $69,550,000 in revenue and $74,717,000 in spending. That is a $5,167,000 gap.

Fund 115 is Measure U. Voters approved that 1 percent transactions and use tax in 2016. The adopted budget describes it as a general sales tax restricted solely to public safety by resolution. Measure U is budgeted at $16,985,000 in revenue and $21,406,000 in spending.

The Measure U gap is $4,421,000. The adopted budget says Measure U fund balance is being used to buy equipment such as radios, cameras, hoses and vehicles, to rehabilitate fire stations, and to help pay liability insurance for police and fire.

One-time Measure U uses listed in the budget total $4,537,000. The largest items are $1.5 million for retiring police personnel payouts and $1.5 million toward the liability insurance premium. Other listed items include four police interceptors, 50 radios, two traffic motorcycles, cameras, Fire Station 5 work, and fire hose replacements.

One-time General Fund uses listed in the budget total $1,233,000. They include downtown parking lot repavement, a truck routing ordinance, radios, storage work, branding, Christmas decorations, and other one-time purchases.

The budget says revenues have begun to flatten while costs keep rising. It cites inflation, personnel costs, insurance, and contracts. Cost-containment steps in the document include a hiring freeze on vacant posts, limiting new hires to mission-critical and revenue-generating jobs, and a 10 percent cut in department maintenance and operations spending.

Citywide positions are down 8.5 full-time equivalents from the prior adopted budget. The document lists 17 frozen positions, including six police officers, a deputy fire chief, and other public safety and civilian posts.

Liability insurance is called out as a major pressure. For fiscal 2026-27, the budget puts liability premiums at about $7.0 million, plus a $2.0 million self-insured retention for claims. That is about 4.9 percent higher than the prior year, the document says.

Hemet’s written reserve policy requires spendable, unrestricted General Fund reserves equal to at least 40 percent of current expenditures. The City Council raised that target from 20 percent to 40 percent beginning in fiscal 2023-24. The adopted budget says the reserve totaled about $28.9 million as of June 30, 2025.

The city’s latest posted Annual Comprehensive Financial Report remains the report for the year ended June 30, 2024. That is the newest ACFR on the Finance Department’s financial information page.

The operating budget is separate from the capital program. The city’s five-year Capital Improvement Program for fiscal 2026-27 through 2030-31 lists a grand total of $159,501,108. The fiscal 2026-27 column is $21,736,408. Those totals are in the CIP project summary, not the operating-budget tables.

On the November 3, 2026, ballot, Hemet voters will decide Measure Q. It is a separate 1-cent transactions and use tax. The City Council placed it on the ballot on July 14. The city’s Measure Q FAQ and the city attorney’s impartial analysis both say the tax is estimated to generate about $16 million a year.

Measure Q would be a general tax. Proceeds would go to the General Fund and could be used for any lawful city purpose, according to the proposed ordinance and the impartial analysis. The tax would last until ended by voters. The city says groceries, prescription medicine, diapers, and feminine hygiene products are exempt. The city also says the money would stay in Hemet, with public disclosure, independent citizens’ oversight, and audits.

Hemet’s current sales tax rate is 8.75 percent, the city’s FAQ states. Measure Q would add 1 cent on each dollar of taxable purchases.

The city has scheduled three Measure Q open houses at the Hemet Public Library, 300 E. Latham Ave.: Sept. 16 from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m., Sept. 26 from 10 a.m. to noon, and Oct. 16 from 6 to 8 p.m.

The adopted operating budget does not include Measure Q revenue. The November vote is a separate question from the books the council already adopted for this fiscal year.

The post Hemet budget spends $9.6 million more than it takes in appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Water rates passed 4-1. Sewer rates passed 3-0 after two members left the dais. Both schedules take effect Jan. 1, 2027, and rise each Jan. 1 through Jan. 1, 2031.

City water bills will go up. The mailed Proposition 218 notice gave this example: a typical single-family home using 1,100 cubic feet of water in a monthly billing period would go from $59.54 now to $92.53 under the 2027 rates. The same notice lists a separate Water Adjudication Fee on every unit. The Willdan rate study in the agenda packet, using a 3/4-inch meter and the same 1,100 cubic feet, put the full city water bill at $79.01 now and $104.63 in 2027.

The city’s sewer collection charge for a single-family home would rise from $8.22 a month to $10.48 on Jan. 1, 2027, up $2.26, the sewer notice says. Eastern Municipal Water District treatment charges are billed on top of that. The city does not set EMWD’s rates.

The meeting was at 625 S. Pico Avenue. Mayor Crystal Ruiz, Mayor Pro Tem Clarisa Sanchez, and Councilmembers Phil Ayala, Alonso Ledezma, and Valerie Vandever answered roll call. City Clerk Julia Espinoza called the roll. Staff reports name Travis Randel as interim city manager.

The water hearing ran from 7:02 to 8:29 p.m., the action minutes say. The council first voted 5-0 on Resolution 4144, findings on exhaustion of administrative remedies, and to proceed. Vandever moved. Sanchez seconded. Ayes: Ruiz, Sanchez, Ledezma, Vandever, Ayala.

Public Utilities Superintendent Mat Osborn and Finance Director Kimberly Ganimian presented.

Five people spoke, the minutes say: Michael Siordia, Brian Hawkins, Mike Sullivan, George Evans, and Ashley Macias. The minutes list the names. They do not say what anyone told the council.

The clerk recorded 12 written protests against the water rates. The city’s notice said a majority of affected parcels would have blocked the increase, and that the water system serves about 4,666 customers. Oral comments did not count as protests unless a written protest was filed. Email protests were not accepted.

Ledezma moved Resolution 4145, the water rate schedule, with CEQA findings. Sanchez seconded. The vote was 4-1. Ayes: Ruiz, Sanchez, Ledezma, Ayala. Nay: Vandever. The minutes give no reason for the no vote.

The adopted water schedule keeps the current structure and raises the numbers, according to the notice in the packet.

Most homes pay a monthly meter charge. For a 5/8-inch or 3/4-inch meter, that charge goes from $24.89 now to $51.84 on Jan. 1, 2027, then $75.17 in 2028, $86.45 in 2029, $90.77 in 2030, and $93.49 on Jan. 1, 2031. A 1-inch meter goes from $34.82 to $86.19 in 2027.

Residential use is billed in two tiers, per 100 cubic feet (748 gallons). Tier 1, the first 11 units, goes from $3.15 to $3.70 in 2027. Tier 2, above 11 units, goes from $3.90 to $4.49. By Jan. 1, 2031, those volume rates would be $6.67 and $8.10. Nonresidential customers pay a uniform rate, $3.73 now and $4.26 in 2027.

All water customers also pay the Water Adjudication Fee, $1.77 per 100 cubic feet now and $1.10 in 2027. The notice says that fee covers groundwater-basin management and replenishment under the Hemet-San Jacinto Groundwater Management Program.

The sewer hearing opened at 9:54 p.m. and closed at 10:22 p.m., the action minutes say.

The council voted 5-0 on Resolution 4146, the exhaustion findings, and to proceed. Vandever moved. Sanchez seconded. Ayes: Ruiz, Sanchez, Ledezma, Vandever, Ayala. Osborn and Ganimian presented again.

Four people spoke: Michael Siordia, Brian Hawkins, Manuel Sotelo, and Susan Acevedo. The minutes give names only.

The clerk recorded 13 written protests against the sewer rates.

Ledezma moved Resolution 4147, the sewer schedule, with CEQA findings. Sanchez seconded. The vote was 3-0. Ayes: Ruiz, Ledezma, Sanchez. Absent: Ayala, Vandever. The minutes do not say why they were off the dais. Both voted later on a 1st Street contract, which passed 5-0. Mayor Ruiz adjourned the meeting at 11:05 p.m.

Most residential sewer customers pay a monthly city collection charge per equivalent dwelling unit. That charge goes from $8.22 now to $10.48 on Jan. 1, 2027, then $14.15 in 2028, $19.10 in 2029, $19.67 in 2030, and $20.26 on Jan. 1, 2031. Some businesses, restaurants, and most schools pay by water use instead: $0.75 per 100 cubic feet now and $0.95 in 2027.

Customers pay the city’s collection rate plus EMWD treatment and disposal charges. For city water customers, EMWD’s charges appear on the city bill. Others may see the city sewer charge on an EMWD bill. The notice lists EMWD’s present charges as $8.22 per EDU and $40.31 per sewage unit and says those figures can change.

Staff reports from Ganimian, approved by Randel, and the Willdan Financial Services rate study say existing rates will not cover later years of the plan. The city cited higher costs for labor, materials, energy, chemicals, construction, and contracted work, plus repair of aging pipes, wells, reservoirs, and sewer mains. Water rates also cover debt service. Both staff reports say that without the increases, the general fund would have to subsidize the utilities.

The notices went out under Article XIII D of the California Constitution, commonly called Proposition 218. The new rates apply to service on and after Jan. 1, 2027.

The City Council meets next on Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2026, 6:30 p.m. open session, at the San Jacinto Community Center, 625 S. Pico Avenue. Agendas: https://horizon.agendalink.app/engage-v2/sanjacintoca/agendas

The post Council OKs five-year water, sewer rates appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

“How is it that we’ve gone through all these hearings and meetings, and we’ve arrived at the same place we were four years ago?” Supervisor Chuck Washington asked at the end of Tuesday’s hearing on Ordinance No. 927. “We don’t seem to be moving the needle here. I get the same complaints from constituents. It’s disappointing. I come to work to try to maintain or improve their quality of life.”

The Transportation & Land Management Agency, along with the Department of Planning and Code Enforcement, had sought modifications to the STR ordinance based on studies and community meetings. But after a 90-minute hearing during which more than a dozen people aired grievances, the board voted unanimously to table action to an unspecified date.

However, due to legislative constraints, the board was unable to automatically extend a moratorium on the issuance of STR certificates in Thousand Palms and the B Bar H Ranch. Technically, the moratorium will expire on Feb. 28. But the supervisors’ consensus pointed to the likelihood of their renewing the moratorium, possibly for another 10 months, when they return for their next regular meeting on March 3.

The board implemented a slate of countywide regulations tied to STRs under Ordinance No. 927 in October 2022. The measure has been largely untouched since then, and Tuesday’s hearing was sought by TLMA to make a series of “minor” adjustments.

Short-term rentals are defined as residential dwellings leased for a maximum of 30 days and a minimum of two days and one night. Prior to the ratification of Ordinance No. 927, the county had a somewhat informal process for permitting short-term rentals. Officials said there are now roughly 1,100 certificated STR properties in unincorporated communities countywide.

Most of the comments heard by the board Tuesday reflected the same issues the panel considered when the ordinance was first implemented — lack of enforcement or consequences for STR operators who don’t follow the rules.

“The same bad actors are really the ones we’re talking about,” a Temecula Valley resident named Ron told the board. “The real problem is Code Enforcement doesn’t write citations. You need to rethink the officers’ hours of operation. They’re heading back home just when the parties are starting at night. Noise disturbances are preventing us from sleeping. Without code doing an adequate job, this will never be solved.”

Another Temecula Valley resident complained that regardless of how bad conditions are in the STR property adjacent to his home — where one weekend renter recently rammed a vehicle through the front door — Code Enforcement is ineffectual.

“My life is a living hell,” he told the board. “Nothing is being done. They have massive parties there, and all we’re asking is that Code Enforcement do some actual enforcement.”

An East Thousand Palms senior said her dirt road has been virtually overtaken by partygoers regularly renting out an STR property directly across from her home.

“Sometimes there 100 cars parked on the road, and they go off-roading,” she said. “Some cities in the Coachella Valley have banned STRs. There are too many. We don’t need more.”

Supervisor Jose Medina was aghast at what he heard, noting that he’d never experienced anything remotely like the speakers’ circumstances in his 30 years residing in the same Riverside house.

“We all have the right to live in peaceful, safe neighborhoods,” he said. “I’m glad we won’t vote on this today. We need to see more cooperation between the Sheriff’s Department and Code Enforcement.”

Board members recognized that the majority of STR operators are law-abiding, but said people leasing out some properties for illegal events had grown accustomed to flouting regulations — and had not faced serious penalties to deter them from doing so.

Supervisor Manuel Perez expressed hope that the agencies, with the guidance of the board, could “work out the kinks” to improve Code Enforcement operations.

“We should consider after-hours enforcement,” he said.

Although the county maintains an overnight phone line staffed by a complaint taker, the most that can be done between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. is for the staffer to call the STR operator to alert him or her to complaints. Deputies will respond to properties to investigate excessive noise and other disturbances, but Undersheriff Don Sharp admitted they have to “prioritize” calls. He said they will only go if they’re not needed for something that rates higher, such as a domestic violence or assault report.

The amendments that were under board consideration included a new provision enabling the director of the Department of Code Enforcement, head of the TLMA or the director of the Department of Planning to declare an “urgent circumstance” that grants authority to immediately order the abatement of a public nuisance at an STR.

The ordinance’s proposed new language also specified that any “responsible operator” of an STR may be denied a certificate of renewal if he or she received three notices of violation in a six-month span, or five notices over the entire duration of an STR certificate.

The slate of amendments further called for an increase in the initial STR application fee from $740 to $1,040, and elevating the annual renewal fee from $540 to $750. The Planning Commission voted 4-0 last month to recommend that the board designate funds to expand the county’s STR Enforcement Team.

A moratorium established in April 2025 halted the issuance of all STR certificates in Thousand Palms and the B Bar H Ranch. That suspension followed a surge in boisterous parties at vacation rental properties throughout the communities.

The TLMA confirmed complaints continued in both areas after the moratorium was invoked, but the number over the last six months totaled fewer than 40. The moratorium’s official sunset date is Feb. 28, but the board will discuss resetting it next month.

The post ‘My Life Is A Living Hell’: Complaints Continue About Short-Term Rentals In Riverside County appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The governor, who will address the Legislature and present his budget proposal this week, has spent the past seven years pushing an ambitious agenda. Now in his final year, numerous interest groups will clamor for him to pass their preferred policies, nix the regulations they fear and protect the programs they favor. How he responds will follow him into his expected presidential primary run.

Will he, with his recent focus on affordability, make a dent in Californians’ housing and health care costs? Will he make progress on reducing homelessness? Will he continue pushing green energy as voters demand cheaper gas? Will he weather another dismal budget deficit without punishing cuts that would alienate the progressives whose programs he has championed?

“This really is a pivotal year for him,” Democratic political consultant Kelly Calkin said. “What do voters in the rest of the country want to see? They’re feeling the pinch of affordability. … He’s probably going to look through that lens on what helps shape his agenda for the next year.”

It’s also his final opportunity to make headway on some of the lofty goals Newsom made when he ran for governor in 2018 that he hasn’t always met.

He vowed to tackle homelessness, which has only gotten worse over his seven-year tenure, despite the more than $24 billion his administration has poured into it. He started off his term with an initial, headline-grabbing proposal to grant new parents six months of paid leave, but quickly pared it back to a two-week increase, for a total of eight weeks, and gradual boosts in how much the program pays.

In 2021 he said the state would add 200,000 new subsidized child care slots by this year, but the plan has been delayed for two years and remains tens of thousand of slots short; he has since promised to resume the expansion this year.

He campaigned on establishing a single-payer public health care system, even calling out “politicians saying they support single-payer but that it’s too soon, too expensive or someone else’s problem.” Then he pivoted to “universal coverage,” with the state slowly expanding coverage for low-income Californians, including immigrants who entered the country illegally, but abruptly halted that amid a budget deficit last year.

He spoke, like so many before him, of evening out the state’s boom-and-bust tax system that over-relies on stock market returns, but has largely quashed other proposals to raise revenue as the state stares down a deficit.

‘It never seems like enough’

Newsom’s penchant for big promises and first-in-the-nation ideas has been both a blessing and a curse for the ambitious politician. Advocates of those policies say the lofty goals have made a difference, even if the state ultimately falls short of achieving all of them.

Newsom has left his mark on state government: He started new programs like the expansion of public school to all 4-year-olds, created an office to control rising health care costs, flexed the state’s regulatory powers to achieve its greenhouse gas-reduction goals — only to run into resistance with the Trump administration — and pushed state leaders into overseeing thorny issues like homelessness and the mental health care system that had long been left to local and county governments.

“I don’t think there was a lot of stuff lacking,” said Anthony Rendon, the former Assembly speaker who led the chamber during Newsom’s first five years in office, of policy issues the governor has yet to address. After years of working with Newsom’s predecessor Jerry Brown, who was focused mostly on fiscal restraint and building up the state’s reserves, Rendon and former Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins recalled Newsom starting off his first term in 2019 pleasing the mostly Democratic Legislature with a long list of progressive ideas and a willingness to spend on them.

“In retrospect, it never seems like enough,” Rendon said.

Case in point: housing. It’s perhaps the most visible measure by which Newsom will be judged after he leaves office and it comprises a bulk of the recent national Democratic platform focused on lowering the cost of living. About 40% of California households are “burdened” by their rent or mortgage, census data shows, a policymaker benchmark meaning housing eats up more than a third of their income.

Newsom ran on lowering those costs by boosting production and said it was “achievable” for the state to build an ambitious 3.5 million new homes by 2025. In 2024, the state added just under 120,000 new units, about a fifth of the annual rate needed to meet that goal. In media appearances the governor now downplays his original figure as a “stretch goal.”

Yet those who favor building more say he’s still accomplished more than any other governor on housing. They blame local resistance to housing density, high interest rates and the persistently high cost of building as reasons for the slow progress.

“You can’t solve a systemic problem overnight or even in seven years, but what you can do is change the trajectory of the issue,” said Ray Pearl, executive director of the California Housing Consortium, a nonprofit that advocates for building affordable housing.

A pivot to modular housing this year?

Pearl pointed to actions Newsom has taken, like an early budget move to quintuple the state’s tax credit for low-income housing construction, backing laws that relax rules on where housing can be built and picking legal fights with cities that refuse to plan adequate housing units for their populations.

“Leadership sets the tone,” he said. “It’s changed the focus and the conversation to where the state of California has finally gotten serious in planning for and producing affordable housing.”

Pearl said in Newsom’s final year in office he hopes the governor will support a proposed $10 billion bond lawmakers want to put on this year’s ballot to boost a state affordable housing fund.

Newsom acknowledges California has yet to see his promised building boom, and last month expressed interest in alternative forms of construction, such as modular housing, as another solution. On The Ezra Klein Show, he hinted at an upcoming legislative debate over how the state can promote modular housing, a cheaper way to build in which houses are assembled in factories then shipped to sites to be installed. An Assembly committee chaired by one of Newsom’s allies on housing, Democratic Oakland Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, is set to discuss the method this year. Its use in the Bay Area has already exposed familiar debates about the use of union labor in housing.

“This holds a lot of promise. It holds a lot of political peril, in the context of the politics within labor. And that has to be accommodated and dealt with,” Newsom said. “By the way, if there’s a big preview for California in my last year, it’s in this space legislatively to take it to the next level.”

It’s the closest Newsom has come in recent weeks to stating a new policy goal or proposal. Izzy Gardon, Newsom’s spokesperson, would not provide any details on his housing or any other agenda, telling CalMatters only to “stay tuned.”

Gardon refused interview requests to discuss the governor’s policy goals for his final year. Newsom is expected to deliver his State of the State address on Thursday.

Tough times for health care and social services

Already, advocates for the comprehensive safety-net services that Newsom has championed — another hallmark of his tenure — are urging him to maintain those programs as he stares down another tough budget deficit estimated at $18 billion. The agency overseeing those services accounts for nearly 40% of the state’s general fund spending and many of its programs are projected to lose significant federal funds through President Donald Trump’s tax and spending bill.

During Newsom’s two terms, he added subsidized child care slots, boosted cash assistance for the poor, installed a state surgeon general who has focused on childhood trauma and the racial health gap and most significantly, incrementally expanded health care coverage to different groups of immigrants who are in the country illegally.

The latter, a controversial and costly policy, has allowed the governor to pivot from his original promise of a universal, state-paid health care system that was the pie-in-the-sky dream of progressives and still say he was achieving “universal access.” After passage of the Affordable Care Act, more than 90% of Californians were insured by the time Newsom took office. His expansions, first for immigrant young adults and then for older ones, pushed it to nearly everyone in 2023.

Policy allies generally don’t fault Newsom for shifting away from a single-payer system, which would have required billions more in state funds and complex agreements with an increasingly unaligned federal administration. They are particularly satisfied that his administration has laid some of the groundwork for such a proposal by attempting to rein in the growth of health care costs through price limits imposed by the Office of Health Care Affordability. But now, they’re worried he’ll walk away from his expansive coverage goals altogether.

Last year, facing higher than expected costs in the Medi-Cal program and needing to close a $12 billion deficit, Newsom undid coverage for the last group of immigrants to become eligible: working-age adults. A freeze on new enrollment of adults took effect Jan. 1. Later this year, adult immigrants who entered the country illegally will lose Medi-Cal dental coverage and next year most will face monthly premiums that are expected to force some off coverage, to the disappointment of health advocates who are urging Newsom to reverse the cuts.

Amanda McAllister-Wallner, executive director of the advocacy group Health Access California, said she’s worried the administration will consider further cuts this year, after Newsom has come out heavily against other proposals to raise revenue for the health system, like a nurses’ union proposal for a wealth tax. She doesn’t like that the governor appeared willing to back down on coverage at the same time the state’s provision of social services for immigrants became an increasing political controversy nationally.

“The hope was that the Health for All expansion would be considered the baseline, that that would be something we budget for long term because it’s just something that’s part of who we are as a state,” said McAllister-Wallner. “Health care has been an area where the governor has really made a name for himself in a way that I think he can and should be very proud of, and to see … a backing-off of those commitments would be the biggest disappointment for me.”

The post Gavin Newsom’s legacy: Can he deliver on unmet promises in his final year as governor? appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.