HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1991/07/23
Tuesday, July 23, 1991
6:00 p.m.
\'11 dee'!ore un~:er pGnn:ty cf PO~';~!;y t~;at 1 am
er:i;:d,'}'--e~:l b"/ the ,:.'i~~:' oi Chu::J "Fs"J) in the
Oi1icE: e'f .~,:-~.:),: C:!0r:, ;.':;lj .~ :.::: ; P8S~3d
t;':[:; i\1,Qn~.:~"::.}':i -'J C~1 'Ui.,) ~>.:l!8~ rl D:rJtd \8\
the Public ,crvt:. es ",Uk'",. end t City Ha:! M
Df:\TED~ ::rJ 11 t,1L SlGl"'FJ)
(
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Relnllar Meeting of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CALLED TO ORDER
1.
CAll. THE ROll:
Councilmembers Grasser Horton ~ Malcolm _' Moore ~ Rindone _,
and Mayor Nader _'
2. PLEDGE OF AIJ.EGIANCE TO THE FlAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MlNlITES:
June 18 and July 9, 1991 (Joint Meetings of the City
CouncillRedevelopment Agency)
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office: Naomi Ross - Chula Vista 21 Committee
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 12)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items lisred under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the
Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff requests
that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to
Speak Form" avaiJJJble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the stnff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff
recommendation.) Items pu/led from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after PubliJ: Hearings and Oral
CommuniJ:ations. Items pulled by the public wiD be the first items of business.
5. WRITfEN COMMUNICATIONS: None.
6.A ORDINANCE 2457 AMENDING CHAPTER 9.06 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
REGULATION OF SECURl1Y ALARM PERMITS (second readin~ and
adoption) - (Chief of Police) Continued from the 7/9/91 meeting.
B. RESOLUTION 16266 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITI-I ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC.
7. ORDINANCE 2470 AMENDING VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF SECTION 9.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE TO ALTER OR ENHANCE THE CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL
PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH GRAFFITI RELATED VIOLATIONS (first
readin~) -When Council considered the amendments proposed for chapter
9.20 of the Municipal Code at the July 16 Council meeting, they directed
that staff return with further amendments to 9.20. Staff recommends
Council place ordinance on first reading. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-2-
July 23, 1991
8. RESOLUTION 16267 APPROPRIATING $30,000 FOR LEGAL EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITI-lTHE
ISSUANCE OF THE STAlE ROU'IE 125 TOLL ROAD FRANCHISE - Council
directed the retention of legal services for waiver of, and then filing of,
certain CEQA and contract causes of action against Cal Trans and C1V as
applied to the SR 125 toll road. At the time of the direction, the Council
was unable to appropriate funds for the expenditure. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (City Attorney)
9. RESOLUTION 16268 APPROVING A "NATIONAL NIGfIT OUI" FUN RUN EVENT TO BE HElD
AT BAYSIDE PARK ON AUGUST 6,1991 AND AU1HORIZlNG THE MAYOR
TO EXECU'IE AHOID HARMLESS INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTWITI-I
THE PORT DISTRICT FOR THIS EVENT - August 6, 1991 will represent the
eighth annual "National Night Out". National Night Out is a nationwide
effort to heighten crime prevention awareness, strengthen neighborhood
spirit and police-community relations, generate support and participation
for local crime prevention programs and sending a message to criminals
that our communities are organized and fighting back. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
lOA RESOLUTION 16260 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITI-I SWEElWATER
AU1HORITYTO PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF STORM DRAIN FEES - On
12/8/91, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed regulations
for the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits to regulate storm water discharge into the waters of the
U.S. The final version of these regulations were issued on 11/16/90.
These permits will require agencies discharging storm water to develop
management programs for the control of pollutants. The City established
a storm drain fee by enacting Ordinance 2463 on 6/18/91. The storm
drain fee will pay for the establishment and implementation of the NPDES
program. Amendments to the agreements with the Sweerwater Authority
and the Otay Water District will be needed to provide for the collection of
said storm drain fees. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions.
(Director of Public Works) Continued from the 7/16/91 meeting.
B. RESOLUTION 16261 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITI-I OTAY WATER
DISTRICT TO PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF STORM DRAIN FEES
11A RESOLUTION 16269 MAKING FINDINGS ON THE PETITION FOR THE SALT CREEK I
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-1 - FN Projects, Inc. (Baldwin
Company) has submitted a petition requesting assessment district financing
of infrastructure improvements for their Salt Creek I residential
development. The owner has also submitted a map showing and
describing the boundaries of the proposed district. Certain improvements
are located outside the City boundary necessitating the request for consent
and jurisdiction from the County of San Diego. Because of the complexity
of the proceedings and time constraints, the owner has requested that
Thomas O. Meade be retained as project manager for the district. The
current agreement with Municipal Financial Services, Inc. is being
amended to delete the project management services. Staff recommends
approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-3-
July 23, 1991
B. RESOLUTION 16270 ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING TIlE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-1 (SALT CREEK I)
C. RESOLUTION 16271 APPROVING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND
REQUESTING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION FROM TIlE COUNlY OF
SAN DIEGO FOR TIlE SALT CREEK I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER
90-1
D. RESOLUTION 162n APPROVING AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO TIlE AGREEMENT WITH
MUNlOPAL FINANaAL SERVICES, INC. AND AUTIlORIZING TIlE MAYOR
TO EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT
E. RESOLUTION 16273 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH THOMAS 0_ MEADE FOR PROJECT
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR TIlE SALT CREEK I ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER 90-1 AND AUTIlORIZING TIlE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT
12.A RESOLUTION 16274 MAKING APPOINTMENTS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-2
(OTAY VALLEY ROAD) - Preparations are being made to bring the Otay
Valley Road Assessment District to the Council in the near future for a
public hearing. A portion of the proposed improvements and a parcel of
land proposed to be assessed are outside the City's boundary. As a
preliminary step in the proceedings it is necessary to request consent and
jurisdiction from the County of San Diego to construct the portion of the
road and to assess the land outside the City. Staff recommends approval
of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 16275 ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING TIlE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)
C. RESOLUTION 16276 APPROVING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND
REQUESI1NG CONSENT AND JURISDICTION FOR ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speok
to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form
to speak in opposUion to the staff recommendatioTL) Comments are limited to five mUw1eS per individual
13.
PUBUC HEARING
FORMATION OF CHULA VISTA OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NUMBER 24, CANYON VIEWS - The developers of Canyon View Homes
Subdivision have petitioned the City for the formation of an open space
maintenance district in accordance with the criteria contained in the
Municipal Code. On 7/9/91, the Council set July 23,1991 as the date for
a public hearing on the proposed formation of Open Space Maintenance
Agenda
-4-
July 23, 1991
District No. 24. Staff recommends Council conduct the public hearing and
approve the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
RESOLUTION 16277 ESfABUSHING OPEN SPACE MAINfENANCE DISfRlCf NUMBER 24 -
CANYON VIEWS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportuniJy for the general publil: to address the CiJy Council on any subject mntter within the Couru:il's
jurisdiction tIult is not an item on this agendJ1. (State law, however, generalfy prohibits the CiJy CoundI from
taking action on any issues not included on the posted agendi1.) If you wish to address the Council on such a
subject, please complete the yellow .Request to Speok Under Oral Communications Form' available in the lobby
and submit it to the CiJy Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your nome and address
for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenclo are expected to elk:it substantial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, stoff, or members of the general publk:. The items will be considered individualfy by the Council and staff
recommendations may in certJJin cases be presented in the alterru1tive. Those who wish to speak, please fill out
a 'Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the CiJy Clerk prior to the meeting. Publk:
comments are limited to five minutes.
14.
REPORT
ON ENDANGERED USTINGSTATIJS OF THE CAUFORNlA GNATCATCHER
AND CURRENT REGIONAL AND SUB-REGIONAL EFFORTS TO PREPARE
A HABITAT CONSERVATION 'PLAN - The report contains a review of the
current status of the California Gnatcatcher as a state and federal
endangered species. Current programs by other agencies and groups which
are proposing to preserve sensitive biological habitat, and Chula Vista's
options are also listed. Staff recommends Council 1) authorize the City
Manager to send a letter to the California Fish and Game Commission
regarding the potential listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a candidate
for state endangered species; and 2) direct staff to prepare a habitat
conservation program for areas within the City containing sensitive
biological habitat, including coastal sage scrub habitat. (Director of
Planning)
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the CiJy Council will consider items whU:h have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the CiJy's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
No items submitted.
Agenda
-5-
July 23, 1991
ITEMS PULLED FROM TIlE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the Cily Couru:il will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda
items pulled at the request of the public wiI/ be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers. Public
comments are limited to five minutes per individuaJ.
OTHER BUSINESS
15. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORTCS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
16. MAYOR'S REPORTCS)
17. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Moore
a. Discussion and potential action regarding SANDAG and approval of master plan for air-
cartier airport in Otay Mesa with City of San Diego as lead agency and application to
Federal Aviation Administration (FM) for associated planning funds.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to the Regular City Council Meeting/Worksession on Thursday, July 25, 1991 at
4:00 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
July 19, 1991
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager
Council Meeting of July 23, 1991
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the City Council
meeting of July 23, 1991. There are no Written Communications.
SWM:mab
0~M~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item (, It -+e
Meeting Date 07/23/91
ITEM TITLE
Establishment of Fees for Security Alarm Permits; Increasing Fees
for False Alarms and Establishing Late Fees; and, Approval of
Agreement with Enforcement Technology Inc. for the Management
of Billing Related to Security Alarm Permits and False Alarms.
~ ResoluMrd'A~ending the Master Fee Schedule; APf'II2.OVt~ ~111'qJ
A ~ PS)~l~@t\ce Amending Chapter 9.06 of the Municipal Code
_ D\~G p..i" relative to the Regulation of Security Alarm Permits;
ND \<.\:.P-
s[CO. 8 ~
Agreement with Enforcement
Resolution Approving
~ecr-1010gy, Inc.
SUBMITTED BY Police c:fIkI ~
REVIEWED BY City Manager.J~ ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
Currently, the Police Department responds to approximately 545 security alarms each month,
99.5% of which are false alarms. Staff proposed changes to the Alarm Ordinance, CYMC 9.06,
for the purpose of clarifying the Ordinance's provisions and increasing the penalty assessments
for recurring false alarms. A public hearing was held on June 18, 1991, pursuant to
Government Code 66018, to hear testimony regarding the proposed fees. The recommended
fees and procedures proposed herein consider issues raised in public testimony given at that
time, and reflect Council concerns relative to the City recovering the costs of responding to
chronic false alarms.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) Adopt the Resolution Amending the Master Fee Schedule, effective the same date as the
Ordinance Amendment.
2) Place Ordinance on Second Reading for Adoption.
3) Approve Agreement with Enforcement Technology Inc. (ETEC)
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
~ ~I
Page 2, Item
(c
Meeting Date 07/23/91
DISCUSSION:
At the public hearing regarding proposed amendments to the Master Fee schedule, three
concerns were raised: I) that the Alarm Ordinance enforcement program should include an
educational component to raise citizen's awareness of the extent, cost and consequences of
recurrent false alarms; 2) that the program provide for timely billing; and, 3) that fee schedule
proposed by ETEC and described in the Agenda statement of June 18 be clarified. Additionally,
Council requested that staff address the issue of full cost recovery with respect to the proposed
fees.
When Police Officers respond to false alarms they leave a 3"xS" yellow card (PD-508) which
briefly informs the property owner that Officers responded to an alarm and that no signs of entry
were found (see attachment I). Staff is proposing a revised, more detailed PD-508 which will
also serve as the first and second occurrence warning to property owner's as required by the
Alarm Ordinance. The revised PD-508 (see attachment 2) describes the Alarm Ordinance and
penalties specified therein, the proportion of alarm responses which are false and how they
impact public safety citywide, and informs the owner who to contact if they believe the alarm
was legitimate. Staff feels this change will increase community understanding of the alarm
dilemma and help reduce the number of false alarms.
To ensure timely and accurate billing, staff and ETEC have agreed upon a "real-time" billing
system. Under this system, ETEC will bill property owners within 5 working days after they
have been notified that a third (or greater) false alarm has occurred at a particular address.
Fines still outstanding at month's end will be re-billed. Bills that are thirty day past due shall
include an additional 15% late fee as provided for in the proposed language of the Master Fee
Schedule. This proposal more closely emulates conventional billing methodologies employed
by the private sector. Staff believes this system will be effective in recovering penalty
assessments without badgering property owners.
Another concern raised by the public was in regard to the fees to be paid by the City to ETEC.
The False Alarm Enforcement and Management Program, as proposed, would work as follows:
I. ETEC processes and enters all 2,800 existing alarm permits, and all new permit
applications, into their database at $2.50 each.
2. Police Officers respond to an alarm. If there are signs of entry or tampering they will
presume the alarm is legitimate and investigate. If the alarm appears to be false, the new
PD-508 will be left in a prominent place at the scene and the Crime Prevention Unit
(CPU) will be notified via the Police Department's dispatch system. No related fees.
3. The CPU notifies ETEC that a false alarm was activated at an address. ETEC enters the
address into their billing system -- the City is charged $.35 for each false alarm
activation entered into the ETEC system.
~-2..
Page 3, Item !..t,
Meeting Date (J7/23/91
4. In the event of the third, or subsequent, alarms in a consecutive twelve month period,
ETEC bills the property owner the appropriate penalty assessment -- the City is charged
$.95 for each bill mailed by ETEC.
5. ETEC collects the penalty assessments as an agent of the City and deposits all funds
received into a Trust Account in the City's name at a local bank of the City's choice --
the City is charged $.20 for each payment received, processed and deposited by ETEC.
The City retains all interest earned by the account.
5. ETEC submits a monthly statement to the City describing the services provided during
the previous month. The contractual minimum monthly charge is $300.00. The CPU
reviews this billing for accuracy and pays ETEC for services rendered.
The staff proposal would result in total annual charges to the City of between $3600 and $4000,
in the second and subsequent years of the contract, depending upon the number of new
applications processed, false alarms, and the rate of response to billings. First year costs would
be higher due to the one-time cost of entering the 2800 existing permits into ETEC's system.
Cost Comoarison
Three vendors submitted proposals to provide false alarm management service to the City. The
cost comparison presented below is based upon the same calendar year 1990 activity levels
referenced in the staff report ofJune 18th: approximately 6,530 false alarm activations; 314 false
alarm fines mailed; 208 payments received and processed; and, total payments received of
$25,650. There are currently about 2,800 permits on file.
ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC. (ETEC)
FEE STRUCTURE: 6530 activations @ $.35 = $2,285.50
314 billings @ $.95 = $298.30
208 payments processed @ $.20 = $41.60
2800 permits currently on file entered into system @ $2.50 = $7,000.00
Contractual minimum monthly payment: $300.00
Payments Received $25,650.00
Service Payment $10,600.00 (1st Year; subsequent years $3,600 - $4,000)
Net to City $15,050.00
ALARM MANAGEMENT SERVICES (AMS)
FEE STRUCTURE: 33% of payments received
Payments Received $25,650.00
Service Fee $ 8,464.50
Net to City
$17,185.50
lD~.3
Page 4, Item t.p
Meeting Date 07/23/91
WESTERN ALARM TRACKING (WAT)
FEE STRUCTURE: 40% of payments received
Payments Received
Service Fee
$25,650.00
$10,260.00
$15,390.00
Net to City
Other Considerations
Staff toured the operations the two lowest cost vendors: ETEC and AMS. ETEC is based in
Tustin, has facilities in Carlsbad and Berkeley, and has contracted with over fifty governmental
agencies nationwide to provide services including moving, parking, and false alarm, citation
management. ETEC uses proven hardware and mature, flexible software systems to maintain
and safeguard its various databases. ETEC's staff has a broad base of experience in developing,
implementing and maintaining enforcement management systems for municipal government.
Because it currently contracts with the San Diego County Courts, ETEC has communications
protocols in-place which facilitate the electronic transmission of data between the San Diego
Courts and Tustin. AMS is a start-up company based in Escondido attempting to procure its
initial contract. AMS's hardware and software systems performed adequately in demonstrations
but are untested in a production environment. AMS has a two person staff with general law
enforcement and alarm monitoring experience. AMS, as a firm, lacks a track record in dealing
with either municipal government or court systems. Staff is convinced, based upon a
combination of cost, reliability, and quality and breadth of customer service considerations, that
the ETEC proposal is most capable of meeting all the City's requirements.
Full Cost Recovery (FCR)
Staff believes the proposed penalty assessments fairly reflect the Alarm Ordinance's purposes.
The first two false alarms in any twelve month period are presumed to be accidental and,
therefore, there is no fine. Subsequent false alarms in any twelve month period are considered
preventable: the property owner has been apprised of a malfunctioning alarm and it is presumed
that sufficient corrective action has not been taken. Based on the same assumptions presented
in the staff report of June 18 (16.5 minutes average time spent, $26.00 hourly including benefits)
FCR (hourly rate X FCR factor of 1.94296) for false alarms can be estimated at $14.15 for a
one Officer response and $28.30 for a two Officer response. One Officer responds to alarm
calls during daylight hours, two Officers respond after dark. Additionally, any FCR for false
alarm activations should include Communications Center staff time. The 6,530 false alarms in
1990 represented about 10.5% of the 62,396 calls for Police service in 1990. FCR for
Communications Center staff can be estimated at $3.25 (5 minutes average time spent, $20.00
hourly including benefits X FCR factor of 1.94296). Therefore, total FCR for false alarms
range from $17.40 for a daytime response to 31.55 for night responses. Staff believes the
penalty assessments, as proposed on June 18th, generally provide for full cost recovery.
b-~
Page 5, Item
~
Meeting Date 07/23/91
The Penalty Assessments proposed for the Master Fee Schedule are:
1. third false alarm within twelve consecutive months, $25.00;
2. fourth and fifth false alarm within twelve consecutive months, $50.00;
3. sixth false alarm within twelve consecutive months, $75.00; at the sixth false
alarm within a consecutive twelve month period, the property owners Alarm
User's Permit is suspended for purposes of revocation;
4. $10.00 to process new permit applications; and,
5. $2.00 bi-annual renewal fee.
Conclusion
The hearing held June 18, 1991, has resulted in two significant changes to the staff proposal
presented for public commentary on that date:
A. By enhancing the information provided by responding Police Officers at false alarm
scenes, alarm permit holders will be more aware of the costs and effects of false alarms.
Staff expects that increased education will reduce the number of false alarms.
B. The proposal that a more timely billing system be used will help: 1) ensure that violators
are billed accurately, and, 2) create a nexus between a violating false alarm occurrence
and the fine in a permit holder's mind.
Review of the proposals from the three vendors finds AMS with the lowest service fee during
the first year. This is directly related to the fact that AMS is offering to enter the current 2,800
Alarm User Permits into the database with no charge whereas ETEC will charge $7,000 (2800
X $2.50).
Even though the first year cost is greater, staff is recommending an agreement with ETEC based
on the fact that they have significant satisfactory experience with several governmental agencies
performing similar tasks and the realization that ETEC will be providing the service at the
lowest cost to the City after the first year.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The $2.00 Renewal Fee applied to the current number of Alarm User Permits will yield $5,600
(2,800 X $2.(0). Staff estimates the number of new permits in a twelve month period would
yield $3,000 (400 X $7.50). The funds col1ected via false alarm penalty assessments are
impacted by several variables which preclude an accurate fiscal estimate.
~~'5
ATTACHMENT 1: CURRENT FALSE ALARM NOTIFICATION
/
DATE:
TIME:
COMP.#:
;#-;
.
ON THE ABOVB. DAm AND TIMJ!t" OI'I'.:I'~_C
FROM-TfIE CHUI..A VISTA POUCI! DEPAR:,>
RESPONDED TO AN Al.ARM. ~: PBP.liI.~-
WERE CHECKED.. ANI) NO SIGNS OF El(J1LT j
OR TAMPERING WERE LOCATED . ",1;"__:?
" . .~...."......... - ..
- ~ '".,,0; -,- "
~n{'
PO-50s
.;:
.. ""'-..,: ... ",:.., .,.~
,;i::
;-. !-$t'1I
.iL'"
/..,~t."
ATTACHMENT 2: PROPOSED FALSE ALARM NOTIFICATION
FALSE ALARM NOTICE
Address: Date:
Time: Complaint #:
On the above date and time, Officers of the Chula Vista Police
Department responded to an alarm. THERE WERE NO
SIGNS OF ENTRY OR TAMPERING. lfyou believe, for
any reason, that this was not afalse alarm, please contact the
Crime Prevention Unit within three days ill 691-5187. The
Crime Prevention Unit is open Monday through Friday, 8:00 -
5:00. Please refer to the complaint number, date and time
listed above.
We need your help in reducing the number of false alarms.
In Chula Vista, 98 % of the alarm calls the Police Department
responds to are false a1arms...98%! By reducing the number
of false alarms, Police Officers can focus their activities upon
those which make our community safer to live and work in.
We will all benefit by reducing the number of false alarms.
If you believe your alarm system is malfunctioning, notify
your alarm service right away. If human error is to blame,
take action to reduce the possibility of future false alarms.
However, if you discover evidence of a possible crime call
691-5151 immediately.
The SECURITY ALARM ORDINANCE, Chapter 9.06 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code, requires all persons having a
security alarm to possess a valid Alarm User's Permit. If
more than two false alarms ori.inate from the above address
in anv twelve (\2) month period. penalties will be assessed bv
the City to the permit's holder for ourooses of recoverin. the
cost of resoondin. to recurrin. false alarms. See schedule
below.
FALSE ALARM PENALTY ASSESSMENTS
Third Alarm in a twelve (12) month period:
Fourth Alarm in a twelve (12) month period:
Fifth Alarm in a twelve (12) month period:
Sixth Alarm in a twelve (12) month period:
$25.00
$50.00
$75.00
$75.00
More than six false alarms in any rwelve (12) month period
will result in the suspension and/or revocation of the Alarm
User's Permit.
f., -1
ATTACHl-1ENT 3
COUNCIL AGBHDA STATEMENT
Item
ITEM TITLB:
Meeting Date 6/18/91
a) Public Hearing to Consider Esta~lishing
Fees for Security Alarm Permits Increasing
Fees for False Alarms and Establishing Late
Fee
SUBMITTED BY:
b) Resolution Amending Master Fee Schedule
c) Ordinance Aaending Chapter 9.06 of the
Municipal Code Relating to Requlation
of Security Alarm Permits
Chief oWJ1~ice
REVIEWED BY:
city Manager
(4/sths Vote: Yes____No X )
Currently, the Police Department is responding to 550 security
alarms every month. This is very time-consuming for patrol
officers and for the office staff who must monitor these alarms and
apply the provisions of the Alarm Ordinance 9.06 CVMC. Staff plans
to alleviate this pro~lem with changes in the Alarm Ordinance and
contracting with an alarm tracking company to monitor the Alarm
Ordinance.
1) Conduct a Public Hearing pursuant to Government Code
Section 66018 to hear testimony regarding the proposed
fees
,,;"\j
,t (
'\
RECOMMENDATION:
2) Adopt the Resolution Amending the Master Fee Schedule,
effective the same date the Ordinance Amendment becomes
effective
(J' .,
[\,')
~\' "Ii \
~ -'
\
~,"
3) Place Ordinance on First Reading
4) That Council agree in concept to entering into an
agreement with Enforcement Technology, Inc. and staff
return with the formal agreement at a later Council
meeting
DISCUSSION:
When the Security Alarm Ordinance was adopted in 1981 we were
averaging 150 alarms each month. In 1991 the monthly average has
climbed to 550 and this coupled with a false alarm rate of 99.5%
~.~
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 6/1S/91
results in a significant drain on the time of patrol officers.
staff has determined that on the average, an officer spends 16.5
minutes on each alarm. Based on an hourly rate of $26.00, (salary
plus fringe benefits), the annual cost is $47,190 (16.5 minutes X
550 calls per month X 12 months = 10S,900 minutes ~ 60 = 1,S15
hours X $26.00). This does not account for the fact that two
officers are sent on many alarms: the time it takes to process the
call in the Communications Center: and the staff time to monitor
the alarm ordinance.
The current ordinance is designed to discourage false alarms by
creating a penalty/fine system after a given number of false alarms
has occurred. Traditionally, the Alarm ordinance has been
monitored by the two employees assigned to the Crime Prevention
unit. The rapid escalation in alarm responses has created a
significant work load increase for the unit. currently, the unit
is spending almost sot of their time monitoring the Alarm
Ordinance. Even with this significant allotment of time the
billing process for false alarms is two to four months delayed.
To reduce the staff time and the number of false alarms, staff is
recommending the following changes:
1) Require an initial fee of $10 for an alarm
permit and a two year renewal fee of $2. The
current Ordinance does not require any fee for
an alarm permit. staff reviewed the alarm
ordinances in fourteen jurisdictions in San
Diego County and twelve of them required a
fee. The average fee is $1S.00. This initial
fee pays for the staff time involved in
placing the new alarm permit in the system.
Staff is also recommending a nominal fee of
$2. to renew the alarm permit bi-annually.
In the current ordinance the alarm permit does
not have to be renewed. This renewal will
provide the department with an opportunity to
obtain updated information on the permit
especially as it applies to the name, address
and phone number of the person who can respond
to emergencies such as alarm activations. If
this change is approved, all the 2,750
current alarm permit holders would be required
to pay the $2. renewal fee at this time and
new permits would require a fee of $10.
2) The false alarm fining system would be
increased and simplified.
~-1
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 6/18/91
The current ordinance reads as follows: CVMC 9.06.130
B.1.a and b.
"a. More than two in any thirty-day period, or
more than three within any ninety-day period: or
more than four within any one-hundred-eighty-day
period: or more than six in anyone-year period
shall result in a penalty assessment to twenty-five
dollars:
b. Each additional alarm after the twenty-five
dollar penalty assessment for any given time period
shall result in a penalty assessment of fifty
dollars."
This system has proven to be very confusing for the public and
complicated for the staff to administer. The fines have not
changed since 1981 and they need to be increased to send a stronger
message to decrease false alarms. The new language, which would be
included in the Master Fee schedule would be as follows:
"The first two (2) false alarms within a twelve (12)
month period shall be considered accidental and no fee
shall be charged. The alarm permit applicant shall be
notified in writing after the occurrence of the second
false alarm, notifying him/her that any further false
alarms will result in penalty assessments.
For false alarms exceeding the initial two (2) false
alarms within a twelve (12) month period:
Third (3rd) false alarm - TWenty-Five Dollars
($25.00).
Fourth (4th), Fifth (5th) and Sixth 6th) false
alarms - Fifty Dollars ($50.00).
All additional false alarms - One Hundred
Dollars ($100.00) each."
3) Whenever an alarm activation is called into
the police communications center by the alarm
monitoring company, they will provide the
police dispatcher with the alarm permit
number. This will allow the department
t. ..10
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 6/18/91
to initiate activity to monitor that permit
number and also insure that all moni tored
alarms have obtained permits from the city as
required by the Ordinance.
4) All fees due to violations of the false alarm
sections in the ordinance would be due and
payable within 30 days of the billing date
(CVMC 9.06.2130C): a late fee of fifteen
(15%) of the false alarm Assessment shall be
added to the unpaid balance of any assessments
required by this section not paid within
thirty days of the billing date (CVMC
9.06.1300): and the amount of any penalty
assessment fee and late fee assessed pursuant
to this section shall be deemed a debt to the
City, and an action may be commenced by the
issuing officer in the name of the city in any
court of competent jurisdiction in the amount
of the delinquent debt. Payment of any
penalty assessment fees-and late charges shall
not prohibit criminal prosecution for the
violation of any provisions of this Chapter
(CVMC 9.06.130E).
These three new sections will
payments and further the goal of
false alarJIs and compensating the
staff services rendered.
expedite
reducing
City for
5) That the City enter into an agreement with an
alarm tracking company to monitor the security
Alarm Ordinance. Contracting with an Alarm
Tracking Service would have the following
advantages:
a) Eliminate the significant staff
hours now being performed by the
Crime prevention Unit in monitoring
the Security Alarm Ordinance.
b) Eliminate staff hours performed by
Finance staff in billing for false
alarm violation.
I, .11
-~--_._._~._---~-------_.,~--,._.
.'. ..... ..-...-
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 6/18/91
c) Decrease false alarms by providing a
more efficient monitoring of the
system.
d) Generate revenue to pay for staff
. costs in monitoring the program.
staff has located three companies that provide
alarm tracking services in San Diego and
orange Counties. They are Western Alarm
Tracking (WAT) located in Fountain Valley, and
Enforcement Technology, Inc. (ETEC) in Tustin,
and Alarm Management Services (AMS) of San
Diego.
Staff has received offers from each company. WAT charges 40% of
the money collected, AMS charges 33% of the money collected and
ETEC charges a specified fee for each transaction they perform.
Staff has analyzed these three proposals utilizing alarm experience
during 1990 which included the following factors:
Number of false alarm activations 6,530
Number of false alarm fines due 314
Number of false alarm payments received 208
Total fine payments received $25,650.
EXAMPLES OF COSTS
CUrrently, there are approximately 2,800 permits on file. Last
calendar year, there were approximately 6,530 false alarm
activations. There were 314 false alarm fines mailed to residents
and businesses. Only 208 fine payments were received.
The following are examples of fees accrued from the past years
transactions, using all three possible vendors. These examples do
not include the proposed permit fee.
~ ,12-
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date 6/18/81
~
6,530 false alarm activations @ $.35 each = $2,285.00
314 false alarm fines @ $.95 each = $298.30
208 payments processed @ $.20 = $41.60
Total dollar amount collected and deposited: $25,650.00 collected
for city
City Makes
Service Payment
Profit
$25,650.00
- 3.600.00
$22,050.00
($300
minimum monthly service
charge - not to exceed
$9,000 annually)
~
No fee for false alarm data recording, no fee for alarm fines, and
no fee for payment processing
40% of amount collected for payment of services
Percentage paid = $10,260.00
City Makes
Service Payment
Profit
$25,650.00
-10.260.00
$15,390.00
AMQ
No fee for false alarm data recording, no fee for alarm fines, and
no fee for payment processing
33% of amount collected for payment of services
Percentage Paid = $8,464.50
City Makes
Service Payment
Prof! t
$25,650.00
- 8.464.50
$17,185.50
(.-/3
Page 7, Item
Meeting Date 6/18/91
If the council approves the new fee schedule of $10 for new alarm
permits, ETEC will charqe $2.50 for including the new permit in the
system and WAT will charge $4. and AMS will charge $3.30.
Staff concludes that it would be more profitable to enter into a
service agreement with ETEC.
FISCAL IMPACTa
The $2.00 renewal fee applied to the current number of permits will
yield $5,500 ($2.00 X 2,750). Staff estimates the number of new
permits in a twelve month period would yield $300 ($7.50 X 400).
The funds collected via false alarm fees includes several variables
which do not allow for a specific fiscal estimate.
ALARM1l3
IP ~ltI
~\c~.
t>.<::P<< ORDINANCE NO. 2457
~<;) ,.
(,. ~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
~~ VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 9.06 OF THE CHULA VISTA
~~ MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SECURITY ALARMS
00~<;) The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain
~~ as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 9.06.030 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 9.06.030 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter,
and phrases shall be construed as
section unless it is apparent from
different meaning is intended:
the following words
set forth in this
the context that a
A. "Alarm agent" means and includes any person who is
self-employed or employed directly or indirectly by
an alarm business operator whose duties include, but
are limited to: selling, maintaining, installing,
monitoring, demonstrating or causing others to
respond to an alarm in or on any building, place or
premises. This definition shall not apply to local
safety officers as defined in Government Code
Section 20019.4.
B. "Alarm business operator" means and includes any
business operated for any consideration whatsoever,
engaged in the installation, maintenance, alteration
or servicing of alarm systems or which responds to
such alarm systems. "Alarm business operator,'
however, shall not include a business which merely
sells from a fixed location or manufacture alarm
systems, unless such business services, installs,
monitors or responds to alarm systems at the
protected premises.
"
C. "Alarm system" is any device designed for the
detection of an unauthor ized entry on the premises
or for alerting others of the commission of an
unlawful act or both, and when activated emits an
audible or silent signal or message to which police
are expected to respond. I t includes those devices
which emit a signal within the protected premises
only and supervised by the proprietor of the
premises where located, and otherwise known as a
proprietary alarm. Auxiliary devices installed by a
telephone company to protect its systems which might
be damaged or disrupted by the use of an alarm
system are not included in the definition.
\
()/f./J'NI4Ne.C tAl
s e.A It! It! E /) .7'"-
A(i~",b,q
FIIJ..I-
()It 1.9'
{,pA - J
C7'
D. "Alarm user" means any person who owns, leases,
rents, uses or makes available for use by its
agents, employees, representa ti ves or immedia te
family an alarm system in the city.
E. "Audible alarm" means an alarm system designed to
emit an audible sound outside of the protected
premises to alert persons of an unauthorized entry
on the premises or of the commission of an unlawful
act.
F. "Business" means any nonresidential use.
G. "Direct-dial device" means a device which is
connected to a telephone line and upon activation of
the alarm system automatically dials a predetermined
telephone number and transmits a message or signal
indicating a need for emergency response.
H. "False alarm" means the activation of an alarm
system through mechanical failure, accident,
misoperation, malfunction, misuse, or the negligence
of either the owner or lessee of the alarm system or
any of their employees or agents. False alarms
shall not include alarms caused by acts of God, the
malfunction of telephone lines, circuits or other
causes which are beyond the control of the owner or
lessee of the alarm system.
1. "I ssuing officer" shall mean the ;.ltUtl>t / / I::It
~~~ILt/t~f~tt chief of police.
J. "Person" shall mean a person, firm, corporation,
association, partnership, individual, organization,
company or a governmental political unit.
K. "Residential" means premises used as dwelling units
which includes apartments and IOdginghouses.
SECTION II: That Section 9.06.050 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 9.06.050 Alarm user's permittL fee.
A.
No person shall install, or cause to be installed,
use, maintain, or possess an alarm system on any
business or residence owned or in the possession or
control of such person within the city without first
haVing obtained an alarm user's permit from the
~~//~t//~//t~f~tt Issui~Officer In
_tt~t;.~nt~/~/t~lt/~~///1~~/~V~~/fl>t
_n//.t.;~//~t~vYt/A1~/~/~/LAA~A//~lt~//t~~
;.Lt~ttl>t///~V//~//~~f~tt. The ;.Lt~ttl>t///~f
/
f (/ '__.
j
f'~-I' .I (~j. ("1/
, '
(
...;' ',' /t I
. ( .1
p( J (
~!,'
,
"
I,A.2.
,
" (1/ ~'
,
,
/i,.
,I' ,,,.."
.,"'" r
;
~
1. The number of alarm systems and specific purpose
for which the alarm system or systems shall be
used;
2. The alarm user's name;
3. The address of the premises in or upon which the
alarm system has been or will be installed;
4. User telephone number;
5.
The alarm business
selling, installing,
responding to and/or
system; and,
opera.tor or
monitoring,
maintaining
operators
inspecting,
the alarm
6. The name and telephone number of at least two
persons who can be reached at any time, day or
night and who are authorized to respond to an
alarm signal and who can open the premises in
which the system is installed.
..
c. An alarm permit shall be valid for twenty-four
months, but a se arate ermit shall be obtained for
eac se arate uSlness, se arate ace 0 USlness,
c ange 0 owner s lp or c ange ln type 0 perml t.
_n/~~/p~tt~~/~7tn~t~/~/_/~g~/tn
.1.t~/~J/t~~;,tt/AP~~Ptv/~V/t~~/~/~t~t~~1
t.tP~/ M/ ItYiIu'rI /p~t~U/ M/ NrlW# /.n; MAtN /rNr/rI'ItI /l~
t~;~K~~//irlq~r//~/~~~/pL//$~ttl~n/1'e~'lJe
In/~/~tt,/A/nf~/p~t~lt/~/t~~~lt~~/~/tllln~
.//;,i,~tt//~V~~VV~rI/At~/~/~Aut//Ltp~/t~~
~.t~//~~t~//t~.n~~//pt//t~;pt.tlpn//ptt~t~//.n~//t~~
~pptpptl.t~/t~~~/p.l~'
~, Jf)!U~/ /~ri / ~ / M~#/rI / U/ /YrI / ~ / lJtMt/ /tp
t)!U NVW#WrI / MMI /Pt! /w, / ~ / 1:.6~A4I / In
t)!l~///~I///t)!~///~///~~~t///~///~~
t~~p~n~l~l~//Lpt//~/~//YttiVrii//pttlt~t
.n~//~V~VrlVrig/A//p~t~lt/~VWJri/~/AAU~//.tt~t
t)!~/ NVW~VWrI / MMI /Pt! /w, / ~ / 1:.6~ /In
t)!U/t~.Pt~t/
~II"~
tl tflltii~II~~~/~~/~II~/Atktll~nllaXat~
~ttte~II~~/~~/lttI11V~iit~tll~/t~/~~taln
i/~t~tlp~t~ltl_tlt~~~lt~~/ln/t~lt/t~ttl~nl
SECTION III: That Section 9.06.060 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
..
Sec. 9.06.060 Correction of information.
Whenever any change occurs relating to the written
information ~11~blll~~ required In Ex Section
9.06.050, _lit~ll~tt;rtI11~V~i~1 the permit holder or
~lt designateee shall give written notice of such
change to tlie ~ltettl>tIIMlII#~UiIIAMAtll Issuing
Officer within five working days.
SECTION IV: That Section 9.06.080 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 9.06.080 Alarm system regulations.
A. Alarm Deactivation Audible Alarms. Audible
residential alarms shall be equipped with an
automatic shutoff mechanism capable of terminating
the audible annunciator after activation wi thin a
maximum of fifteen minutes. Audible commercial
alarm systems shall be equipped with an automatic
shutoff mechanism capable of terminating the
audible annunciator after activation within a
maximum of thirty minutes. 1/tI~t<i/~/a1.at."t
Inttall~~llptll>tll~I>II~II~V~qV~~II~~~~II~!lltM~
~t~lnant~/~/f~/~/t~~~i~dlnl>t/I~~~~/l>f
t~tnln~/I~//~~/lann~ntlat~t/I~/~~Y<iII~ntlX
nln~tt/~~/~Lt~tll~~/~~lli~~ftft~/nAYltMlt
tettll>n/~etl>~~tleff~ttl~elt~/t~~plt.
B. Maintenance Notification. The alarm user shall
contact the Police Department's Communication
Supervisor prior to any service, test, repair,
maintenance, alteration, or installation of an
alarm system which might produce a false alarm.
Any alarm activated where such prior notice has
been given shall not constitute a false alarm.
C. Power Supply. Alarm systems shall be supplied with
an uninterruptible power supply in such a manner
that the failure or interruption of normal utility
electricity will not activate the alarm system.
The power supply must be capable of at least four
hours of operation.
/'14 -q
r-'
D. Repairs. When any false alarm causep. by a
malfunction of an alarm system has occurred, the
alarm user shall cause the alarm system to be
repaired to eliminate the malfunction. The alarm
system annunciator shall be disconnected while
repairs are made.
E. alarm s stem user whose alarm
og
SECTION V. That Section 9.06.130 of the Chu1a Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 9.06.130 False alarm penalty assessment.
A. When any emergency alarms, messages, signals, or
notices are received by the Police Department
showing that an alarm user has failed to meet any
of the requirements of this chapter, the Mtl:tK.'Pt
'Plllp~~lltll~~I~K.t Issuing Officer is authorized
to demand that the user of that alarm system
disconnect the system until it is made to comply
with the requirements.
B. Any person having an alarm system which results in
a police response in which the alarm proves to be a
false alarm, shall pay a penalty assessment fee to
the city ~~III'Pll'P~~1 in the amount established
by the City Council b resolution in the Master Fee
Sc e u e or eac a se a arm, message or slgna1 ln
excess of two activations in any twelve month
period.
.'
1. . t~l~~/A!At~/t~~ftnt/~~~~rf~,/~~p~tK.~~nK.
It~~//~l~t~//~t~K.~~~//*~lt~//~t~//ln//~tl~K.~nt~
~K./~/K.l~~/ftt.V/K.~~/~/~I/~/t~~PK.~t
~n~I/~~/~~//fd//~tt~~~//~//~~//~~tl~~~
~ll~~~~l~///n~~~~t'///~~///~~K.///I'PtK.~///~~l~~'
~~~HI / t~ / /W / /~/ / ~/ / /litt~#r;~dtl / /~~
I~H'P}4#
~, ~~t~/~/K.~~/~/~nt/~/p~tt~~,
~t///~qV~///~///t~v~t///~///~nt
~tn~K.lf~~t//p~tA~Ai.//~//~~//~td//I'P~f
*tK.~t~/////~/////~n~f~~n~f~~f~I~~K.tf~~t
p~ft~~'///~;//n;~v~//~//~//Atv//~nt
~n~ft~~t///ptvi~~//~//~//Atvl/~
p~n~lK.l////~~~~~~~~nK.////~I////K.~~nK.lflt~~
bA :S
I
V:
C.
D.
~, t~t~////tqqYtYidtY///~///Al~////t~~
t~~ntirtl~~//~AV//p~dtYV1//~ii~ii~int
t~t//td1/~~/tl~i/~~uVq~/~/tii~Xt
In///~///p~n~Xtt///~iiiii~int///~t///tlttt
~lJl1.M U
2. t~~~intln~//~lt~//t~~//~/At.V//t//dt~//~~~t~
Jnit~XX~tl~n//tu~/~/~/~nt~t//t~~t~~tt~tj
t~~t~//~~/~//ui//t~~te~//~///~~//lltit
t~flJ~~~//~Vuq/~/~l~f~t'//~iu/~/t~~tt~
~n~///~~~~//AAAt~///Yd//~//tlxr~~nt~
pitJ~~I//~~u~/~/~i//t/~//~ii~ii~int
(Jl//W~dV1-1qW~/~/pU//qtW~/AWAY.///U
t~i//~#WtVWd/M//t~~/Nvt-lriid~/WM4l,//t~i
pint.Ui! /t#~#r;WV / ~ /~i/ /rfW~r/Wr'f / M/ It~i
ptIJYlil~nt//~//Yd//tA~t~ttA~n//Ar.V//~t
tM.t/t~ttIIJM
The Issuing Officer shall cause to be issued a
monthl bill for the un aid fees accrued during any
mont y 1 lng perlo an any prlor perlo s. Suc
bill shall be due and payable. withln thHty (30)
days of the billing date.
A late fee of fifteen percent (15%) of the false
alarm assessment shall be added to the unpaid
balance of an assessments required by this section
not pal wlt ln t lrty ays 0 tel lng ate.
any enalt assessment fee and late
ursuant to t lS Sectlon e
to t e Clt , an an actlon may e
t e ISSUln 0 lcer ln t e name 0 t e
court 0 com etent urlS lctlon ln t e
o tee lnquent e t. ayment 0 any
enalt assessment fees and late char es shall not
pro 1 lt cnmlna prosecutlon or t e V10 atlon of
any provisions of this chapter.
SECTION VI. That Section 9.06.140 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
E.
Sec. 9.06.140 Right to discontinue response.
The ~lfitt(Jt//M//~//ittttt Issuing Officer
reserves the right to discontinue response by police
officers to any location of a silent or audible alarm
when (1) the alarm user has been given written notice
and assessed six penalty assessments within any
(Jn~rtitf twelve-month period, or (2) the alarm user
has failed to pay any such penalty assessment.
Reinstatement may occur when the alarm user has taken
steps to eliminate or correct the problem(s) and has
documented the corrective action in writing to the
~lt~tt(Jt//~t//p~~llt//t~titt Issuing Officer and paid
any penalty assessments that are due.
(PA-/P
\.
SECTION VII. That Section 9.06.150 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: "
Sec. 9.06.150 Suspension/revocation of permits.
If at any time it comes to the attention of the
~Jt~tt~t//~t//p~~tJt//~~t,tt Issuing Officer that the
holder of an alarm user's permit under this chapter has
violated any provisions of this chapter, or rules, or
regulations made pursuant to this chapter, including but
not limited to, false alarms which exceed the numbers
permitted pursuant to Section 9.06.130, whether or not
the holder has failed or refused to pay the false alarm
penalty assessment fee as provided in t~~//~~ttAp~
this chapter, the ~/~//p~~~tt//~~t~tt Issuing
Officer may suspend or revoke the permit. If an alarm
user's permit is to be suspended or revoked, as provided
hereunder, . the ~Jt~ttpt//At.V//p~~lJt//~ Issuing
Officer shall notify the holder of the permit in writing
of ~t~ the intention to revoke such permit
seventy-two~ours before the effective hour of the
suspension or revocation, along with notice of the
opportunity for administrative review of the proposed
actlon.
SECTION VIII. That Section 9.06.160 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 9.06.160 Appeals.
Any alarm user aggrieved by the decision of the
~Jt~ttpt//~'/~~Vq/~ Issuing Officer to assess
any penalty or to suspend or revoke the permit may
appeal to the City Council by filing an appeal with the
City Clerk within ten (10) da s of recei t of notice of
t e ISSUln 0 lcer s eC1Slon. T e Clt C er shall
t ereu on set t e matter or earln at t e next re u ar
lty ounCl mee lng.
SECTION IX: That Section 9.06.170 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
9.06.170 Criminal penalties.
.'
Any person who violates any provlslon of this chapter
ittl~~Jn~//~,/~~/~/$~tttp~/~/,~~/,~~~/,//p~n~ltt
~~~~~~~~nt~1 shall be guilty of an infraction, and
upon conviction thereof shall be punished in accordance
wi th the California Penal Code regarding infractions.
Such persons shall be guilty of a separate offense for
each and every day during any portion of which any
violation of any provision of this chapter is committed,
continued or permitted by such persons.
)
(pfJ,- 7
C(
SECTION X: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
William J. Winters, Chief of
Police
8093a
i ~A...1
Approved as to form by
Jsvl.l, .9 fL-/J? ~q. '"
D. Richard Rud'pH) I
Assistant Citi~torney
RESOLUTION NO. /(P21,,(,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH
ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC. TO PROVIDE
MANAGEMENT OF BILLING RELATED TO SECURITY
ALARM PERMITS AND FALSE ALARMS, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, it has been recommended that
into an agreement with an alarm tracking company
Security Alarm Ordinance; and
the ci ty enter
to moni tor the
WHEREAS, it is advantageous to contract with an outside
company in order to eliminate significant staff hours by the
Crime Prevention unit and Finance staff; decrease false alarms
and generate additional revenue for the City; and
WHEREAS, three vendors submitted proposals
false alarm management service to the City and staff
operations of the two lowest cost vendors: Alarm
Services and Enforcement Technology, Inc.; and
to provide
toured the
Management
WHEREAS, based upon a combination of cost, reliability,
and quali ty and breadth of customer services cons idera t ions, the
Enforcement Technology proposal is most capable of meeting all
the City's requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby find that competitive bidding
would be impractical and waives the bidding procedure in
accordance wi th Section 2.56.070 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
approve an agreement with Enforcement Technology, Inc. for the
Management of Billing related to Security Alarm Permits and False
Alarms, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER
authorized and directed
behalf of the City.
RESOLVED that
to execute said
the Mayor
agreement
is
for
hereby
and on
<oo'r
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
rmJ
Presented by
William J. Winters, Director
of Public Works
8837a
(, '8- I
-1-
06-1Hl 09: 13A~ FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH ,)1-/'"
P02
Agreement. wi~
Enforcement. Technology, Ino.
for SeQUrity Alarm Trackin; servlces.
nia Agreement b mad8 thl. May 9, un tot' the purpo.e. of
reterenoe only, and etteot.lve a. of the date la.t executed. between
the partie., between the city of cnula viata C"city") therein, It
municipal oorporat1on of the Stat. ot California, and. Bnforoement
TechnolQ9Y, Inc., a California corporation ("Consultant"), and 1.
made referenoe to the followlng tactsl
aecitals
Whereas, the City needs prote..ional management .y.tems
lat'vice. in order to etrlciently monit.or security alarms and
enforca the 8aQUrity Alarm Ordinance in the city, and,
Wherea., Consultant warrant. and repre.ents that they are
axperianoed anI! atafted in a manner .uch that they ara and can
prepare and deliver the .ervice. reqUired of the Con.ultant to the
city with in the time trame. hereln provided all 1n aCCOrdance with
the terms and condition. ot this Agre..ant, and,
NOW THlREFORJI, .. IT RJlSOLVlD that the city and conaultant do
hereby mutually aqree a. follow..
1. con.ultant'. Dut.ie.,
a. General Dutie..
The con.ultant ahall ganerally lII&nage and maintain all record.
and pertora all .arvioa. relating to the saourity Alarm Ordinanca
under tha direotion of the polic. Department'. crime Pravantion
unit, includinQI
1. timely and oourteou. reapon.e to the majority of
talaphone inquiries trom the pUb11c related to the City Security
Alarm ordinance. i., Que.tions regar4in; the alarm Ilermit.,
account aotivlty, qaneral intormation, an4 .
ii. maintain all alarm permit record. and allPlicationa,
recor4inq all tala. alarm aotivation., mail warn in; l.tters and
handle all .ub.equent ~illinq tor any new permit., renewal. and
fals8 ala~ tinea each month, an4
iii. oollect and prooe.. all te.. and payment., depo.itin;
.ai4 monies in the city'. name wi~in a tinanoial in.titution of
the city'. oholoa, and
iv. provide.monthly report. of all aotivity, in the torm
and contain in; .uoh matter. a. .peoitied trom ti.e to time by the
City, and
1
~~ - .3
06-14-91 09: l3AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
P03
v. pay all pos~age i. paid a. part ot tha .ervice, and
(the duti.. of the consultant .s berain in this .aotion oontained
may herainafter be referred to a. .Oanaral Dutie.")'
b. Scope of Work and. Sohadule.
Contraotor sball perform tba dutia. and daliver said service a. 1s
.at forth in tha General Dutie., aooordinq to, and with1n the time
trame therein e.tablished (the General Dutia. an4 the work required
in tha Soope of "Work and Sohadule .hall hare in raferred to a. the
"Defined Service..).
o. standard of cara.
con.ultant, in pertorminq anI servicas under this aqreement,
whather Definad Servica. or Addit onal Service., shall par form in
. mannar con.iatant with that laval of cara and .kill ordinarilY
exerci.ed by mambar. of tha prote..ion currently practioinq undar
similar condition. and in similar location..
d. Inaurance.
consultant shall, throuqhout ~h. duration of this Aqreemant,
maintain tha followinq insuranca covaraqa..
1. cODllllarcial Ganeral t.ill.l:lility %nsuranOa inolucUn9 Bu.ine..
Automobile Liabili~y tnsuranca in the amount of $1,000,000
oo=in&4 dnqla limit, which nalllas the city of Chula Vista ..
adcSltlonal insured and is primary to any in.uranoa policy
carried by the City.
2. Errora and oais.iona Insurance in the llIIlaunt at $250,000.
,. St.atutory Workar' a CClI\penaation Insurance and bployer '.
Liability In .uranaa in the amount of $1,000,000.
All policies .hall be i..uad by . carrier that ha. a Ba.t.' Ratinq
of "A,Clas. V., or batter, or .hall meet with the approval of ~e
City.. Risk Manaqar.
consultant will provide, prior to Clollllllencelllent ot the service.
required under tha aqreement, certificate. of in.uranca for the
Clovereqa. required in this ..ation, and, for CODllllerClial General
Liability Xneurance, a polioy andor.elllent for the City a.
additional 1n.uracl, a policy endor.alllant .tatinq the consultant'.
insuranca 18 primary an4 a policy endor.ement st.tin; that tha
limit. of insuranoe apply .eparately to aach project away frolll
premia.. own'4 oX' rantld 1:ly the consultant. CertiUcat.. of
in.urance .\lst al.o .tate ~.t the polioy _y not: be cancelled
without at laaat thirty ('0) days ~ittan notice to the City.
2
~e, - Lf
06-14-91 09:13AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
P04
2. Du~ie. ot 1;11e city.
a. Conaultatlon and Cooperation.
ci~y ahall regularly oonlult the Con.ultant tor the purpole
of revievlnq all the reco~d., da~a, report. and .ervioee, and ~o
provided direo~ion and tuldance to acoompliah ~he .ervica..
b. compen.ation.
orhe compan..tion t.o ba faid by the City to conlulbnt tor
.ervioa. required herein ahal be a. folloya.
i. .aoh "larm Permit/Acoount. opened at the one time only
tae of $2.50, and
ii. Bach ~ran.action or updatinq ot an Ixistinq account
at a tee ot $ .35, anc1
iil. laoh Statement, Invoice, or warning Lett.ar proce.sed
and mailad at a te. of' .95, and
iv. laoh paym.nt/f.e collectad and proa....d at a f.. of
s.
20.
The .WI of tha abova oomponant i. payable in monthly payment.
within thirty (30) day. of reo.ipt ot invoic..
Con.ultant aqre.. to perform all of tha .erviae. r.quired of
the .9r..mant and .hall incur all a..ocia~ad co.t., inoludinq
repr04uction aftd print in; , .ecretarial work, t.laphon. oharq..,
travel _ inoludinq automobile oharg.. for .aid taa.
c. The City may from time to time reduce the soope of Work
by the con.ultant to &e performed und.r thi. aqr.a.ent. orh. City
and Con.ultant agr.. to maat in 900d faith and conteI' for the
purpose af negotiatin; a corr..ponding reduction in the F.a
a..ooia~ed with .a14 reduotion.
3. Admini.tration ot Contraotl
The City hereby de.iqnato.. the Chief of 'olioe, or d.a19nee,
all it. repre.entative tor the reviaw and admini.tration of the work
performed by Con.ultant herain required.
4. orerm:
consultant shall perton all the cI.Un.e! .ervio.. h.r.in
required of it for a period of ona (1) year trom the daU ot the
execution of thie .,reemen~, the city ha. the option to l:'anew this
.qre..ent, at it. .ole diecretion, tor an additional ya.r. ..id
option .hall ~e ex.roi..d ~y notify!n; Con.ul~ant of reneval in
3
/p(6 - 5
06-14-91 09:13AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
P05
writinq not later than a1xty (60) e!ays prlaedin; Ixp1~at1on of thll
a9ree.ant .
5. Finanoial Interaats ot Consultant.
consultant further warrants and rep~e.ent. that no p~o.i.e
of future eaployment, remuneration, conaid.ration, ;~atuity, or
other reware! OJ:' 9ain has beln lIade to conlultant. or Con.ult.ant
A..oclate.. Con.ultant prolliae. to Idviae city of any such promiae
t.hat lIlay be lIade durin; the Tlrm of thia AfiJr..Jllent, or for 12
month. ther.aft.r.
Consultant. a91'.e. that n.ither Con.ultant nor his immediate
family IU1I\I:Ier., nor hi. employee. or agent.! .hall aoquir. any auch
prOhibited Intere.t within the Term of thla Agreem.nt, or tor 12
montha Iftlr the expiration ot this Agrellllnt.
Consultant lIay not conduct or .olicit any busine.. for any
th1rlS party wh1Cll!. .ay be in c:ontl1ct w!th conaultant'.
r.aponlibiliti.. und.r thi. Aqre..ent.
6. Hold Harmle.s:
con.Ultant shall defend, inc1emnity and hold harmless the c1ty,
its .leotld and appointld oftic.rs and employe.., from and aiain.t
all oldm. fQI' c!a.aq.., liability, COlt and expenle (incluc1inq
without limitation attorney.' fael) ar1sin9 out of the conduct of
the con.ultant, Qr any a,ency or employ.., luboQntractors,or
other. in connlction with the execution ot ~he work cover.d by ~hil
Aqrealllent, exoept only for tho.. olai.. ariainq from the .ole
neqllqanoe o~ sOl. willfUl oonduct ot the city, ita Officer., or
.mploy.... Con.ultant's inde=nification .hall inolude any and all
ooatl, exp.ns.., attorney's fee. and liability incurr" by the
Clty, its ottlo.rs, aglnt., or employees in 4.f.ndlnq aqain8t .uoh
claims, whether the a.lla prgc..d to jUdpal'lt or not. hrtheZ',
cQnlultant at It. own expen.. Ihall, UPQn writt.n reque.t by the
City, defend .ny .uch luit or aotion brou9ht aqainst the city, Ite
otticer., ag.nts, or ..ploy.... CQnsultan~.' lnd.=nltication of
clty shall not ba 11altae! by al'lY prior or .Ub.equent d.olaration
by the Consultant.
7. Termination of Agr....nt for Caus..
If, throuljJb any cau.., con.ultant shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and p~op.r mannar his/h.r Obligation. und.r tbi. A,reement,
or it Con.ultan~ .hall violata any of the cov.nant., aqr.ementl or
stipUlation. of this Agreell.nt, city shall hava the r1qht tQ
terminate this Aqreelllent by qivinq written notioe to Consultant ot
luch t.rmination and sp.oifyinq the etfective e!ate thereof at 1.ast
rive (5) day. betore the effective date Of such tarminatlol'l. In
that ev.nt, all tinilhed or unfinished 400um.n~., data, studi..,
reports and other material a prepared by Consultant shall, at the
4
/,tJ - I.-
06-14-91 09: 13AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
P06
option of the C!it:y, becolle the Jlroperty Of the City, ancl Consultant
shall ~. entitled to receive just and equitable COlIpensat10n for
any work satistactorily completed on .uell docWllent. an4 other
material. up to the effective date of Notice ot Termination, not
to exeeecS the amounts payableharaunder, an4 le.s any damaq..
oau.ed City by ConSUltant'. braaoh.
8. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of lither PartYI
Bither may terminate this Aqreement at any time and for any
reason tor 91vinq .pec1~io written notice to Con.ultant of .uch
termination and specifyinq the etteotive date thereot, at least
thirty (30) days betore the ettective date of such termination.
In that event, all finishelS anlS unf1n!lhelS 40CWllents and other
.aterial. described hereinabove shall, at the option of tha city,
become City'. sole and exclu.ive property. If the Aqreement is
terminated by City a. provided in thi. paraqraph, Consultant .hall
be entitled to reoeive just and equitable compenaation tor any
.atisfactory work completed on such dooWllent. an4 other lIaterials
to the etrective date of .uc1\ termination. Con.ultant hereby
expressly waive. any and all OlaimB tor 4a__ge. or compensation
arialn; under this A9reement except .s .et forth horein.
t. Alliqnability:
The .ervic.. of Con.ultant are personal to the City, and
Consultant .hall not a..iqn any intarest In this Aqre.ment, and
ahall not tran.te~ any interest in the .ame (whether by aa'iqnment
or novation), without prior written oonsent at City whloh city =ay
unreasonable deny.
10. Ownership, Publioation, aeproduction and U.e ot Materiall
All reports, Itudie., information, data, .tati.tio., forms,
cS.81qn., plana, prooe4Ure., syst... ancl any other lIIatet-lale or
propertie. produced IU\cl.r this Aqr..=ent shall be the .ole and
exclusive pl'operty ot City. No .uch lIat.riu. or properties
Pl:ccluoelS 1Jl whole or in part uncler thl. Aqre..ent .hall 13e sUbj ect
to private use, cOPYl:lqht. or patent rlghts by Consultant in the
Unitecl Stat.. Or 1n any other oountry without the expre.. written
con.ent ot Clty. city .ball have unre.triotecS authority to
pu131lah, (!i.olose a. lIay beU.lllited by the provision. ot the Public
Record. Act, cSi.tribute, and otherwise 1.1.., oOPYriq1\t or patent,
in whole or in part, any such reports, stu41e., data, .tatistlcs,
torm. cr other lIatarial. or properties pro4ucecS under this
1qre.=lnt.
11. IncSapen4ent Contractor I
Clty 1. intere.ted only in the re.ult. o13tained an4 Consultant
shall pU'fot'll a. an independent contractor with sol. control Of the
=anner and lIean. of performin; the .ervioes r.quil'ed un4er thl.
S
f:,e -1
06-14-91 09:13AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
PO?
A;l:'."en~. Cl1~y .a1ntain. ~he r1'ln~ only to reject or acoept
Con.Ultant'. work ProduClt.. Consultant and any of the Conaul~ant's
a'len~., ..ployee. or repre.entative. are, for all purpo... under
this Aqr....nt, an independent contraotor anci Ihall not b. deemed
to b. an employ.. ot the City, and non. of them Ihall ~e .nt1tle4
to any btn.tit. to which c1ty employ... are .ntitled includln'l but
not lilal'C.4 ~o, oven!.., r.tir.m.nt b.netit., worlter. compen..tion
ben.tit., injury leave or oth.r leave benetit..
~4. a.sponsible Charq.l
Conaul~ant h.reby de.i;n.t.. it. vice-Pr..leSent of Operation.
aI the CitY". ainllle point of Clontact tor all qu"Uon. and/ot'
reque.ts ar1sinq tro. the con8ultant. dl.charq. of it. dutl.. ..
described h.rein.
13. ~inlstratlv. Claim. Requir...nt. an4 Procedure. I
No sult Or arbltration shall b. brou;ht ari.in; cu~ of this
Agr....nt a;aln.t the city un1... a 01.1. ha. firat b..n pre.ented
in writing and lileeS with ~he eitl or Chula Vi.~. and ao~e4 upon
by the Clty of Chula Vi.t. in accordance with the proc.dures .et
forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vi.ta Municipal Cod., as aame
may b. from ti.. to time b. am.nded, the proviaion. of ~hlch are
1ncorporated by this r.tereno. as it tully ..t to~th her.in, and
such pOlici.. and prooedure. uS.d by the City in the implem.ntation
ot aame.
upon requ..t by City, Consultant .hall.eet and cont.r in 9004
faith with City for the purpoae of resolving any dispute OV.r the
terms of thb Aqreement.
14. Attorney'. ~.e.l
Shou14 that dispute re.ult 1n litigation, it i. agree that the
prlvailinq patty ahall be .ntitled to recov.r all reasonable coat.
incurred in the d.t.n.. of the Claim, lncludln~ oo.ta and
attorn.y'. f....
6
.
~e-g
06-14-91 09: 13AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
POS
8iqnature paqe to
Agreement with
Inforcement TeChnology, Inc.
for Seourity Alarw Tracking Service..
IN WITNESS WHEREOP, cit1 and Conaultant have executed this
Aqreemant this clay ot , 1991.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
BYI
loEONARD N. MOOD
Mayor, Pro Tempore
city ot Chula Vista
AUntl
Beverly Authal.t,
city Clerk
ApprClved .. to feZ'lla
Brue. N. Booq..r4,
City Attcrney
loqy, Inc.,
atien
BYa
7
1.,8 - q
~ \h~ l,c
From: SAN DIEGO HARVEST INC. (619) 673-9445 Jun. 05. 1991 01:12 PM P02
de:J A~
TIlE CITY OF CH'()l.A VlSTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosUJC of certain ownership intereSts, payments, or campalp contributions, on all matters
which will require dlscretlonaxy action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The followinB information must be disclosed:
1. List the nlUlles of all pcrS(lns having a financial interest in the conlIaCt, Le., conlIaCtor, subcontractor,
materill supplier.
~~m~~ ". hr~o~{~nn
__ Kathrvn A. Ar~pni~nm
2. If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is a COJPOl'&lion or partnership, list the names of all
indlviduals owninB mon: than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest
in the partnership.
3. If any person identified purll\W\t to (1) above i. non-profit orcanlzatlon or a trust, llst the naJlIN of any
pc::cson servinl as dlrector of the non-profl.t OrpnW.tion or as trulltllt or benefioiary or trustor of the
trust.
4. Have you Iuld MOte than $250 worth of busin..s tranlllCled with any member of the City staff, Board.,
Commissions. CommitteeS and Counoll within the past twelve months? Yes_
No -1L If yes, please indicate pcnon(s):
5. Please identify oach and every pcr8On, inc1udinB any agents, employees, consullants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent YO\l befon: the City in WI matter.
Jamp~ ~ ~y~~~i~~n
6. Ha.ve you and/or' your offtc:ct'$ or agents, in the aggxepte, contributed mon: than $1,000 to a
Councilmembet in the curront or preceding election period'] Yes _ No...x....- If yes, stata which
Counci1membet(s):
lm2a i. c1efiMcl u: "My IlIdIv/dIIIIl, /fmt. "" .._"-JIdp. jol", __, IWocI4JUln, HdIIl c/llb. frtIUnI4I ar'll1I/tJltlDJI.
",rp9/'OlIOIl, mille, hwI, nod...... qnJl(.v/;l,,1W IJIId ""1 ",,......UIIfy. cI",1JIId 110"""",11//)1, /IllUllriptUU,l. dlltrlcr",OIMrpollr/nd
#llWlvlslQII, or ""1 olhn' IrfIlllI or combiIIIJIlDn aallII IU /J IUIII. .
(NOTBI
AtlAOb IlWilloaal pap u ....
~JsH/
, I
'1)
Da.te:
SignatuIe
IT~mt:t~ iT lI. r~e:.1"t of ~""'9
Print or typo name of contraetor/appllcant
(Revlood: 1I/J0/Il0]
[A.1131A:DISCLOSI,TKTI
EFS/WRT
TEL No.714-531-4823
~,J lt~~ ~
Ma~ 7.91 21:56 P.02
THE CITY OF CllULA VIS1J1. PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure oC certain ownership interesU, paymerttJ, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will re>quire discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all penons having a financial interest In the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor,
material suppUer.
Western Alarm Tracking
2. If any penon identified pursuant to (i) above is a corporatiol\ or partnership, list the names of all
in~viduals owning more than 10% of the shares In the corporation or owning any partnership interest
in the partnership.
Cartel~ C. Green
Barbara A. Green
Mildred L. Eskew
3. If any person Identified pursuant to (1) above Is non-profit organization or a trust, Ust the names of any
penon serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the
trust. .
-----llOllE-----
~
4. Have you had more thilJ\ $250 worth of business tnnsacled with any member of the City staff, Boards,
Commissions, Committees and CoWlcil within the put twelve months? Yes_
No ~ If yes, please indicate penon(s): .
S. Please identify *h and every person, including any lI&cnlS, employees, consultants or independent
contrac!ors .who you have assianed to represent you before the City In this matter.
~ l..t pr (' r::t"'P-~n
Barbara A. Green
Mildred L. Eskew
6. Ha.ve you and/or your officers or IicnlS, in tho aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmembet in tho current or precedine election period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, stale which
CouncUmember(S):
brIml It cl.fIDod u: "An1 INl/YIiUud, ftmt. Ct>-JHII'f1II"ltJp, JoIN W1IIlIn, _ocI41lotl, loc/Ill dltb, ,frQlmllll OrlallllQllolI,
""'1'I"QlIOII, UfQlI, trWt, ,.,,,t,.,,.,IY'fIIJ-, ,1tJS tIIIII any (11M ""tUlly, city and ttllINry, C//)'. mlllllclpall". dllmcr Dr OIM pol//leal
,ubdlvllloll. or l1li1 (11M ",olll' or COItIblll(lllotl 4d/II' III II 1UIII"[lg" . .
(NOn: AltIch lLIldlliOMl pII" u Ill: II'ry) . . f?r 0 0
Date: Nay 7, 1991 l!!4... """-
SignatUre of contractor/appUcant
Carter C. Green
Western Alarm Tracking
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
'..TXTJ
[l.Y\ood' 1l1lOI9O}
05-08-91 06:29AM FROM ENFORCEMENT TECH
"'~ l,c
P02
71lB cm OF CHULA VlSTA P/&R'1Y DISCLOSURE STATBMBNT
Statement of disclosure of certaixl ownership intetelts, payments, or campai8n contributions, on all matters
which will require di:sc:Ruonlr)' action on the part ot the City Council, Plannlna Commission. and all other
official boeHu. The foUowinalnformation must be disclosed:
1. List the nll11les of all persons having a financiallntetelt In tho contract, I.e. , contractor, subcontractor,
material suppUer.
En~or~ement Technology, Inc.
2. If any penon identified punllMt to (1) above b . corporation 01" partnerahip, Ust tho names of ill
in~vidua1s ownin& morc than lOll' of the shareS In the corpot1ltion or ownina any partnership intere&t
In the partnorshlp.
Gary E. Ward, Ph;C
Nick S. George
3. If any penon identifted pun\lal\t to (1) above is non-profit Ofll";',liort or a trUSt. Ust the names of any
person servin. u director of the non-profit O1"I""ifttlon 01" as trustee or benefl.clary or trustor of the
InIst. '
'::
. :!
,.
Have you had more than S2S0 worth of business transacted with IlI1Y member of tho City staff, Bokds,
Commissions, CommittMI and CouncU within the past twelve months? YOI - I
No.L If yes, please incUCIlI ponon(I): " ' :i,
Please Identity each and every person, includin, any lIents, employees, consultants c:r irl:i I,',' ,~~' II
contractors who you have wiped to reprwnt you before the City In this matter. "~\ \,1\\ : ~,r "
4.
..
6. Have you and/or your oMcen or 'lents, in the aure&ale, COlItribut8d more than $1,000 to a
CouncilmembClr ill Ch. current or PrececUnl election period? Yes _ No.L- If yes, state which
CouncUmembar(a):
EmIlI i. 4dMd III ...",,~, /fIrrI. .. ,.,........ ~ --. ~'" lodlll ~. /NIiII'ffIIl or,lUlll,llllolt.
~lo". .,01_, nvn, ~",_, qn4J_, r1IiIlIIIIl..,.. ......",. cI11 tIINI 0/1IIIItr1. e/Iy, mUIIldpllll/)', d/l1l'l<< orOlMr pollrtClll
1ubd1vlslo,.. or tI1f1 OIMr '10"" 0' CCIIIIb'-"'1I tuft", 116 . UIIlt. .
(NOT!: AllIdllllclltloaal plIIW II Jt: ry)
Date: May 8. 1991
".Linda
SIIfIINrI of c:on
Linda G. Fran
Print or type name of contmltor/applicant
1I.'IlttdIIII30190J
tA-llllA,DlICl.O$lI.TXT1
OS-07-Ql O~:O~PM P02
Council Agenda statement
Item:~
Meeting Date: July 23, 1991
Item Title:
Ordinance 2470: Amending Various Sections of
Chapter 9.20 of the Municipal Code to Alter or
Enhance the Criminal and/or civil Penalties
Associated with Graffiti-Related Violations.
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney~
Submitted by:
4/5ths Vote: ( ) Yes (X) No
At their meeting of July 16, 1991, the City Council directed
that staff return to the Council with a report that would permit
discussion and action to be taken with regard to four areas
relating to altering or enhancing the criminal and/or civil
liability for graffiti-related violations, and to include staff's
recommendation with regard to each area. In order to facilitate
deliberation and action by the Council with maximum flexibility,
each of the four areas are represented by a separate ordinance.
The Council is invited to act on them as a group, or individually,
as they desire.
The areas of concern, and the consideration which Council
indicated they would like to give to each area is dealt with in
detail below.
Boards and Commissions Recommendation:
Although there hasn't been time for a review by the Graffiti
Task Force, staff believes that the ordinance as presented would
meet with their approval.
Discussion
In order to understand what has occured by the two recent
amendments to the Graffiti Chapter, 9.20, of the Municipal Code,
the Chapter as a result of the last meeting's amendments, is
attached as Exhibit A. It is marked to show the revisions
accomplished if the Council enacts staff recommendations.
qraf22.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 1
1-1
Area No.1: Failure to Remove.
Backaround:
The current provision, at section 9.20.035, reads as follows.
This section is now "on the books":
9.20.035 Permitting Graffiti to Remain
It is unlawful for any person who is the owner or
who has primary responsibility for control of property or
who has primary responsibility for the repair or
maintenance of property ("Responsible Party") to permit
property which is defaced with graffiti to remain so
defaced for a period of seven (7) days after notice of
same, unless said person shall demonstrate by a
preponderance of evidence that they do not have the
financial or physical ability to remove the defacing
graffiti, or unless it can be demonstrated that the
Responsible Party has an active program for the removal
of graffiti and has scheduled the removal of the graffiti
as part of that program."
Action Issue:
Should criminal liability for failure to remove graffiti be
converted to the right of city to enter and remove at property
owner's cost?
Staff Recommendation:
No, the criminal liability for failure to remove graffiti
should remain, but a provision should be added to permit the right
of the City to enter and remove graffiti at property owner's cost.
The attached ordinance achieves this result, in sections 1 and 2,
by defining "graffiti" in section 1, and in section 2 by declaring
graffiti to be a public nuisance, and creating a City right of
entry and removal, after extending due process to the property
owner.
Reasons for Staff Recommendation:
This issue involves distributing and/or advancing of costs for
graffiti removal as between the property owner and the City.
Staff's primary reason for the recommendation is to save the public
treasury from the costs for graffiti eradication.
Permitting graffiti to remain on property is a form of poor
property maintenance--the charge for removal of which--is and has
been typically assigned to the property owner. We see no reason
graf22.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related violations
Page 2
-"1-2..
for deviating from this age-old practice.
staff believes that, with mere knowledge of the criminal
liability, most all, say 80%, of graffiti on private property will
be removed by the property owner without City intervention. Of the
part remaining, we would anticipate that 70% will be removed
without the need for full criminal prosecution permitted by the
above referenced section. If the property owner does not have the
physical or financial ability to remove same, he or she would be
criminally immune, and then the Public Works Director, under the
authority of the lien section created by the attached ordinance,
could enter, eradicate, and then, if he deems appropriate, collect
the cost thereof from the property owner.
Such an approach will substantially reduce the cost to the
city for a removal effort by shifting those costs to the property
owner.
Alternative Council Action:
However, Staff recognizes that there is clearly a policy issue
involved in this decision--Why should the innocent property owner
who becomes the victim of a graffiti crime be further subjected to
prosecution and be required to bear the costs of eradication for
this "societal problem"?
If the City desires to delete the "Criminal Liability for
Permitting Graffiti to Remain" provision, and still desires to
achieve graffiti eradication on private property, the City should
adopt the attached ordinance including Section 2 (authorizing city
entry and removal), and fund such a graffiti removal program. The
Director of Public Works antic~pates a cost of between $100,000 to
$200,000 per year, which doesn't include offset for anticipated
collections on liens.
If the Council desires to eliminate criminal responsibility
for permitting graffiti to remain, they should adopt Ordinance A,
which will be handed out prior to the meeting, to delete section
9.20.035.
Area No.2. Wronqful Disolav of "Graffiti-ables".
Backqround:
The current provision, at Section 9.20.040(C), dealing with
spray paint, reads as follows. A similarly worded provision,
dealing with felt tip markers, exists at 9.20.045(C).
graf22.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related violations
Page 3
l~3
n C. Display for the Purposes of Sale. No person,
firm or entity engaged in a commercial enterprise
("Seller") shall display any aerosol paint container for
sale, trade or exchange, nor shall store any aerosol
paint container pending display for sale or pending sale,
except in an area from which the public shall be securely
precluded without employee assistance. Two such
acceptable methods for displaying aerosol paint
containers for sale shall be by containment in (1) a
completely enclosed cabinet or other storage device which
shall be permanently affixed to a building or building
structure, and which shall, at all times except during
access by authorized representatives, remain securely
locked; or in an enclosed area behind a sales or service
counter from which the- public is precluded from entry."
Action to Consider:
Should criminal liability for a merchant. s wrongful display of
"graffiti-abIes" be converted to civil liability for same?
Staff Recommendation:
No. No change is required to implement this recommendation,
as the "wrongful display" provisions were already enacted on second
reading at the meeting of July 16.
Reasons for Staff Recommendation:
1. Substantially greater compliance will be achieved as a
criminal section.
Staff recommends against the change to civil penalties since
the cost would be restricted to the actual damages that could
be proved were caused by the retailers negligent display. We
believe that it will be difficult to prove that graffiti
materials came from a certain store and that the matter would
probably not come to trial for three or four years after the
occurrence. This may lead some retailers to lax compliance by
retailers on the belief that it would be cheaper to display as
they had in the past and wait for such civil prosecution, if
any, that may occur.
; 2. The section was ameliorated at the request of the Chamber
representative on the graffiti subcommittee.
The graffiti task force considered these sections and
discussed them at length. The original lanquage proposed by
the City Attorney required that spray paint cans and felt tip
markers be kept in locked display cases similar to those used
graf22. WI>
July 19, 1991
AllJ re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 4
-,..4
for watches, pocket knives, expensive pens and other valuable
items. The Chamber of Commerce representative (the owner of
Cornells Office Products) demurred and requested that an
alternative be found which would give business owners more
flexibility while still protecting the public interest. The
discussions on this item made it clear that graffiti on City
facilities and utility Companies' boxes cost the public
significantly and that the task force felt quite strongly that
the business community must do its part to help reduce this
cost.
3. The Chamber circulated the provision among its members
without report of objection.
The second reading of the ordinance proposing wrongful display
was delayed to permit circulation among the Chamber members.
No objections were received by staff during or after the 30-
day delay.
4. Civil liability already exists, at section 9.20.050(C) for
wrongful display. This is discussed below.
Alterative Action:
Adopt Ordinance B, which will be handed out prior to the
meeting, to delete Section 9.20.040(C) and 9.20.045(C), thereby
deleting criminal liability for a merchant's wrongful display of
"graffiti-abIes", and which provides greater definition of the
civil offense of wrongful display in Section 9.20.050(C).
Area No.3: Civil Liabilitv for furnishina minors with "Graffiti-
abIes".
Backaround:
The city Attorney originally proposed the current prov~s~on,
at Section 9.20.050(B), dealing with parental civil responsibility
for damages, reads as follows:
"B. Parental civil Responsibility for Damages. Any
parent or other legal guardian who consents to, permits,
or otherwise knowingly allows her or his child under the
age of eighteen to possess an aerosol paint container or
a felt tip marker shall be personally liable for any and
all costs to any person incurred by any party in
connection with the repair of any property caused by said
child, and for all attorney's fees and court costs
incurred in connection with the civil prosecution of any
claim for damages, not to exceed $1,500.00."
graf22.wp
July 19, 1991
A113 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 5
\..5
Action to Consider:
The Council originally requested to consider this issue:
Should parental civil liability for furnishing minors with "graf-
fiti~ables" be expanded to any adult?
staff Recommendation:
Amend the City's current provision to delete parental civil
responsibility for damages entirely (thus relying on state Law),
create such civil responsibility for damages in all other persons--
adults or minors--for selling or furnishing graffiti implements to
a minor, and supplement state law by defining "paint or similar
substances" as contained in civil Code Section 1714.1 to include,
at least in Chula Vista, "felt tip markers". Adoption of the
attached ordinance achieves this result, in sections 3 and 6.
Reasons for Staff Recommendation.
This provision is, to a certain extent, conceptually
duplicative of a "vicarious liability" provision of state law, at
civil Code section 1714.1, which provides, in parts pertinent to
graffiti, as follows:
" (a) Any act of willful misconduct of a minor which
results in . . .any injury to the property of another
shall be imputed to the parent or guardian having custody
and control of the minor for all purposes of civil
damages, and the parent or guardian having custody and
control shall be jointly and severally liable with the
minor for any damages resulting from the willful
misconduct. . . ."
(b) Any act of wilful misconduct of a minor which
results in the defacement of property of another ~
paint or a similar substance shall be imputed to the
parent or guardian having custody and control of the
minor for all purposes of civil damages, including court
costs, and attorney's fees, to the prevailing party, and
the parent or guardian having custody and control shall
be jointly and severally liable with the minor for any
damages resulting from the willful misconduct, not to
exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for each tort of
the minor."
The city's provision requires a separate act of the parent or
consenting to possession by his or her child, and the state law
does not even bother with such a convention in assigning vicarious
liability to the parent. On this count, the state law is broader
and hence, more advantageous.
graf22.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 6
l.~
The state law is limited to "paint or a similar substance",
and may be construed to not apply to felt tip markers. On this
count, the City's provision is more advantageous.
The city's provision, at the request of the subcommittee, is
limited in the amount of civil damages a parent may be liable for,
to $1,500.00. The state law set such limit at $10,000, and hence,
on this count, is more advantageous.
On the whole, the provisions of the state Law are believed to
be more advantageous that our provision on the subject of parental
civil responsibility, and given potential problems with the state
pre-emption doctrine, the staff recommends deletion of our Parental
civil Responsibility provision entirely.
On the other hand, while state Law, at Penal Code Section
594.1, makes it illegal for any person, other than a parent, to
sell, give or otherwise furnish a minor a spray paint can, but does
not impose civil penalties for same.
The revision proposed by Council and Staff will now impose
such civil penalties to the same extent as provided by State Law--
$10,000 per incident.
Alternate Action:
Delete section 3 of Ord. 2470, which will have the effect of
decriminalizing furnishing minors with "graffitiables" and Section
6 of Ord. 2470, which will have the effect of leaving state Law
imputation of civil liability to parents to spray paint defacement.
Area No.4. Wronaful Storaae.
Backaround:
At the city Council meeting of July 16, the city council
deleted the criminal offenses of wrongful storage of spray paint
cans and felt tip markers. Sections 9.20.040 (0) and 9.20.045 (0).
However, in the penalties section, Section 9.20.050(C), civil
responsibility for damages resulting from "wrongful storage" and
for "wrongful display" is still imposed (i.e., currently "on the
books"). This section now reads as follows:
" C. civil Responsibility for Damages Wrongful
Display or Storage. Any person who displays or stores an
aerosol spray container or felt tip marker in violation
of the provisions of this chapter shall be personally
liable for any and all costs incurred by any party in
connection with the repair of any property caused by a
minor who shall use such aerosol spray container or felt
graf22.wp
July 19, 1991
A113 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 7
1'-1
tip marker in violation of the provisions of California
Penal Code Section 594, and for all attorney's fees and
court costs incurred in connection with the civil
prosecution of any claim for damages, not to exceed
$1,500.00.
Action to Consider:
Should wrongful storage of "graffiti-abIes" be added as a
basis for civil liability only?
If No: If the Council desires that neither civil nor
criminal liability for wrongful storage should be instituted, this
section should be modified to delete "or stores" from its
provisions. Adopt Ordinance C to be handed out at the meeting.
If Yes: If the Council desires to "decriminalize"
wrongful storage, but to institute civil consequences for wrongful
storage, the staff proposed ordinance should be enacted. See
Section 5.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff's original recommendation was to make the wrongful
storage of "graffiti-abIes" as a criminal offense, subject to a
very lenient enforcement policy. Council rejected that recommenda-
tion at the July 16 meeting by deleting the provision entirely.
Staff's second choice would be to re-insert the same provision
without criminal consequence, but make it a basis for civil
damages. Thus, adopt the proposed ordinance as submitted with this
report.
Alternate Actions:
Delete section 5 of the attached Ordinance which will result
in having no civil penalties associated with wrongful storage of
"graffitiables".
Reasons for Staff Recommendations:
The wrongful storage provisions originally derived from a
desire to control accessibility of minors to "graffiti-abIes". It
is believed that spray cans used to commit graffiti were being not
being bought, but in fact were being stolen from stores and open
garages.
Staff wanted a leadership statement requesting the public to
"please lock up your 'graffiti -ables' " . Al though a lenient
enforcement policy was acceptable to the graffiti subcommittee,
Council wanted to de-criminalize it entirely. Staff feels the
qraf22.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 8
"1"~
leadership of the City should still make the public request to lock
up the spray cans and felt tip markers, and attributing civil
consequences to the violation is still an effective means.
Fiscal ImDact:
There will be some additional costs associated with the
administration and enforcement of the provisions as proposed by
staff, but the amount is currently incapabie of calculation. It is
estimated to be less than $20,000 additional per year for staff
work which will be performed out of current appropriations.
graf22.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 9
"l-q / 7- Z1-
e-rJJJ~/T r4-
COMPILED ORDINANCE MARKED FOR REVISIONS
TO REFLECT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS
""1-11
Ell II A
.
Chapter 9.20
PROPERTY DEFACEMENT
CUrrent to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Marked for staff-Proposed changes in Al13, July 23rd Meeting
9.20.010. Purpose and intent.
It is the purpose and intent of the City Council of the
city, through the adoption of this chapter, to provide additional
enforcement tools to protect public and private property from
acts of vandalism and defacement; especially, but not limited to,
graffiti on privately and publicly owned walls, which are
inimical and destructive of the rights and values of private
property owners as well as the total community. It is further
the intent of the City Council, through the adoption of this
notice upon all of those who callously disregard the property
rights of others, that the law enforcement agencies of the city,
both the police department and the prosecutor's office, will
strictly enforce the law and severely prosecute those persons
engaging in the defacement of public and private properties.
9.20.020 Definitions.
A.
altering
physical
"Deface", as used in this Chapter, means the intentional
by physical, mechanical or chemical means of the
shape, dimension, contour or appearance of property.
B. "Aerosol paint container" means any aerosol container,
regardless of the material from which it made, which is adapted
or made for the purpose of spraying paint or other substance
capable of defacing property. (Ord. ____, Sec. 1, 1991)
C. "Felt tip marker" means any indelible marker or similar
implement with a tip which, at its broadest width is greater than
one-eighth (1/8th) inch, containing an ink that is not water-
soluble. (Ord. ____, Sec. 1, 1991)
D. "Graffiti" includes anv unauthorized inscriDtion. word.
fiaure. or desian that is marked. etched. scratched. drawn. or
Dainted on anv structural comoonent of anv buildina. structure.
or other facilitv. reaardless of the nature of the material of
that structural comoonent.
9.20.030 Prohibition of defacement.
It is unlawful for any person to intentionally deface,
alter, change, destroy, mutilate, remove, take down or take away
graf21.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Chapter CUrrent to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 1
"\..\3
~H-I ~/T A (1 P"1r::s)
any public property or any private property without the consent
of the owner of such property or the public agency charged with
the trusteeship of property. A mistake as to the private
property owner's identity or lack or knowledge that such property
is held by a public agency shall not be a defense to a violation
of this section.
9.20.035 Permitting Graffiti to Remain
It is unlawful for any person who is the owner or who has
primary responsibility for control of property or who has primary
responsibility for the repair or maintenance of property
("Responsible Party") to permit property which is defaced with
graffiti to remain so defaced for a period of seven (7) days
after notice of same, unless said person shall demonstrate by a
preponderance of evidence that they do not have the financial or
physical ability to remove the defacing graffiti, or unless it
can be demonstrated that the Responsible Party has an active
program for the removal of graffiti and has scheduled the removal
of the graffiti as part of that program.
9.20.037. Riaht of city to Remove.
A. Graffiti as a Nuisance. The existence of araffiti
within the City limits of the City of Chula vista is a
public and private nuisance. and may be abated accordina to
the provisions and procedures herein contained.
B. Riaht of Entrv on Private Property Provisions.
1. Securina Owner Consent.
Prior to enterina upon private property or property
owned bv a public entity other than the city. for the
purpose of removal of araffiti. the city shall attempt
to secure the consent of the property owner. and a
release of the City from liability for private or
public property or liability damaae.
2. Failure to Obtain Owner Consent.
If a Responsible Party fails to remove the offendina
Graffiti within the time herein specified. or if the
city shall have reauested consent to remove or paint
over the offendina Graffiti and the Responsible Party
shall have refused consent for entry on terms
acceptable to the city consistent with the terms of
this Section. the city shall commence Abatement and
Cost Recoverv proceedinas for the removal of the
araffiti accordina to the followina procedure.
qraf21. wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Chapter CUrrent to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 2
l-\~
3. Abatement and Cost Recoverv proceedinas.
graf21. wp
July 19, 1991
A. Notice and Conduct of Due Process Hearina.
The Director of Public Works ("Hearina Officer"\
shall aive not less than 48 hours notice. served
in the same manner as summons in a civil action in
accordance with Article 3 (commencina with section
415.10\ of Chapter 4 of Title 5 of Part 2 of the
Code of civil Procedure (If the owner of record.
after diliaent search cannot be found. the notice
mav be served bY postina a copy thereof in a
conspicuous place upon the property for a period
of 10 days and publication thereof in a newspaper
of aeneral circulation published in the county in
which the property is located pursuant to Section
6062.\ to the Responsible Party who is responsible
for the maintenance of a parcel of property
containina araffiti ("Property"\. and. if a
different person is the owner of record of the
parcel of land or which the nuisance is
maintained. based on the last eaualized assessment
roll or the supplemental roll. whichever is more
current. then to said owner also. of a "due
process" hearina at which said Responsible Party
shall be entitled to present evidence and araue
that his or her Property does not contain
araffiti. The determination of the Hearina
Officer after the "due process" hearina shall be
final and not appealable. If. after the due
orocess hearina. reaardless of the attendance of
the Responsible Party. or his aaent. the Hearina
Officer determines that the Property contains
araffiti. the Hearina Officer shall aive written
notice ("Eradication Order"\ that. unless the
araffiti is removed within 5 days thereafter. the
City. or its desianated aaent. shall enter upon
the Property. cause the removal. paintina over (in
such color as shall meet with the approval of the
Public Works Director\ or such other eradication
thereof ("Eradication Effort"\ as the Public Works
Director determines appropriate. and shall provide
the Responsibility Party thereafter with an
accountina of the costs of such Eradication Effort
on a "full cost recovery basis".
B. Eradication Effort. Not sooner than the time
specified in the Order of the Hearina Officer. the
Public Works Director. or his desianee. shall
implement the Eradication Order. and shall provide
an accountina to the Responsible Party of the
Graffiti Chapter CUrrent to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 3
"..\5
costs thereof ("Eradication Accountina").
C. Cost Hearina. If the ResDonsible Party fails
to reauest a hearina before the Hearina Officer on
the Eradication Accountina ("Cost Hearina"). or if
reauested. and a Cost Hearina is conducted after
extendina due Drocess to the ResDonsible Party.
after such a Cost Hearina. the Hearina Officer
determines that all or a Dortion of the Costs are
aDDroDriatelv charaeable to the Eradication
Effort. the total amount set forth in the
Eradication Accountina. or such amount thereof
determined as aDDroDriate bv the Hearina Officer.
("Assessed Eradication Charaes") shall be due and
payable bv the Responsible Party within 30 days.
D. Lien. If all or any portion of the Assessed
Eradication Charaes remain unpaid after 30 days.
Dursuant to the authority created bv law.
includina Government Codes Section 38773. et sea..
such portion thereof as shall remain unpaid shall
constitute and is herebY declared to constitute a
lien on the PrODertv which was the sub;ect matter
of the Eradication Effort. The Director of Public
Works shall present a Resolution of Lien to the
city Council. and upon Dassaae and adoDtion
thereof. shall cause a certified CODY thereof to
be recorded with the San Dieao County Recorder's
Office.
9.20.040 Prohibition of sale, possession, display for purposes
of sale, and storage of aerosol paint containers.
A. Sale or FurniShing to Minors. It shall be unlawful for
any person, other than a parent or legal guardian, to sell,
exchange, give,' loan, or otherwise furnish, or cause or permit to
be sold, exchanged, given, loaned, or otherwise furnished, any
aerosol paint container to any person under the age of eighteen
years without the consent of the parent or other lawfully
designated custodian of the person, which consent shall be given
in person.
B. Possession. It shall be unlawful for any person under
the age of eighteen years to have in his or her possession any
aerosol paint container while upon public property or upon
private property without the consent of the owner of such private
property whose consent shall be as to the person's presence while
in the possession with a aerosol paint container.
C. Display for the Purposes of Sale. No person, firm or
entity engaged in a commercial enterprise ("Seller") shall
graf2Lwp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Chapter CUrrent to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 4
\..11.c
display any aerosol paint container for sale, trade or exchange,
nor shall store any aerosol paint container pending display for
sale or pending sale, except in an area from which the public
shall be securely precluded without employee assistance. Two
such acceptable methods for displaying aerosol paint containers
for sale shall be by containment in (1) a completely enclosed
cabinet or other storage device which shall be permanently
affixed to a building or building structure, and which shall, at
all times except during access by authorized representatives,
remain securely locked; or in an enclosed area behind a sales or
service counter from which the public is precluded from entry.
9.20.045. Prohibition of sale, possession and display of felt
tip markers.
A. Sale or Furnishing To Minors. It shall be unlawful for
any person, other than a parent or other legal guardian, to sell,
exchange, give, loan, or other furnish, or cause or permit to be
sold, exchanged, given, loaned, or otherwise furnished, any felt
tip marker to any person under the age of eighteen years without
the consent of the parent or other lawfully designated custodian
of the person, which consent shall be given in person.
B. Possession by Minors. It shall be unlawful for any
person under the age of eighteen years to have in his or her
possession any felt tip marker while upon public property or upon
private property without the consent of the owner of such private
property, except while attending, or travelling to or from a
school at which the person is enrolled, if the person is
participating in a class at said school which has, as a written
requirement of said class, the need to use felt tip markers.
C. Display for the Purposes of Sale. No person, firm or
entity engaged in a commercial enterprise ("Seller") shall
display any felt tip marker for sale, trade or exchange, nor
shall store any felt tip marker pending display for sale or
pending sale, except in an area from which the public shall be
securely precluded without employee assistance. One such
acceptable method for displaying felt tip markers for sale shall
be in a completely enclosed cabinet or other storage device which
shall be permanently affixed to a building or building structure,
and which shall, at all times except during access by authorized
representatives, remain securely locked.
9.20.050. Penalties for violation of chapter.
A. Criminal Penalties. Any and all violations of this
chapter shall be punishable either as an infraction or a mis-
graf2l.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Chapter Current to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 5
"'1-\1
demeanor, at the discretion of the city Attorney.' It is fur-
ther understood that financial parental responsibility for any
acts of vandalism shall be strictly enforced.
B. Parefttal ei~il Respenaisility fer gamages. Any parent
SF e~her le~al gaardian ~he eSRseRts te, permits, SF e~heEh.ise
)[Rstliftgl}- alle....~s her SF his shill! lnute!" tae age af eighteeR t.e
pessess an aereael paint eeR~aiPler 8E" a felt tIp merIte!" 8aa11 136
pers8Ral1y liae1e fer any aRa all seats te a~-.peraeR iRearred hy
any par~y ift eeRReetisR ~i~h the repair af 8RY preperty ea~sed BY
said aails, aRa fer all atte!"ftey's fees aRd aeaFt seats iRearred
ift eSRRcetieR vith the eivil preeesytlsR af any alai. fer
dama~e9. Civil Resoonsibilitv for Furnishina Minors. Anv oerson
who violates the orovisions of Penal Code 594.1 (relatina to the
sale. aivina. or furnishina of sorav oaint cans to minors). or
who violates the orovisions of section 9.20.040(A) (sorav oaint
cans) or 9.20.045(A) (felt tio markers) shall be oersonallv
liable for any and all costs to any oerson incurred bv said
oerson in connection with the reoair of any orooertv caused bv
the aerosol oaint container or felt tio marker. and for all
attorney's fees and court costs incurred in connection with the
civil orosecution of any claim for damaaes. not to exceed. in
total. $10.000."
C. civil Resoonsibilitv for Damaaes Wronaful Disolav ep
E~eraac. Anv nerson who disolavs BY stares an aerosol snrav
container or felt tio marker in violation of the orovisions of
this Chaoter shall be oersonallv liable for anY and all costs
incurred bv any oartv in connection with the reoair of any
orooertv caused bv a oerson who uses such aerosol sorav container
or felt tio marker in violation of the orovisions of California
Penal Code Section 594. and for all attorney's fees and court
costs incurred in connection with the civil orosecution of any
claim for damaaes. not to exceed $1.500.00.
D. civil Resoonsibilitv for Wronaful Storaae.
Anv oerson who stores an aerosol sorav container or felt tio
marker in violation of the suboaraaraoh 1 of this Section shall
be oersonallv liable for any and all costs incurred bv any oartv
in connection with the reoair of any orooertv caused bv a oerson
who shall use such aerosol sorav container or felt tio marker in
violation of the orovisions of California Penal Code Section 594.
and for all attorney's fees and court costs incurred in
connection with the civil orosecution of any claim for damaaes.
not to exceed $1.500.00.
1. This language is similar to Penal Code Section 594 for
graffiti vandalism. Damages for illegal sale or possession are
not expected to be significant.
qraf21.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Chapter Current to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 6
l' \~
1. Prooer Storaae of Aerosol Sorav containers and Felt
Tio Markers.
Aerosol sorav containers and felt tio markers shall be
stored when not in use in either (11 a comoletelv enclosed
room which shall. at all times exceot durina access or
substantial occuoancv bv the owner or an authorized adult
reoresentative of the owner. remain securelY locked: or (21
in a comoletelv enclosed cabinet or other storaae device
which shall be oermanentlv affixed to a buildina or buildina
structure. and which shall. at all times exceot durina
access bv the owner or an authorized adult reoresentative of
the owner. remain securely locked. For the ourooses of this
section. an owner or authorized reoresentative of the owner.
shall be deemed to have substantial occuoancv of a room even
durina short oeriods of absence if the room is Dart of a
laraer structure which is occuoied bv the owner."
(El For the ourooses of definina "a similar substance" with
the city limits of the city of Chula vista. as the term is used
in civil Code section 1714.1 (bl. insoluable ink of the tvoe used
in a felt tio marker shall be deemed to be a substance similar to
oaint.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John Lippitt
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
city Attorney
qraf21. wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Chapter Current to July 17, 1991 Meeting
Page 7
"\..14
~t.f', ~
~~oj..
~(ff. (1
<~-t'
?~!.t If 1
ORDINANCE NO. 2. 4 t'J 0
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF
CHAPTER 9.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALTER
OR ENHANCE THE CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL
PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH GRAFFITI-RELATED
VIOLATIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Subsection D is hereby added to Section
9.20.020, Definitions, of Chapter 9.20, which subsection D shall
read as follows:
D. "Graffiti" includes any unauthorized inscription, word,
figure, or design that is marked, etched, scratched, drawn, or
painted on any structural component of any building, structure,
or other facility, regardless of the nature of the material of
that structural component.
section 2. Section 9.20.037, "Right of city to Remove" is
hereby added to Chapter 9.20, which Section shall read as
follows:
"9.20.037. Right of City to Remove.
A. Graffiti as a Nuisance. The existence of graffiti
within the city limits of the City of Chula vista is a
public and private nuisance, and may be abated according to
the provisions and procedures herein contained.
B. Right of Entry on Private Property Provisions.
1. Securing Owner Consent.
Prior to entering upon private property or property
owned by a public entity other than the City, for the
purpose of removal of graffiti, the City shall attempt
to secure the consent of the property owner, and a
release of the City from liability for private or
public property or liability damage.
2. Failure to Obtain Owner Consent.
If a Responsible Party fails to remove the offending
Graffiti within the time herein specified, or if the
city shall have requested consent to remove or paint
over the offending Graffiti and the Responsible Party
graf23.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Ordinance to Alter Criminal Consequences
Page 1
l-;?"3
shall have refused consent for entry on terms
acceptable to the city consistent with the terms of
this section, the city shall commence Abatement and
Cost Recovery Proceedings for the removal of the
graffiti according to the following procedure.
3. Abatement and Cost Recovery Proceedings.
A. Notice and Conduct of Due Process Hearing.
The Director of Public Works ("Hearing Officer")
shall give not less than 48 hours notice, served
in the same manner as summons in a civil action in
accordance with Article 3 (commencing with section
415.10) of Chapter 4 of Title 5 of Part 2 of the
Code of Civil Procedure (If the owner of record,
after diligent search cannot be found, the notice
may be served by posting a copy thereof in a
conspicuous place upon the property for a period
of 10 days and publication thereof in a newspaper
of general circulation published in the county in
which the property is located pursuant to section
6062.) to the Responsible Party who is responsible
for the maintenance of a parcel of property
containing graffiti ("Property"), and, if a
different person is the owner of record of the
parcel of land or which the nuisance is
maintained, based on the last equalized assessment
roll or the supplemental roll, whichever is more
current, then to said owner also, of a "due
process" hearing at which said Responsible Party
shall be entitled to present evidence and argue
that his or her Property does not contain
graffiti. The determination of the Hearing
Officer after the "due process" hearing shall be
final and not appealable. If, after the due
process hearing, regardless of the attendance of
the Responsible Party, or his agent, the Hearing
Officer determines that the Property contains
graffiti, the Hearing Officer shall give written
notice ("Eradication Order") that, unless the
graffiti is removed within 5 days thereafter, the
city, or its designated agent, shall enter upon
the Property, cause the removal, painting over (in
such color as shall meet with the approval of the
Public Works Director) or such other eradication
thereof ("Eradication Effort") as the Public Works
Director determines appropriate, and shall provide
the Responsibility Party thereafter with an
accounting of the costs of such Eradication Effort
graf23.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti ordinance to Alter criminal Consequences
Page 2
l-l~
on a "full cost recovery basis".
B. Eradication Effort. Not sooner than the time
specified in the Order of the Hearing Officer, the
Public Works Director, or his designee, shall
implement the Eradication Order, and shall provide
an accounting to the Responsible Party of the
costs thereof ("Eradication Accounting").
C. Cost Hearing. If the Responsible Party fails
to request a hearing before the Hearing Officer on
the Eradication Accounting ("Cost Hearing"), or if
requested, and a Cost Hearing is conducted after
extending due process to the Responsible Party,
after such a Cost Hearing, the Hearing Officer
determines that all or a portion of the Costs are
appropriately chargeable to the Eradication
Effort, the total amount set forth in the
Eradication Accounting, or such amount thereof
determined as appropriate by the Hearing Officer,
("Assessed Eradication Charges") shall be due and
payable by the Responsible Party within 30 days.
D. Lien. If all or any portion of the Assessed
Eradication Charges remain unpaid after 30 days,
pursuant to the authority created by law,
including Government Codes Section 38773, et seq.,
such portion thereof as shall remain unpaid shall
constitute and is hereby declared to constitute a
lien on the Property which was the subject matter
of the Eradication Effort. The Director of Public
Works shall present a Resolution of Lien to the
City council, and upon passage and adoption
thereof, shall cause a certified copy thereof to
be recorded with the San Diego County Recorder's
Office.
,
r (tlte. Section 3. Section 9.20.050 (B) of Chapter 9.20 is hereby
't~(i ~mended to read as follows:
(,.. tJ fl.. "(B) Civil Responsibility for Furnishing Minors. Any
~ ~\\J person who violates the provisions of Penal Code 594.1
\. r\ (relating to the sale, giving, or furnishing of spray paint
0\ cans to minors), or who violates the provisions of Section
9.20.040(A) (spray paint cans) or 9.20.045(A) (felt tip
markers) shall be personally liable for any and all costs to
any person incurred by said person in connection with the
repair of any property caused by the aerosol paint container
or felt tip marker, and for all attorney's fees and court
costs incurred in connection with the civil prosecution of
graf23.wp.
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Ordinance to Alter Criminal consequences
Page 3
1,,).5
_ any claim for damages, not to exceed, in total, $10,000."
-....r-
\,
I ~UV Section.4. section 9.20.050 (Cl of Chapter 9.20 is hereby
~~~\' amended to read as follows:
.{ ~I?' ~" c. civil Responsibility for Damages for Wrongful
~ct~ Display.
~\<,
h~
Any person who displays an aerosol spray container or
felt tip marker in violation of the provisions of this
Chapter shall be personally liable for any and all costs
incurred by any party in connection with the repair of any
property caused by a person who uses such aerosol spray
container or felt tip marker in violation of the provisions
of California Penal Code section 594, and for all attorney's
fees and court costs incurred in connection with the civil
prosecution of any claim for damages, not to exceed
$1,500.00."
Section 5. section 9.20.050 (D) of Chapter 9.20 is hereby
added to read as follows:
D. Civil Responsibility for Wrongful Storage.
Any person who stores an aerosol spray container or
felt tip marker in violation of the subparagraph 1 of this
section shall be personally liable for any and all costs
incurred by any party in connection with the repair of any
property caused by a person who shall use such aerosol spray
container or felt tip marker in violation of the provisions
of California Penal Code Section 594, and for all attorney's
fees and court costs incurred in connection with the civil
prosecution of any claim for damages, not to exceed
$1,500.00.
1. Proper Storage of Aerosol Spray containers and
Felt Tip Markers.
Aerosol spray containers and felt tip markers
shall be stored when not in use in either (1) a completely
enclosed room which shall, at all times except during access
or substantial occupancy by the owner or an authorized adult
representative of the owner, remain securely locked; or (2)
in a completely enclosed cabinet or other storage device
which shall be permanently affixed to a building or building
structure, and which shall, at all times except during
access by the owner or an authorized adult representative of
the owner, remain securely locked. For the purposes of this
section, an owner or authorized representative of the owner,
shall be deemed to have substantial occupancy of a room even
graf23.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Ordinance to Alter Criminal Consequences
Page 4
'"1-2-("
~.
~.
J
~
~
~
/
during short periods of absence if the room is part of a
larqer structure which is occupied by the owner."
"
Section 6. Subsection eE) is hereby added to Section
9.20.050 Chapter 9.20, which subsection (E) shall read as
follows:
"CE) For the purposes of defininq "a similar
substance" with the city limits of the City of Chula Vista,
as the term is used in civil Code section 1714.1 (b),
insoluble ink of the type used in a felt tip marker shall be
deemed to be a substance similar to paint."
Presented by:
John Lippitt
Director of Public Works
Approved as to form by:
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
,
graf23.wp
July 19, 1991
Graffiti Ordinance to Alter Criminal Consequences
Page 5
\"1-1/7.~
Graffiti Issues Flowchart
permittinq Graffiti to Remain
e;, 1. Do you want to "decriminal ize" (to mak.e it not 8 criminal
\ offense) the act of permitting graffiti to remain on one's property
for more than 7 days?
~ 2. Do you want to label the section as a "criminal offense"?
c( 3. Do you want to subject large graffiti attractors, like SDG&E,
Pac Bell, Cox Cable, City of Chula Vista, to a 15 day time limit?
Create Citvls RiQht to Remove from Private prooertv
o(
4. Do you want the City to have the right to enter on private
property to remove graffiti?
0< 5. Do you want to designate-this section, in the title thereof, 858
Hcivil remedy?1I
o~ 6. Do you want the private property owner to pay for same?
6.1.
If so, do you want the City to have the option of
collecting as a property tax assessment, usually
upon sale of the property?
~ 7. Do you want to place a limit on the amount for which a private
property owner may be held liable?
7.1. Do you want to distinguish a higher or different limit
,,~~\~~ + for commercial than residential private property?
.\ ~ ~ ll.N..tuJl" .
~b( '561>\~'L., .J. ~u... (f\Ah ":- \
'. . 'i:~-\ \"\"-~\~J
~V"-LA-~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ \k,~~ \)\JJ ~-\:
u.. ~ '\, b-\
WronQful DisDlav
8. Do you want to make it criminal for a merchant to wrongfully
~~C:~::~~~ ~~ ~
d."-~ jv.(.L~\V
7 -,A V
"
Staff I S
Recoomenda-
tion
"\ No, do
nothing.
'- Yes,
Introduce
Ord. 0
"
Yes,
Introduce
Ord. E
"J Yes, included
in Ord 2407.
'"
Yes;
Introduce
Ord. F
.~
Yes. included
in Ord. 2407.
"
Yes, included
in Ord. 2407.
Yes. Go to
question 7.1
Yes, amend
Ord. 2407 by
amending
9.20.037(8)
(3) (C) IICost
Hearing" as
indicated in
Handout 1.
Yes. Already
on the books.
Do nothing.
~~
'N\- 'M...- '-I-'.
Al ternate Action
If yes, Intro.
duce Ord A,
deletes
9.20.035.
If no, do
nothing.
If No.
do. nothing.
I f no, amend
Ord. 2407 by
deleting Section
2; go to
question 8.
If no, do
nothing.
If no, amend
Ord. 2407 by
deleting
9.20.037(8)(3)
(e) end (0)
(page 7-25)
If no, amend
Ord. 2407 by
deleting
9.20.037(8)(3)
(D) IILienl1
If no, do
nothing.
If no. amend Ord
2407 by amending
9.20.037(8)(3)
(C) IICost
Headngll as
indicated in
Handout 2.
If no, introduce
Ord. 8-1 to
delete the
criminal
provisions for
wrongful
displey.
9. Do you want to make a merchant who wrongfully displays "graffiti-
ables" civilly liable for damages if his merchandise contributes to
an act of vandalism?
10. Would you like to both delete the criminal liability for
wrongful display and institute civil liability in one action?
Civil Uabilhv for FumishinQ "Graffhi-ables"
11. OUr own provisions relating to parental responsibility should be
deleted as . ..tter of pre-emption by the State vicarious liability
law relating to . parentis civil responsibility for the graffiti acts
of their minors. Delete Section 9.20.050(8).
12. Do you want to make all adults civilly liable (in the same
manner as parents), not to exceed 510,000 (the State limit for
parents), for furnishing minors with IIgraffiti.sblesll?
Civil liability for Wronaful StoraQe of IIGraffiti-ablesll
13. Youlve already eliminated the criminal liability for wrongful
storage of "graffiti-ablesll. Do you want to provide civil liabilHy
for a person who wrongfully stores "graffitiablesll?
7- SO
Yes. Already
included in
Section 4 of
Ord. 2407
with $1,500
limh.
No.
Yes. Already
included in
Ord. 2407.
Section 3.
Yes. Already
in Ord. 2407,
Section 3.
Yes. Already
in Ord. 2407,
Section 5.
No. Amend Ord.
2407 to delete
Section 4.
If Yes,
introduce Ord. B
Not a val id
option due to
State Pre-
eq>tion rule.
No. Amend Ord.
2407 to delete
Section 3.
No. Amend Ord.
2407 to deLete
Section 5.
Ordinance A
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY DELETING
SECTION 9.20.035 THEREBY DECRIMINALIZING THE
ACT OF PERMITTING GRAFFITI TO REMAIN ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 9.20.035, "Permitting Graffiti to Remain"
is hereby deleted in its entirety.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John Lippit
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
/1
I
~,:,
".-
1/)
graiM.wp
July 19, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 11
-'-'=3(
{ -
l
Ordinance D
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY DELETING
SECTION 9.20.035 THEREBY DECRIMINALIZING THE
ACT OF PERMITTING GRAFFITI TO REMAIN ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
section 1. Section 9.20.035, "Permitting Graffiti to Remain"
of Chapter 9.20 is hereby amended to read:
" 9.20.035 Permitting Graffiti to Remain; criminal Liabilitv
It is unlawful for any person who is the owner or who has
primary responsibility for control of property or who has
primary responsibility for the repair or maintenance of
property ("Responsible Party") to permit property which is
defaced with graffiti to remain so defaced for a period of
seven (7) days after notice of same, unless said person shall
demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence that they do not
have the financial or physical ability to remove the defacing
graffiti, or unless it can be demonstrated that the
Responsible Party has an active program for the removal of
graffiti and has scheduled the removal of the graffiti as part
of that program."
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Bruce M. Boogaard
city Attorney
John Lippit
Director of Public Works
graf29.wp
7- 3<<
'y
Ordinance E
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY DELETING
SECTION 9.20.035 THEREBY DECRIMINALIZING THE
ACT OF PERMITTING GRAFFITI TO REMAIN ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The section 9.20.035, "permitting Graffiti to
Remain" of Chapter 9.20, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"
9.20.035 Permitting Graffiti to Remain: Criminal Liabilitv
It is unlawful for any person who is the owner or who has
primary responsibility for control of property or who has
primary responsibility for the repair or maintenance of
property ("Respons ible Party") to permit property which is
defaced with graffiti to remain so defaced for a period of
seven (7) days after notice of same, unless ill-said person
shall demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence that they do
not have the financial or physical ability to remove the
defacing graffiti, or ill it can be demonstrated that the
Responsible Party has an active program for the removal of
graffiti and has scheduled the removal of the graffiti as part
of that program within 15 davs of the notice. in which case
said araffiti shall be removed not later than 15 days after
said notice."
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John Lippit
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
city Attorney
graf32 . wp
~ - ~'=<
/ /-~
/
~:
Ordinance F
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY DELETING
SECTION 9.20.035 THEREBY DECRIMINALIZING THE
ACT OF PERMITTING GRAFFITI TO REMAIN ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
section L The title of section 9.20.037, "Right of City to
Remove", of Chapter 9.20, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"9.20.037. Right of city to Remove: civil Remedv". No other
changes, amendments or alterations are hereby made to said section.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John Lippit
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
city Attorney
~3\
7- 3C( / 1-.3~
graf33.wp
Handout 1
C. Cost Hearing. If the Responsible Party fails
to request a hearing before the Hearing Officer on
the Eradication Accounting ("Cost Hearing"), or if
requested, and a Cost Hearing is conducted after
extending due process to the Responsible Party,
after such a Cost Hearing, the Hearing Officer
determines that all or a portion of the Costs are
appropriately chargeable to the Eradication
Effort, the total amount set forth in the
Eradication Accounting, or such amount thereof
determined as appropriate by the Hearing Officer,
not to exceed $2.000.00 for commercial and
industrial land uses and $500.00 for all other
land uses ("Assessed Eradication charges") shall
be due and payable by the Responsible Party within
30 days.
~~~ \'
~ \. , ~r . /yy n 1'\, I ( - ()
'\ ~~ U. \\.L\~C 11\,'\\'UA. ~"j(~ ~""~
~ ~ _L'- ~"'\ \\J )
)- 5~'
graf34.wp
Handout 2
C. Cost Hearing. If the Responsible Party fails
to request a hearing before the Hearing Officer on
the Eradication Accounting ("Cost Hearing"), or if
requested, and a Cost Hearing is conducted after
extending due process to the Responsible Party,
after such a Cost Hearing, the Hearing Officer
determines that all or a portion of the Costs are
appropriately chargeable to the Eradication
Effort, the total amount set forth in the
Eradication Accounting, or such amount thereof
determined as appropriate by the Hearing Officer,
not to exceed $1.000.00 ("Assessed Eradication
Charges") shall be due and payable by the
Responsible Party within 30 days.
7-'3'"
Ordinance B-1
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY DELETING
SECTIONS 9.20.040 (Cl and 9.20.045 (Cl THEREBY
DECRIMINALIZING THE ACT OF WRONGFUL DISPLAY BY
MERCHANTS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
section 1. Subsection (Cl of section 9.20.040 of Chapter 9.20
is hereby deleted in its entirety.
section 2. Subsection (Cl of section 9.20.045 of Chapter 9.20
is hereby deleted in its entirety.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John Lippit
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
graf26.wp
<f
r37
Ordinance B
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY DELETING
SECTIONS 9.20.040 {Cl and 9.20.045 {Cl THEREBY
DECRIMINALIZING THE ACT OF WRONGFUL DISPLAY BY
MERCHANTS, BUT ATTRIBUTING CIVIL LIABILITY FOR
SAME.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Subsection (Cl of Section 9.20.040 of Chapter 9.20
is hereby deleted in its entirety.
Section 2. Subsection (Cl of Section 9.20.045 of Chapter 9.20
is hereby deleted in its entirety.
Section 3. Section 9.20.050 (Cl of Chapter 9.20 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
If c.
Display.
Civil Responsibility for Damages for Wrongful
1. Wrongful Display.
Any person who displays an aerosol spray
container or felt tip marker in violation of the
provisions of this section shall be personally
liable for any and all costs incurred by any party
in connection with the repair of any property
caused by a person who uses such aerosol spray
container or felt tip marker in violation of the
provisions of California Penal Code Section 594,
and for all attorney's fees and court costs
incurred in connection with the civil prosecution
of any claim for damages, not to exceed $1,500.00.
2. Proper Display of Aerosol Spray containers and
Felt Tip Markers.
Aerosol spray containers and felt tip markers
shall be displayed for sale, trade or exchange in
an area from which the public shall be securely
precluded without merchant assistance. Two such
acceptable methods for displaying aerosol paint
containers for sale shall be by containment in {ll
a completely enclosed cabinet or other storage
device which shall be permanently affixed to a
building or building structure, and which shall, at
all times except during access by authorized
representatives, remain securely locked; or (2l in
)__:::>0
r /0
an enclosed area behind a sales or service counter
from which the public is precluded from entry.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
John Lippit
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
city Attorney
graf26.wp
)- -=s?
council Agenda statement
Item:
~
submitted by:
)~~l
Resolution: Appropriating $30,000 for Legal
Expenses Associated with the
Issuance of the SR 125 Toll Road
Franchise. 17, ~
Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney/~
Meeting Date:
July 23, 1991
Item Title:
4/5ths Vote: (X) Yes () No
The City council directed the retention of legal services for
waiver of, and then filing of, certain CEQA' and contract causes
of action against Cal Trans and CTV2 as applied to the SR 125 toll
road. At the time of the direction, the council was unable to
appropriate funds for the expenditure. staff is now requesting
that the Council appropriate $30,000 from the General Fund
unappropriated balance for legal expenses associated with the SR
125 litigation, including the waiver solicitation.
Recommendation:
Adopt the attached resolution appropriating $30,000 from the
unappropriated balance in the General Fund for legal expenses
associated with the SR 125 litigation.
Boards and Commissions Recommendation:
None. None appropriate.
Discussion:
On June 5, 1991, at a budget meeting of the City council, the
city authorized, as an urgency item, the retention of outside
counsel of the city Attorney's choice in an amount of not to exceed
$5,000, to attempt to solicit a waiver of the impending statute of
1. California Environmental Quality Act.
2. California Transportation Ventures, Inc., the franchisee of
Cal Trans to build a toll road from Otay Mesa to SR 54.
sr1251. wp
July 17, 1991
A1l3 re Appropriation for SR 125 suit
Page 1
<l.l
limitations3 on the CEQA cause of action against Cal Trans and CTV.
However, there were insufficient members present to appropriate
funds for the expenditure. The Councilmembers were advised that
staff would return for the appropriation later.
As a result of the Council's direction, the City Attorney
retained Best, Best & Krieger to negotiate the waiver from Cal
Trans and CTV. They have now billed us $3,947.63 for their work in
this regard, which is essentially completed.
As a result of being advised in a closed session about the
legal risks which may be associated with obtaining the waiver, the
City Council decided, on or about June 18, 1991, upon advice from
the city Attorney, to abandon the "waiver" approach, and directed
the institution of litigation within the statutory time. The
appropriation for same was not on the agenda and hence could not be
made at that time. The Councilmembers were advised that staff
would return for the appropriation later.
As a result of the Council's direction, the city Attorney
retained the Law Firm of Dwight Worden to institute the litigation,
which was done June 28, 1991. No bills have been sent in yet, but
we expect them shortly and desire to be in a position to promptly
pay same.
Fiscal Impact:
There is no fiscal impact from merely making the appropria-
tion. The cost of the legal services already directed to be re-
tained are being incurred on a time and materials basis. We have,
to date, incurred $3,947.63 for the waiver, and about $2143.50 for
the CEQA lawsuit, and costs will continue to accrue on the suit at
a rate of not to exceed $150.00 per hour. We expect that the total
costs can be contained so as to not exceed $30,000.00, but this
will vary depending on the litigation strategy and the level of
defense. We may be required to return for an additional
appropriation.
Accordingly, it is necessary to appropriate $30,000 from the
unappropriated balance of the General Fund to be transferred into
Account 100-0150-5201.
3. CEQA specifies that action to invalidate approval of a
project without compliance with CEQA must be brought within 180
days after approval of the project. The franchise was issued to
CTV on January 6, meaning that action had to be taken sooner than
July 5, 1991.
sr1251.wp
July 17, 1991
Al13 re Appropriation for SR 125 suit
Page 2
g-.2..
RESOLUTION NO. )~1t.7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $30,000 FOR LEGAL
EXPENSES ASSOCIATEO WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE
SR 125 TOLL ROAD FRANCHISE
The Ci ty Counci 1 of the Ci ty of Chul a Vi sta does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council directed the
legal services for waiver of, and then filing of,
causes of action as applied to the SR 125 toll road;
retenti on of
certai n CEQA
and
WHEREAS, at the time of the direction, the Council was
unable to appropriate funds for the expenditure; and
WHEREAS, staff is now requesting that the Council
appropriate $30,000 for the legal expenses associated with the SR
125 litigation, including waiver solicitation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ci ty Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby appropriate $30,000 for the
unappropriated balance of the General Fund into Account
100-0150-5201 for the 1 egal expenses associ ated wi th the issuance
of the SR 125 Toll Road franchise.
and
orney
9068a
C(.~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
q
Meeting Date 7/23/91
ITEM TITLE: Resolution IlD~'-1 - Approving a
"National Night Out" picnic Event to
be held at Bayside Park on August 6,
1991 and Authorizing the Mayor to
execute a Hold Harmless
Indemnification Agreement with the
Port Dis~ri~~ for this event.
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of/}Qlllce
REVIEWED BY: city ManagerJ~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote Yes_No X
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Agreement
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
August 6, 1991 will represent the eighth annual "National Night
Out." National Night Out is a nationwide effort to heighten crime
prevention awareness, strengthen neighborhood spirit and pOlice-
community relations, generate support and participation for local
crime prevention programs and sending a message to criminals that
our communities are organized and fighting back! This evening all
neighborhoods across the country are encouraged to turn on their
outside lights from 8:00 to 10:00 P.M. and spend the evening
outdoors.
The Police Department is recommending that a picnic be held at
Bayside Park on Tuesday, August 6, 1991 from 5:00 to 8:00 P.M. We
anticipate that the event would draw approximately 300
participants. In addition to the picnic, there will be
demonstrations, live entertainment, display booths and food booths.
Some of those scheduled to attend include: the Police canine Unit,
S.W.A.T. displays, Crime Suppression unit Display and Crime
Prevention Displays. There will also be a special appearance by
McGruff, the crime dog and Pluggie, the fire prevention hydrant.
Since the event is proposed to take place on Port District land,
the Port District has asked that the city submit a certificate of
insurance naming the Port as additional insured. In addition, the
Port has also requested that the City sign a Hold Harmless
Indemnification Agreement. The Risk Manager has reviewed this
request and stated that there will be no additional cost to the
city to provide either of these.
,\-1
Page 2, Item
'1
Meeting Date
7/23/91
FISCAL IMPACT:
This event will be presented free to the public. Food costs are
estimated at $500 and funds are budgeted in account 1050-5344.
WJW/amh
Nightout
G ...2.
RESOLUTION NO./I,'U/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT"
PICNIC EVENT TO BE HELD AT BAYS IDE PARK ON
AUGUST 6, 1991 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE A HOLD HARMLESS INDEMNIFICATION
AGREEMENT WITH THE PORT DISTRICT FOR THIS EVENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, August 6, 1991 will represent the eighth annual
"National Night Out" which is a nationwide effort to heighten
crime prevention awareness, strengthen neighborhood spirit and
police-community relations and generate support and participation
for local crime prevention programs; and
WHEREAS, the Pol ice Department is recommending that a
picnic event be held at Bayside Park on Tuesday, August 6, 1991
from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m.; and
WHEREAS, since the event is proposed to take place on
Port District land, the Port District has asked that the City
submit a certificate of insurance naming the Port as additional
insured; and
WHEREAS, in addition, the Port has also requested that
the City sign a Hold Harmless Indemnification Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor of the
City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute
a Hold Harmless Indemnification Agreement with the Port District,
a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, in
connection with a "National Night Out" picnic Event to be held at
Bayside Park on August 6, 1991.
9074a
Presented by
William J. winters
Director of Public Safety
Bruce M. Boogaa
city Attorney
~-3 1t/--1
,
NO.
DATE
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
TIDELAND ACTIVITY PERMIT
PERMITTEE:
City of Chula Vista
USE OR ACTIVITY:
Picnic/Crime Prevention Displays
LOCATION FOR WHICH PERMIT ISSUED:
Bavside Park
EFFECTIVE DATES (No ~ore than 30 days):
Auqust 6, 1991
SECURITY DEPOSIT: S -0-
THIS PERMIT FOR TIDELAND USE IS ISSUED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
1. Permittee shall comply with all apolicable laws, rules
and regulations of the District and other governmental entities.
2. Permittee shall keep the property and all equipment used
in connection with this permit in a clean, safe and sanitary manner
and in good repair at all times. Allor any portion of the security
deposit shall be available unconditionally to the District for the
purpose of cleaning or repairing damages to the property upon ter-
mination of this permit.
3. This permit may be cancelled by either party by the giving
of twenty-four (24) hours notice in writing to the other party.
Such cancellation shall be without liability of any nature.
4. .This permit shall not be transferred or assigned.
S. Permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hol~ harmless
District, its officers and emoloyees agai~st all causes of action,
for Judicial relief of any kind, for damage to proper(y of any kind
whatsoever," and to whomever belonging, including Permittee, or in-
jury to or death of any person or persons, including employees of
Permittee, resultin~ directly or indirectly from activities in con-
nection with the issuance and performance of this permit or arising
from the use of the property, facilities or services of District,
its officers or employees.
~-5
6. Pe~mittee shall maintain comp~ehensive public liability
(cove~ing operations, p~oducts and completed operations) and blanket
cont~actual cove~age insu~ance throughout the term of this permit.
The policies shall, as a minimum, provide the follow1n9 forms of
coverage:
(A) Pe~sonal Inju~y and Bodily Inju~y:
One Person S ./ $1,000,000.00
One Oecu~~ence S /" combined single
/ limi t.
(B) Prope~ty Damage S
.
Certificates of such insurance, in a form satisfactory to the District.
shall be filed with District's Community andGove~nment Affairs De-
partment. Insu~ance certificates filed pu~suant to this permit shall
contain a non-cancellation-without-notice clause and shall p~ovide
that copies of cancellation notices shall be sent to the District.
7. The rights and privileges extended by this permit are non-
exclusfve.
8. Permittee shall not engage in any activity on property of
the District other than the activity for which this permit is e~ressly
issuea.
g. Permittee shall be subject to.and comply with any special
~onditions attached hereto.
.10. Permittee shall comoly with all reauirements and directives
of the Port Directo~ of District.
11. In the event of failure of Permittee to comply with any
provision of this permit, this permit may, at the discretion of the
Port Director, be terminated immediately.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
By
Permittee hereby accepts this permit and agrees to comply with all the
terms and conditions thereof.
APPROVED as to form:
Permittee's signature
Address: 276 Fourth Avenue
JOSEPH D. PATELLa
Port Attorney
Chula Vista. CA 91910
q-~
Date request received in
CGA Dept.:
CHECKLIST FOR THE USE OF TIDELAND PROPERTY
Please complete each item below.
1. Sponsoring individual or group:
City of Chula Vista
2.
Address and telephone number of contact person:
Rosemary Reznik - Chula Vista Police Department - 691-5187
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
What type of event is planned?
National Night Out Picnic, dog demonstration, taekwondo
demonstration, crime prevention displays.
3.
4.
Where exactly on the bayfront?
Bayside Park - Bayside Parkway to Sandpiper Way to Marina Parkway.
Also requesting dirt lot west of 400 Quay for parking (Rohr
Industries lot - north side of park).
Day and date of event:
August 6, 1991 - Tuesday
5.
6.
Time period: Start
5:00 PM
Finish
8:00 PM
7. Will traffic be affected?
Yes
8. How many persons involved or expected to attend?
300
9. If large group, what security arrangements have been made?
Yes
10. If commercial or catered event, do you have liability insurance coverage?
Yes
Please return this checklist by (within ten 10 working days) or
your request for an event on Port tidelands will be canceled.
7/.0
q-1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /0 A~8
Meeting Date 7/23/91
ITEM TITLE: a. Resolution ,~~O Approving amendment to agreement for
sewer service billing and collection with Sweetwater Authority
to provide for collection of storm drain fees and adjustment
of billing fee
b. Reso 1 ut i on I jp'J..~ I Approvi ng amendment to agreement for
billing services with Otay Water District to provide for
collection of storm drain fees and adjustment of billing fee
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
On December 8, 1988, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposed regul at ions for the issuance of Nat i ona 1 Pollutant Di scharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits to regulate storm water discharge into the
waters of the United States. The fi na 1 versi on of these regul at ions was
issued on November 16, 1990. These permits will require agencies discharging
storm water to develop management programs for the control of pollutants. The
City establ i shed a storm drain fee by enact i ng Ordi nance 2463 on June 18,
1991. The storm drain fee will pay for the establ ishment and implementation
of the NPDES program. Amendments to the agreements with the Sweetwater
Authority and the Otay Water District will be needed to provide for the
collection of said storm drain fees along with the sewer service charges.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the items as described in the titles
above.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In order to establish and implement the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program, the City Council established a storm drain
fee by enacting Ordinance 2463 on June 18, 1991 and by approving Resolution
16200 which amended the Master Fee Schedule to add the storm drain fee. The
effect of the fee will be to reimburse the General Fund appropriately for the
costs associated with the NPDES program. The approved fee was $.70 per month
per dwelling unit for single family dwellings and $.06 per hundred cubic feet
of water consumed for multi-family, commercial, or industrial accounts per
calendar month with a $500 maximum.
The revenues are based on a total number of single family dwell ing units of
27,300 and an estimated water consumption rate of 3.1 million gallons per day
for mult i -famil y and 3.1 mill ion gallons per day for commerci a 1 usage. The
tota 1 est imated annual revenues are $405,000. The est imated di rect cost of
the NPDES program for Fiscal Year 1991-92 is approximately $405,000. The
storm drain fee will be paid only by the parties connected to City's sewer
system and wi 11 be coll ected with the sewer servi ce charges. The exi st i ng
agreements with the Sweetwater Authori ty and the Otay Water Di stri ct must be
I/) -I
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 7/23/91
amended in order to provide for the collection of the storm drain fee and for
the payment by the City to the Sweetwater and Otay Water Districts of
additional fees as discussed under "Fiscal Impact".
These additional fees will compensate the Districts for their added efforts to
produce reports and to handle added calls from customers concerning increased
sewer service charges.
FISCAL IMPACT: Otay Water Di stri ct increased thei r bill i ng servi ce charge
from $.25 to $.50 per bi 11 per month. Sweetwater Authority increased thei r
billing service charge from $.25 to $.75 per bill per month. As a result of
the increases, the charges by the water compani es wi 11 total approximately
$221,100 annually. This covers the cost of billing and collection for sewer
servi ce charges and storm drain fees, which will bri ng a combi ned annual
revenue to the City estimated at $6,895,000. The proportionate cost of
collecting storm drain fees is approximately $13,000 per year or 5.9 percent
of the total charges. Therefore, the net annual storm drain fee revenue to
the City will be approximately $392,000. Approximately, $208,100 in remaining
water company bi 11 i ng and collect i on charges (94.1%) will be appl i ed agai nst
sewer service revenues.
SMN/mad:File No. KY-181
WPC 5690E
) f) ..2.
RESOLUTION NO. 16260
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
WITH SWEETWATER AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE FOR
COLLECTION OF STORM DRAIN FEES AND ADJUSTMENT
OF BILLING FEE, AND AUTHORI ZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on December 8, 1988, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed regulations for
the issuance of National pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits to regulate storm water discharge into the waters
of the United States with the final version of these regulations
being issued on November 16, 1990; and
WHEREAS, said permits will
storm water to develop management
pollutants; and
require
programs
agencies
for the
discharging
control of
WHEREAS, the City established a storm drain
enacting Ordinance 2463 on June 18, 1991 which fee will
the establishment and implementation of the NPDES program;
fee
pay
and
by
for
WHEREAS, an amendment to the agreement wi th the
Sweetwater Authority will be needed to provide for the collection
of said storm drain fees along with the sewer service charges.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Amendment to
Agreement with Sweetwater Authority to provide for collection of
storm drain fees and adjustment of billing fee, a copy of which
is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the Ci ty of
Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Amendment for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by
d as
,j
~
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
9047a
lOA - fo Ii -2.
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY FOR SEWER SERVICE BILLING AND COLLECTION
THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT, made and entered into this
day of , 1991, by and between the CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, a municipal corporation , hereinafter called " City " and
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY, hereinafter called "Sweetwater";
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS, City has previously entered into an agreement with
the California Water and Telephone Company, dated October 30, 1962,
as adopted by Resolution No. 2949, and an amendment thereto adopted
by Resolution No. 3510, regarding collection of sewer service
charges, and
WHEREAS, Sweetwater is the successor to the California Water
and Telephone Company, and
WHEREAS, the parties hereto further amended said agreement by
Resolution No. 9778 to substitute the name of the Sweetwater
Authority for that of the California Water and Telephone Company,
to modify the amount of payment due to Sweetwater for rendering the
sewer service statements and to provide a new anniversary date for
the timely review of fees and giving of notice of cancellation, and
WHEREAS, the parties further amended said agreement by
Resolution No. 12678 to provide for an increase in the fee to be
paid to Sweetwater for each individual sewer service statement
rendered, and
WHEREAS, Chula vista has recently enacted a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program in order
to eliminate pollution in the storm water and urban runoff
leaving Chula vista's boundaries, and
WHEREAS, Chu1a vista is imposing a Storm Drain Fee of $0.70
per month per dwelling unit for single family dwellings and $0.06
per one hundred cubic feet of water consumed for multifamily,
commercial or industrial accounts with a $500 per month maximum
in order to fund the NPDES program, and
7/19/91
ID A, 3
WHEREAS, Chula vista desires to have Sweetwater bill and
collect the storm Drain Fee as well as the sewer service charges
from all of Sweetwater's consumers who are being billed by
Sweetwater for sewer service charges, and
WHEREAS, the parties mutually desire to further amend said
agreement to provide for collection by Sweetwater of City'S newly
imposed Storm Drain Fee, and
WHEREAS, as a result of this amendment, if approved by both
parties, City will have the obligation, under paragraph 4 of the
original agreement, to give advance notice to each customer of the
reasons for imposing the new Storm Drain Fee, and City will prepare
and obtain Sweetwater's approval for such notice so that it can be
included in Sweetwater's July and August bills.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and
the covenants and conditions set forth in this FOURTH AMENDMENT TO
AGREEMENT, the parties hereto agree that the agreement, as amended
to date, is further amended as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into
the agreement.
2. Paragraph 2 is amended to read:
"A. Sweetwater shall compute, produce and mail sewer service
charge statements, either monthly or bi-monthly at the same time
as Sweetwater bills its customers for water service. Sweetwater
shall add to its statements for water service, the appropriate
sewer service charges for each of its customers who are receiving
sanitary sewer service from Chula Vista, except those accounts
using in excess of 25,000 gallons per day (average per month).
Such latter accounts will be billed directly by Chula vista for
both sewer service and the Storm Drain Fee.
B. Sweetwater shall monthly, within 15 days after the mailing of
bills to customers, submit a report showing an itemization of the
actual water usage by all customers established by Sweetwater as
using in excess of 25,000 gallons per day (average per month).
C. Sweetwater shall also bill a Storm Drain Fee in the amount of
$0.70 per month per single family dwelling unit, and $0.06 per
hundred cubic feet of water consumed for all other types of uses.
Said Fee shall not be separately itemized on the customer's bill,
but shall be included as part of, and shall be billed and
collected in the same manner as, sewer service charges pursuant
to this agreement.
7/19/91
IDA ~'-)
D. Hereafter in this amended agreement all references to "sewer
service" shall be deemed to include both sewer service and the
storm Drain Fee."
3.
read:
Paragraph 5 of the original agreement is amended to
"Sweetwater shall commence the establishment of its billing
procedures within thirty (30) days after the execution of this
agreement or within thirty (30) days after the receipt of the
list of sewer service connections referred to in paragraph 1
hereof, whichever date is the latest. For Storm Drain Fees,
Sweetwater shall commence billing all bi-monthly billings the
first full billing cycle after July 18, 1991 and all monthly
billings the first full billing cycle after August 18, 1991."
4. Paragraph 8 of the original agreement is further
amanded to read:
"City shall pay to Sweetwater one dollar and fifty cents ($1. 50)
for each individual sewer service/ storm drain fee statement
rendered by Sweetwater after the effective date of this Fourth
Amendment to Agreement. city will pay all charges for services
rendered by Sweetwater within thirty (30) days after receipt of
invoice. 11
5. city shall hold harmless and indemnify Sweetwater from
all claims or damages of any kind arising out of the performance
of this amended agreement, including costs of investigation and
defense of any such claims or suits.
6. All other terms and conditions not amended by this
Fourth Amendment to Agreement remain in full force and effect.
7/19/91
I/)/t -5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Fourth
Amendment to Agreement as of the date set forth above. All
signed copies of this Fourth Amendment to Agreement shall be
deemed originals.
CIlY OF GUlA VISTA
S\\EElW\TER AUllllUlY
Mayor
Date
ATIEST:
Ci ty Clerk
Date
President
Date
ATIEST:
Sweetwater Secretary
Date
APPROVED AS 1D laM
APPROVED AS 1D laM
C,ty-Xtforney-----------------
-----Xfforney-ror:sweetvvater--------
7/19/91
I~A-(,p
RESOLUTION NO. 16261
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
WITH OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO PROVIDE FOR
COLLECTION OF STORM DRAIN FEES AND ADJUSTMENT
OF BILLING FEE, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on December 8, 1988, the united states
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed regulations for
the issuance of National pollutant Discharge Elimination system
(NPDES) permits to regulate storm water discharge into the waters
of the united States with the final version of these regulations
being issued on November 16, 1990; and
WHEREAS, said permits will require agencies discharging
storm water to develop management programs for the control of
pollutants; and
WHEREAS, the City established a storm drain
enacting Ordinance 2463 on June 18, 1991 which fee will
the establishment and implementation of the NPDES program;
fee
pay
and
by
for
WHEREAS, an amendment to the agreement with the otay
Water District will be needed to provide for the collection of
said storm drain fees along with the sewer service charges.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Amendment to
Agreement with otay Water District to provide for collection of
storm drain fees and adjustment of billing fee, a copy of which
is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Amendment for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by
e~'
Bruce
City Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
9048a
1013 - /
;
.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR BILLING SERVICES
This First Amendment to Agreement is entered into this day
of July, 1991, between the city ot Chula vista, a munioipal
corporation (nChula vista"), and the Otay Water District, a
Munioipal Water District ("0tayn).
RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, otay and chula Vista have previously entered
into an agreement on May 12, 1~81 whereby Otay bills and
collects sewer service charges from all of otay's consumers who
are receiving sanitary sewer service from Chula Vista, and
B. WHEREAS, Chula vista has recently enacted a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) program in order
to eliminate pollution in the storm water and urban runoff
leaving Chula Vista'S boundaries, and
C. WHEREAS, Chula vista is imposing a fee of $0.70 per
month per dwelling unit for single family dwellings and $0.06
per one hundred oubic feet Of water consumed for multifamily,
commercial or industrial accounts with a $500 per month maximum
in order to fund the NPDES program, and
D. WHEREAS, Chula vista desires to have Otay bill and
collect the NPDES program as well as the sewer service charges
from all of otay's consumers who are benefitting from the
program.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and
the covenants and conditions set forth in this First Amandment
to Agreement, the parties agree that the existing agreement
dated May 12, 1981 is amended as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated
into the agreement.
2. Paragraph 2 is amended to read: "otay shall compute,
and add to its statements for water service, the appropriate
sewer service charges for each of its customers who are
receiving sanitary sewer service from Chula vista, except those
accounts using in excess of 25,000 gallons per day (average per
month). Such latter accounts will be billed directly by chub
,Vista for sewer service only."
3. Paragraph 6 is amended by adding a paragraph thereto
at the end which reads:
In addition to the other
shall monthly submit a report
tiated that month, along with
reports required herein, otay
showing all new accounts ini-
an itemization of the actual
1/)13.. :3
1
~
.
water usage by all customers using in excess of 25,000 gallons
per day (average per month).
4. Paragraph 7 is amended by deleting "twenty-five cents
($0.25) and replacing it with "fifty cents ($0.50)".
5. Paragraph 8 is amended by designating the two
paragraphs after the colon as subparagraph "A", deleting the
existing third paragraph (regarding the fee), and adding:
"B. A storm Drain Fee in the amount of $0.70 per month
per single family dwelling unit, and $0.06 per hundred cubic
feet of water consumed for all other types of uses. . said Fee.
shall be separately itemized on the customer's bill, and shall
be billed and collected in the same manner as sewer service
charges pursuant to this agreement, including collection of
delinquent accounts ~ursuant to paragraph 12. The storm Drain
Fee shall be billed and collected by otay even if Chula vista
separately bills for the sewer service charge under paragraph
2."
6. All other terms and conditions not amended by this
First Amendment to Agreement remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First
Amendment to Agreement as of the date set forth above. All
signed copies of this First Amendment to Agreement shall be
deemed originals.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
Date
Mayor
ATTES'l':
City Clerk
Date
1.N~91
Date
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FORM
I/)~.'I 2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item/I A ~lC
Meeting Date 7/23/91
ITEM TITLE: a) Resolution 11..2."''1 Making findings on the petition for the
Salt Creek I Assessment District No. 90-1
b) Reso 1 ut i on I~ ~ 7l> Adopt i ng a map showi ng the proposed
boundaries of Assessment District No. 90-1 (Salt Creek 1)
c) Resolution ),.,.7/ Approving a proposed resolution of
intention and requesting consent and jurisdiction from the
County of San Di ego for the Sa 1t Creek I Assessment Di stri ct
No. 90-1
d) Resolution /IP 472 Approving Amendment No. 1 to the
agreement with Municipal Financial Services, Inc. and
authorizing the Mayor to execute said amendment.
e) Resolution J~"" '! Approving an agreement with Thomas o.
Meade for project management servi ces for the Sa 1t Creek I
Assessment District No. 90-1 and authorizing the Mayor to
execute said agreement.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No___)
FN Projects, Inc. (Baldwin Company) has submitted a petition requesting
assessment di stri ct fi nanci ng of infrastructure improvements for thei r Sa 1t
Creek I res ident i a 1 development. The owner has also submitted a map showi ng
and describing the boundaries of the proposed district. Certain improvements
are located outs i de the Ci ty boundary necess i tat i ng the request for consent
and jurisdiction from the County of San Diego. Because of the complexity of
the proceedings and time constraints, the owner has requested that Thomas o.
Meade be retained as project manager for the district. The current agreement
with Municipal Financial Services, Inc. is being amended to delete the project
management services.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolutions as listed in the title hereto.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On April 2, 1991, by Resolution 16115, the City Council approved an agreement
with FN Projects, Inc. (The Baldwin Company) in which they agree to provide
for all the funds to pay consulting, administration and appraisal expenses for
the formation of the Di stri ct. Foll owi ng, on April 2, 1991, by Reso 1 ut i on No.
16116, the Council approved an agreement with Muni Financial Services, Inc. to
perform assesSment engineering and project management services associated with
the proceedings.
ll-I
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date
II
7/23/91
The Salt Creek I development is a residential project of approximately 550
dwelling units located at the intersection of East 'H' Street and SR 125. The
developer is requi red to construct East 'H' Street to full s i x- 1 ane wi dth
through the development. Both East 'H' Street and SR 125 are a part of the
Eastern Territories major street system and are included in the Development
Impact Fee (DIF) program for the area. In addition, two collector streets,
Proctor Valley Road and Mt. Miguel Road, an off-site sewer, major water
facilities, and storm drain improvements will be constructed.
FN Projects has submitted a petition to the City requesting assessment
district financing, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, of
approximately $5.0 million in public improvements. Staff has reviewed the
petition and has determined that it meets the requirements of the Streets and
Highways Code and recommends acceptance by Council. An acquisition type
proceedings is proposed wherein the developer will construct the improvements
and the City would acquire them upon completion, which is estimated to be
early 1992. A map showing the proposed boundaries of the district has been
a 1 so submi tted to the City. The map has been revi ewed by staff and has been
found acceptable and its approval by Council is hereby recommended. A reduced
copy of the map (Attachment "A") is attached to this report.
The developer has indicated that marketing of the homes in the development
will begin about October 1, 1991 and has required that the assessment district
publ ic hearing be completed by that time to allow accurate disclosure of
assessment information to prospective homebuyers.
The assessment district proceedings is complicated by the necessity to obtain
consent and juri sdi ct i on from the San Di ego County Board of Supervi sors to
1 evy assessments for improvements constructed in the County. Proctor Valley
Road and the off-site collector sewer are all, or in part, located in the
County. No assessments are proposed to be 1 evi ed to land outs i de the City
boundary. The off-s i te sewer wi 11 belong to the City, however, the street
will be partially in the County until it is annexed to the City in the
future. Consent and juri sdi ct i on must be granted by the Board pri or to the
City beginning the public hearing process.
The approval of the proposed Resolution of Intention does not constitute the
formal action of the City Council declaring the intention to order the
installation of improvements for the subject district. Its purpose is to send
a cl ear i ndi cat i on to the County about the intent of the City to form the
district and the extent of the proposed improvements. A copy of the approved
resolution requesting consent and jurisdiction will be transmitted to the
County along with all supporting information.
As a result of the short time available to carry out the consent and
jurisdiction and subsequent public hearing processes, FN Projects has
requested that Thomas Meade be retained by the City as the project manager for
the entire proceedings. Originally, Municipal Financial Services, Inc. (MFS)
was hired to perform "project management" and "assessment engineering"
act i vit i es. Staff concurs with the owner's proposal and cons i ders that Mr.
\\ .1.
Page 3, Item \ I
Meeting Date 7/23791
Meade's participation would expedite the proceedings. Mr. Meade has
substant i a 1 assessment di stri ct management experi ence and has been hi red as
project manager for several simi 1 ar projects in Chul a Vi sta. He is very
familiar with the consent and jurisdiction process. Mr. Meade will be paid on
an hourly basis, not to exceed $16,000. MFS, which would be retained as
assessment engineer, has agreed to the retention of Mr. Meade and has
submitted an amendment to their existing agreement deleting all project
management service. The reduction in the agreement amount is $9,350 which is
based on an original $12,850 for project management services less $3,500 for
services already provided. Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and
recommends approval by Council.
FISCAL IMPACT: None to the City. The County does not charge for thei r cost
of processing the consent and jurisdiction request and FN Projects will
provide for all the funds to pay for the project manager consulting cost.
LD/mad:AY-082
WPC 5693 E
\\- 3
ATTACHMENT "A"
PROPOSED BOUND ARIES
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 90-1
( SALT CREEK I )
, \ FOR THE
" " CITY OF CHULA VISTA
" "'-, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
" '-----
....... ~0ll-;~,~-7":;''':-;~7~------
. I. I I
\I
.
@>
GRAPHIC SCALE
:;>00 0 200
'"'-"'-...............
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
,
,
. ,
\ ~ \
, \'
, ,
, ,
, .'
, .,
\ ! \
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.00
I
lMnlTI
,..ell ,100fT
/
/
/
/ ./
,//
~ II /
~/ I
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/~ /
/4f!/
/.:;: /
/' /
/ .,~/
/~/
/,;J/
/ /
/ /
/ /
" / /
~'-.J /
)"'l(4-r~ ( "-
.. ~ !JI?/V;-
"
VICINITY MAP
1l0.t:,,~
u".l....r.....ncN
P"Ilt:lLl,P"',"~'
.......011......"&...-11 'U~o.07
LEGEND
I_V (:umn '....'nIIllilAl' lllO_ NOI'(>8m.-... 01'
....U-.<T _TlIleT _ ..... I ....Ll CUll< , I. w.u ....."'ovs I' TMl
CITY e_~ 01' TIE .:lrlY Of ClU.A \'MTA AT" IIfGUl.Aft IlEETINQ IIEUl
TtI11 OA' Of' . 111---,
".aol.UTlOIlllO.
----
IOTll""IOI_.U"I'
ClTlet.P:K.
CITTOFeHlll....IIl8'...
....IlCCL__AIty
@
.....n_TIl..-.
PUO.. TIll _I 01' ,*crn CU:. 01" '...ClTYOI'ctIUI.... _TII.
T_ ClIllOF W-,
l;lTY Clhut,
ClTYOF CNUl.,,""'U
1\1 F8
'UOTltIl
"'0001(
I\UOF
UP...CIl_Ol'IUlP, Of..........NT
DllIUICTI"TIlIOFl'ICl!OI""C_TYae.COlIDI!IIlN'T1IIC~'OI'
.....,_1I0..,...TlOF CAL.f'OlIMl,+..
oUIIlETTIJ.IVUI
"DUNnUCOOIDI.
eOUOlTl 01""" IlI!GO
..2217 Rio U.tdo
5ulla A203
Tlm.cul. . C.lllornl. 112590
(7H)IlIlII.311110
"
I
I
I
j
..:
'" .
.
~
.
k
i
.
@J
a.....
,,~
.
.
.
.
.
\
TO: CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
,....t'............'\. r...;,I.~.."'...:... .'. ~"..;.,,'..';...'....!.\, t.'-..'.-....'~l~..'.'...'
':j /""!' t;;l\,-~) #: it, 5i .r
; },i ir~1:, ('''\ ,~rn "
_r:,;z;-<< j' , ;;~ I f.l~\ t "r"(~~\ G:F;.
u 't;.i,& fJjJ ~ iJ..
-
PETITION FOR SPECIAL ASSBSSMBNT PROCBBDINGS
1. We, the undersigned, are the property owners of land within the area shown on
the map attached as Exhibit "A" and made a part of this document.
2. We petition you to undertake special assessment proceedings for certain public
improvements described as street improvements, including curb, gutter,
sidewalk, street lights, as well as water, sewer, storm drain, telephone,
electrical and gas facilities, together with appurtenances and appurtenant
work, to serve and benefit properties located within the boundaries of
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I), and more particularly described in
Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
3. We understand:
A. THAT the cost of the improvements will be charged to the land which bene-
fits from the improvements, including our land;
B. THAT the cost of engineering, legal and other incidental expenses will be
included in the project cost;
C. THAT each property owner may pay his assessment either in cash without
interest or in installments with interest over a period of years.
D. THAT the estimated cost of the improvements is $5,000,000.00.
E. THAT property with an assessment lien is subject to foreclosure in cases of
delinquency and non-payment.
4. We consent to the formation of the Assessment District and waive any rights to
protest against the formation of said Assessment District.
5. We agree to dedicate all required rights-of-way or easements necessary for the
works of improvement, all dedications to be accomplished before the ordering of
th~ improvements.
II -5
(J4- IJ-.
a.1}. .
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THEY ARE
THE OWNERS OF RECORD OF THE PROPERTY AS SET FORTH HEREIN.
-
DATE OF
SIGNING
NAME OF PROPERTY
OWNER AND STREET
ADDRESS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OR
COUNTY TAX PARCEL NO.
SIGNATURE
/
r
A
,
~
It is hereby further stated that the property within the boundaries of the Assess-
ment District at this time is subject to existing mortgages or deeds of trust.
THE UNDERSIGNED hereby state, as mortgagees or beneficiaries under any existing
deeds of trust, that they acknowledge and join in signature in the Petition for the
above-referenced Assessment District. For further particulars as to any mortgagees
or beneficiaries under any deeds of trust, reference is made to the title report, a
copy of which is attached hereto.
DATE OF SIGNING
NAME OF LENDER
SIGNATURE
\ l r (p
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THIS
DAY OF
, 1991.
-
said Petition represents
attached map.
% of the assessable area, as shown on the
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
\ \=1
-
EXHIBIT "A "
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 90-1
(SALT CREEK 1)
,~~
':-"
.......- ~~~-
/ ~
/ /
/ ,/
//
1/
//
/ /
/ /
/.... /
/4?
I /
I,U
/.'/
/:i/
/ /
/ /
\ / /
~V /
)~~(.
......
,r...~Iit~
"
MFS
SCALE: 1" = 600'
AsseSSOR'S PARCEL No,
595-030-07
\\.. 8
I
I
.J
~
~
.'......
!i ............
NOT '\"
A PART '-',
,
-------..
-
EXHIBIT "B"
PRELIMINARY
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
ACQUISITION
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1
(SALT CREEK I)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
The general desoriptlon of work proposed to be acquired by Assessment District
NO. 90-1 consists of the following:
1. Ealt "H" Street: (proposed right-of-way to vary from 104' to 152') from Eastlake
Drive to Mt Miguel Road; Inoludlng, but not limited to,asphalt, curb, gutter,
meandering sidewalk, street lights, medians, water, sewer, storm drain,
CAlVo telephone, electricity, gas, feno\ng, signing and striping, landscaping
and related appurtenant structures.
2. STATE ROUTE 125: Project grading, excavation and slope stabilization, within
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC (SDG&E) easement adjacent to an existing
SDG&E Tower No. 10, for grading and earthwork required prior to retaining
wall construction.
3. Mt. Miguel Road (proposed 88' right-of-way): from proctor Valley Road to
approximately 1500' south of East .HM Street, 44' right-of-way to be Included
and Improved within the proposed district; including, but not limited to,
asphalt paving, curb. gutter, sIdewalk, street lights, medians, water, sewer,
storm drain, CAlV, telephone, electriclty, gas, signing and striping, and
related appurtenant structures.
4. Proctor Valley Road (San Diego County, varying 60' right-of-way) half street
Improvements including, but not limited to, asphalt paving, curb. gutter,
sidewalk, street lights, medians, water, CATV, telephone, electricity, gas,
signing and striping, and related appurtenant structures.
5. Off81te sewer: Within Proctor Valley Road In san Diego county: Facility varies
_ In dIameter from 10., 12., 15., approximately 9819' linear feet proceeding
. from the within the District (the City of Chula Vlsta) then exiting out Proctor
Valley Road to Jenel.
\\-4
CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF PETITION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
The undersigned hereby CERTIFIES as follows:
That I am the duly appointed PROJECT MANAGER of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA.
That on the / # day of J ""l* 1991, I reviewed a Petition for the
formation of an Assessment Distr' ct for certain public works of improvement,
together with appurtenances, appurtenant work and acquisition, where necessary, in a
special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1
(SALT CREEK I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"), a copy of
which is on file in the office of the city Clerk.
That I caused said Petition to be examined and my examination revealed that said
Petition has been signed by property owners representing more than sixty (60%)
percent of the assessable area of lands within the boundaries of the proposed
Assessment District, all as prescribed by Sections 2804 and 2804.5 of the Streets
and Highways Code of the state of California ("Special Assessment Investigation,
Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931").
That said Petition did represent LJnehul4dol'c--d (too %) percent of the
assessable area of property within the boundaries of the Assessment District.
That said Petition meets the requirements of Sections 2804 and 2804.5 of the Streets
and Highways Code of the State of California.
That written evidence has been submitted indicating that the total estimated amount
of the proposed assessment will not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the
estimated fair market value of the lands proposed to be assessed after the proposed
publ ic improvements have been constructed as required by Section 2804.1 of said
Streets and Highways Code.
Inasmuch as the improvements contemplated are to be subdivision conditioned improve-
ments, said examination also revealed that the Petition has been signed also by all
mortgagees or beneficiaries under any existing mortgages or deeds of trust as
required, and proof of ownership and names of mortgagees or beneficiaries, if
applicable, is attached hereto.
Executed this t 8~ day of
~..d7
r 1991, at Chula Vista, California.
MUNICIPAL FINANCE ADMINISTRATION
~ O~0-e~~
PROJECT MANAGER
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
\\..10
-::r:rtOe..rY\P.+I'OJ'\ Dr'lly
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; DECLARING
THE WORK TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY BENEFIT;
DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE ASSESSED TO PAY THE COSTS
AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
BONDS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The public interest and convenience require, and it is the
intention of this body, pursuant to the provisions of Division 12 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Municipal Improve-
ment Act 1913"), to order the installation of certain public improvements,
together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assessment
district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I)
(hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District").
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
A. The financing of certain public improvements described as
street improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, as well
as water, sewer, storm drain, telephone, electrical and gas facilities,
together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, including acquisition if
necessary, to serve and benefit properties located within the boundaries of
the Assessment District.
B. Said streets, rights-of-way and easements shall be shown
upon the plans herein referred to and to be filed with these proceedings.
C. All of said work and improvements are to be installed at
the places and in the particular locations, of the forms, siz.es, dimensions
and materials, and at the lines, grades and elevations as shown and delineated
upon the plans, profiles and specifications to be made therefor, as herein-
after provided.
D. The description of the improvements and the termini of
the work contained in this Resolution are general in nature. All items of
work do not necessarily extend for the full length of the description thereof.
The plans and profiles of the work as contained in the Engineer's "Report"
shall be controlling as to the correct and detailed description thereof.
E. Whenever any public way is herein referred to as running
between two public ways, or from or to any public way, the intersections of
the public ways referred to are included to the extent that work shall be
shown on the plans to be done therein.
F. Notice is hereby given of the fact that in many cases
said work and improvement will bring the finished work to a grade different
from that formerly existing, and that to said extent, said grades are hereby
changed and said work will be done to said changed grades.
\ \ -1\ .
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
SECTION 2. That said improvements and work are of direct benefit to the
properties and land within the Assessment District, and this legislative body
hereby makes the expenses of. said work and improvement chargeable upon a
district, which said Assessment District is hereby declared to be the Assess-
ment District benefited by said work and improvements and to be assessed to
pay the costs and expenses thereof, including incidental expenses and costs
and which is described as follows:
All that certain territory in the District included within
the exterior boundary lines shown on the plat exhibiting the property affected
or benefited by or to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of said work
and improvements in the Assessment District, said map titled and identified as
"PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I)", and
which map was heretofore approved and which said map or diagram is on fUe
with the transcript of these proceedings, EXCEPTING therefrom the area shown
within and delineated upon said map or plat hereinabove referred to, the area
of all public streets, public avenues, public lanes, public roads, public
drives, public courts, public alleys, and all easements and rights-of-way
therein contained belonging to the public. For all particulars as to the
boundaries of the Assessment District, reference is hereby made to said
boundary map heretofore previously approved and on file.
REPORT OF ENGINEER
SECTION 3. That this proposed improvement is hereby referred to MUNI
FINANCIAL SERVICES, who is hereby directed to make and f Ue the report in
writing containing the following:
A. Plans and specifications of the proposed improvements;
B. An estimate of the cost of the proposed works of improve-
ment, including the cost of the incidental expenses in connection therewith;
C. A diagram showing the Assessment District above referred
to, which shall also show the boundaries and dimensions of the respective
subdivisions of land within said Assessment District, as the same existed at
the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivi-
sions shall be given a separate number upon said Diagram;
D. A proposed assessment of the total amount of the
assessable costs and expenses of the proposed improvement upon the several
divisions of land in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by
such Bubdivisions, respectively, from said improvement. Said assessment shall
refer to such subdivisions upon said diagram by the respective numbers
thereof;
E. The description of the works of improvement to be
installed under these proceedings, and acquisition, where necessary.
When any portion or percentage of the cost and expenses of
the improvements is to be paid from sources other than assessments, the amount
of such portion or percentage shall first be deducted from the total estimated
\~"Il.
costs and expenses of said work and improvements, and said assessment shall
include only the remainder of the estimated costs and expenses. Said
assessment shall refer to said subdivisions by their respective numbers as
assigned pursuant to Subsection D. of .this Section.
BONDS
SECTION 4. Notice is hereby given that bonds to represent the unpaid
assessments, and bear interest at the rate of not to exceed the current legal
maximum rate of 12\ per annum, will be issued hereunder in the manner provided
in the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915", being Division 10 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California, which bonds shall mature a maximum
of and not to exceed TWENTY-FOUR (24) YEARS from the second day of September
next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. The provisions of Part
11.1 of said Act, providing an alternative procedure for the advance payment
of assessments and the calling of bonds shall apply.
The principal amount of the bonds maturing each year shall be
other than an amount equal to an even annual proportion of the aggregate
principal of the bonds, and the amount of principal maturing in each year,
plus the amount of interest payable in that year, will be generally an aggre-
gate amount that is equal each year, except for the first year's adjustment.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code
of the State of California, specifically Section 10603, the Treasurer is
hereby designated as the officer to collect and receive the assessments during
the cash collection period. Said bonds further shall be serviced by the
Treasurer or designated Paying Agent.
Refunding
Any bonds issued pursuant to these proceedings and Division
(a) may be refunded, (b) the interest rate on said bonds shall not exceed the
maximum interest rate as authorized for these proceedings, and the number of
years to maturity shall not exceed the maximum number as authorized for these
bonds unless a public hearing is expressly held as authorized pursuant to said
Division 11.5, and (c) any adjustments in assessments resulting from any
refundings will be done on a pro-rata basis.
Any authorized refunding shall be pursuant to the above
conditions, and pursuant to the provisions and restrictions of Division 11.5
of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, commencing with
Sect ion 9500, and all further conditions shall be set forth in the Bond
Indenture to be approved prior to any issuance of bonds.
"MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913"
SECTION 5. That except as herein otherwise provided for the issuance of
bonds, all of said improvements shall be made and ordered pursuant to the
provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of
the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
\ \ -\~
SURPLUS FUNDS
SECTION 6.
shall be used,
accordance with
purposes:
That if any excess' shall be realized from the assessment, it
in such amounts as. the legislative body may determine, in
the provisions of law for one or more of the following
A. Transfer to the general
any such transfer shall not exceed the
($1,000.00) or five percent (5\) of the total
fund; provided that the amount of
lesser of One Thousand Dollars
from the Improvement Fund;
B. As a credit upon the assessment and any supplemental
assessment; or
c. For the maintenance of the improvement.
SPECIAL FUND
SECTION 7. The legislative body hereby establishes a special improvement
fund identified and designated by the name of this Assessment District, and
into said Fund monies may be transferred at any time to expedite the making of
the improvements herein authorized, and any such advancement of funds is a
loan and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale of bonds as autho-
rized by law.
PRIVATE CONTRACT
SECTION B. Notice is hereby given that the public interest will not be
served by allowing the property owners to take the contract for the installa-
tion of the improvements, and that, as authorized by law, no notice of award
of contract shall be published.
GRADES
SECTION 9. That notice is hereby given that the grade to which the work
shall be done is to be shown on the plans and profiles therefor, which grade
may vary from the existing grades. The work herein contemplated shall be done
to the grades as indicated on the plans and specifications, to which reference
is made for a description of the grade at which the work is to be done. Any
objections or protests to the proposed grade shall be made at the public
hearing to be conducted under these proceedings.
PROCEEDINGS INQUIRIES
SECTION 10. For any and all information
including information relating to protest
directed to the person designated below:
relating to these proceedings,
procedure, your attention is
JOHN LIPPITT, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
P. O. BOX 10B7
CHULA VISTA, CA 92012
TELEPHONE: (619) 691-5021
\\.. 14
PUBLIC PROPERTY
SECTION 11. All public
function shall be omitted
expressly provided and listed
property in the use and performance of a
from a~Bessment in these proceedings
herein.
public
unless
NO CITY LIABILITY
SECTION 12. This legislative body hereby further declares not to obli-
gate itself to advance available funds from the Treasury to cure any
deficiency which may occur in the bond redemption fund. This determination is
made pursuant to the authority of Section 8769(b) of the Streets and Highways
Code of the State of California, and said determination shall further be set
forth in the text of the bonds issued pursuant to the "Improvement Bond Act of
1915".
PETITION
SECTION 13. That a petition signed by property owners representing more
than 60' in area of the property subject to assessment for said improvement
has been signed and filed with the legislative body, and no further
proceedings or actions will be required under Division 4 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State o,f California, the "Special Assessment
Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931".
WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
SECTION 14. It is hereby further determined to be in the best public
interest and convenience and more economical to do certain work on private
property to eliminate any disparity in level or size between the improvements
and the private property. The actual cost of such work is to be added to the
assessment on the lot on which the work is done, and no work of this nature is
to be performed until the written consent of the property owner is first
obtained.
ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT
SECTION 15. It is hereby declared that this legislative body proposes to
levy an annual assessment pursuant to Section 10204 of the Streets and High-
ways Code of the State of California, said annual assessment to pay costs
incurred by the City and not otherwise reimbursed which result from the
administration and collection of assessments or from the administration or
registration of any associated bonds and reserve of other related funds.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
J)
\\ -IS
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
day of 1991, by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the
, 1991.
California, do
was duly
day of
Executed this
day of
, 1991.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
\\~Ilp
)~~~q
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MAKING FINDINGS ON PETITION .IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.
90-1 (SALT CREEK I)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has
been presented by certain property owners an executed Petition requesting the
installation of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and
appurtenant work in connection therewith, said improvements to be installed
pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of
1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California, in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I) (hereinafter referred to as the
"Assessment District"); and,
WHEREAS, it has been reported that said Petition contains the signatures
of more than sixty percent (60%) of the property owners of the assessable
area of the property to be subject to assessment for the proposed works of
improvement. Said Petition meets the requirements of Sections 2804 and
2804.5 of Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That it is hereby found that said Petition has been signed
by owners owning land constituting more than sixty percent (60%) of all
assessable land within the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District,
and said Petition meets the requirements of Sections 2804 and 2804.5 of
Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
SECTION 3. This legislative body hereby further finds and determines,
based on written evidence submitted, that the total estimated amount of the
proposed assessments will not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the
estimated fair market value of the land proposed to be assessed after the
proposed public improvements shall have been installed.
SECTION 4. That it is hereby further determined and found that said
Petition has been signed by not only the property owners, as specified in
Section 2804 of the Streets and Highways Code, but also any mortgagee or
beneficiary under any such existing mortgage or deed of trust, as required by
Section 2804.2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
SECTION 5. That said Petition shall be filed with the transcript of
these proceedings and shall remain open to public inspection.
Presented by
Appro d as to
by
~
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaard:
City Attorney
~
\\ ~ ~ \
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
day of 1991, by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the
, 1991.
California, do
was duly
day of
Executed this
day of
, 1991.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
\\f\-:t.
ATTACHMENT "A"
PROPOSED BOUNDARIES
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT No. 90-1
( SALT CREEK I )
\ \
\ \ CITY
'" '" "'- COUNTY OF
" ~
.
,
@l
.
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 c 200 4W
k.................... I
11M ~EU I
1 INCN . ~OO FT
~~,",",oo}1 /
~~~\)//
\ /
/
/
/
/ /
/4;- /
/4ji /
/,:;. /
/,' /
/:~ /
/~/
/ <V'" /
/ /
/ /
, /
/ /
" / /
('-1~ /
)ol'--<-4-f; (
, ('"
~"-./)I?///,'
/ "- ,I:
VICINITY MAP
NOICA'"
LEGEND
D!STA""80IlNO"RY
."RCELBOUMO"'.'
@
AUUSIoIENTNUMSER
MF8
42217 RID Il~d"
S~ij. A203
Temeoula . Callfornl. 92590
(7Hl69\l.3\1110
L_
FOR THE
OF CHULA VISTA
SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
I
~
.N'n-WE 11lt.$3"
EJ
IKlUNT.t.lH IlII>GE ROAD
~
\
,
,
0
..
0
0:
-'
W
::>
'"
,.
>-'
::;; .
~
.
~
,
,
@J
"~~' ,'"
~'
"
.'
. _ 0.
,'"
10 'l-~ II Sg' OIl' Cl6" W
", )
UU8"
""''"'''''"''
,...RCR,...M.1...U
"S'ESSOR ~"'RCEl NUMSER S.'_OJ"07
IHEREIIT(:ERTIHTNHTHI8U.....S>tOWlNQPROf'OSEDBOU_lllESOF
An_saliENT DlU.'eT ~O. .0.11 SALT cu." II, WAs ....PROYB>IY TilE
ClfYCtJUNCllOFTIE'::ITIOfCHULAVISTAAT...REGULAAMEElINGHELD
lHIS_DAI0F ,,..~
IYUSOLUTIONNO
c;rVCiERK,
CITY oF CHUV VISH,
~~. .~. tIll
1\'.'
FI~'" IN THE oFFICE oF TIE CITY c~ERK OF THE CITY OF CHU~A VISTA
,~ ~OF ,u
CITY C~ERK,
CITY oF CHU~A VI.H,
1\l.'o!i
.
FILED THIS
IN lOOK
OJ.,YOF
,,~
IT PAGE_OF lIAPSOF.SSEUlIENl
t
D1STRIClSIH THE OFFICE OF THE CllUNTY RECORllt'R OF TtlECllUHTY OF
'AH DIEGO, nlTE OF CALIFORHII.
ANHETTEJ.EVAHS
COUHTYRECOR<>ER
COUHTYOFSANDlECO
"
RESOLUTION NO. )~~ ?b
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has
been presented and has received a map showing and describing the boundaries
of the area proposed to be assessed in an assessment district under the
provisions and authority of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California; said
assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1
(SALT CREEK I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District").
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That a map of the Assessment District showing the boundaries
of the proposed Assessment District and lands and property to be assessed to
pay the costs and expenses of the proposed improvements designated as
"PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 (SALT CREEK I)" is
hereby submitted, and the same is hereby approved and adopted.
SECTION 3. That the original map of said proposed boundaries of the
proposed Assessment Oistrict and one copy thereof is to be filed in the
Office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 4. A certificate shall be endorsed on the original and on at
least one copy of the map of the Assessment District, evidencing the date and
adoption of this Resolution, and within fifteen (15) days after the adoption
of the Resolution fixing the time and place of hearing on the formation or
extent of said Assessment District, a copy of said map shall be filed with
the correct and proper endorsements thereon with the County Recorder, all in
the manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways
Code of the State of California.
Presented by
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
day of 1991, by the
\\ €> - \
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the
, 1991.
California, do
was duly
day of
Executed this
day of
, 1991.
Beverly A. Authe1et, City Clerk
\\ ~,1.
RESOLUTION NO. It. ~71_
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND REQUEST-
ING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.
90-1 (SALT CREEK I)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA,
proposes to install certain public works of improvement, together with
acquisition where necessary, appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special
assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1
(SALT CREEK I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"), and as
set forth and described in the proposed Resolution of Intention annexed
hereto; and it is the opinion of this legislative body that the purpose
sought to be accomplished by said work, appurtenances and improvements can
best be achieved by a single comprehensive scheme of improvement, with
proceedings conducted pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improve-
ment Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California; and,
WHEREAS, it is required and hereby further requested that the consent of
the COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO (hereinafter referred to as "Consenting Agency") be
procured to the making of said improvements, acquiring necessary property and
rights-af-way, if necessary, all as described in the proposed Resolution of
Intention, a copy of which is attached hereto; however, no properties are
proposed to be assessed within the jurisdictional boundaries of said Consent-
ing Agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That the proposed Resolution of Intention attached hereto
be, and the same is hereby adopted and approved as the proposed Resolution of
Intention for the work and improvements and appurtenances above referred to
in the Assessment District, and that the consent of the Consenting Agency is
hereby requested for the following:
1. Formation of the Assessment District;
2. Authority to order improvements;
3. Authority to maintain said improvements, as appropriate;
4. Authority and power to acquire rights-of-way, where necessary;
5. The assumption of jurisdiction by this legislative body for all
purposes in connection with the Assessment District;
6. The consent and approval of. the enclosed proposed Resolution of
Intention; and,
7. Consent to and approval of the map forwarded indicating the extent
of territory included in the proposed Assessment District.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to forward a certified
copy of this ReSOlution, together with the proposed Resolution of Intention
attached hereto, and a copy of the map indicating the extent of the territory
included in the proposed Assessment District to the Consenting Agency.
\\c.- I
SECTION 4. Certain of the works of improvement for the Assessment
District are proposed to be constructed within the jurisdictional boundaries
of the Consent Agency; however, no properties are proposed to be assessed
within the jurisdictional boundar.ies of the Consenting Agency, and all
properties to be assessed are within the boundaries of this City.
SECTION 5. This request for consent is made pursuant to the provisions
of Section 10103 of the streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
SECTION 6. That the City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the
Consenting Agency, its officers and employees, from any and all causes of
action, claims, losses or damages which may arise, directly or indirectly,
from the action of the Consenting Agency in reviewing and granting its
consent to the formation of the proposed Assessment District.
~
Presented by
Approved as
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the
day of
City of Chu1a
1991, by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Cauncilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
\ \ c... - '2-
RESOLUTION NO. jlP 2. i 'L
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. I TO THE
AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,
INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AMENDMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, FN projects, Inc. (Baldwin Company) has
submitted a petition requesting assessment district financing of
infrastructure improvements for their Salt Creek I residential
development; and
WHEREAS, because of the complexi ty of the proceedings
and time constraints, the owner has requested that Thomas O.
Meade be retained as project manager for the district; and
WHEREAS, Municipal Financial Services, Inc., which is
performing both assessment engineering and project management
services, has agreed to the retention of Mr. Meade and has
submitted an amendment to their existing agreement deleting all
project management service; and
WHEREAS, the reduction in the agreement amount is $9,350
which is based on an original $12,850 for project management
services less $3,500 for services already provided; and
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and
recommends approval by Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve Amendment No. 1 to
the Agreement with Municipal Financial Services, Inc., a copy of
which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that
Chula vista is hereby authorized and
amendment for and on behalf of the City
the Mayor
directed
of Chula
of the Ci ty of
to execute said
Vista.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
9076a
rm by
Presented by
J)
, City
\ \~ - \ I" D ~ 2.
AMENDMENT NO.1: AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT, entered into this , day of
1991, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter
referred to as "CITY"), and MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES (hereinafter referred to as
"Assessment Engineer").
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City and the Assessment Engineer entered into an agreement for
Assessment Engineering and Project Management services on April 2, 1991, in
conjunction with the anticipated formation project "Assessment District No. 90-1, and
WHEREAS, said agreement provided for specific engineering and project management
services, including, in concert with other project consultants, the study of the financing
and feasibility, implementation and acquisition assessment proceedings for said project
and,
WHEREAS, the City's requested changes for providing project management and the
project management scope of services have required that the corresponding services on
the part of the Assessment Engineer be modified to eliminate duplication of services.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties involved
hereto to amend the original agreement as follows:
Section 1A, subsection Engineering Services, No.2, of the original agreement is amended
to read: "...Descriptions are to be based on final or preliminary engineering plans provided
by the developer and Project Manager, and shall be of sufficient detail to allow preliminary
cost estimates to be performed."
Section 1A, subsection Engineering Services, No.3, of the original agreement is amended
to read: "In conjunction with the design engineer and Project Manager, analyze cost
estimates for each proposed facility, as well as estimates for financing costs."
Section 1A, subsection Project Management Services, Nos. 11 to and including 19, of the
original agreement are deleted.
Section 1 S, subsection Project Management Services, Nos. 21 to and including 27, of the
original agreement are deleted.
Section 1C, subsection Engineering Services, No.3 within the Engineering Services
subsection is deleted.
Section 1C, subsection Project Management Services, Nos. 5 to and including 8 are to
be deleted.
\\\:>-.3
Section 3, subsection 1 is amended to read: "For services performed under Section 1-A
(Feasibility and Financing Plan) the lump sum fee of $10,000 payable in monthly progress
payments based on percentage of the work completed. In addition, the amount of $3,000
is payable for project management services rendered prior to the execution of this
amendment. "
Section 3, subsection 2 is amended to read: "For services performed under Section 1-6,
(Implementation Phase) the lump fee of $40,000 per district, payable in monthly progress
payments based on percentage of the work completed."
Section 3, subsection 3 is amended to read: "For services performed under Section 1-C,
(Acquisition Services) the lump sum fe of $3,650, payable in monthly progress payments
based on hourly charge rates not-to-exceed the maximum amount."
BY SIGNING THIS CONTRACT AMENDMENT, THE CITY ACKNOWLEDGES THIS TO
BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT WITH ALL OTHER SECTIONS
UNCHANGED, AND THAT THIS DOCUMENT, AMENDMENT NO.1, CONSTITUTES
THE ONLY MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGREEMENT. NO OTHER AGREEMENTS,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE ASSESSMENT ENGINEER
EXIST WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED
HEREUNDER. THIS AMENDMENT SUPERSEDES ALL PRIOR COMMUNICATIONS
BETWEEN THE PARTIES INCLUDING ANY ORAL OR WRITTEN PROPOSALS. THE
NOW AMENDED CONTRACT MAY BE FURTHER MODIFIED OR AMENDED IN
WRITING ONLY, AND ANY SUCH AMENDMENT MUST BE SIGNED BY DULY
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND MFS.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and ASSESSMENT ENGINEER have executed this
Amendment on this _ day of , 1991.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
f)f. ~
Mayor,
City of Chula Vista
David Keltner, PE
Director,
Special District Services
ATTEST AS TO FORM:
RMJ
City Clerk
\\'D-~
RESOLUTION NO. ~~"13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THOMAS
O. MEADE FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR
THE SALT CREEK I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1,
AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, FN Projects, Inc. (Baldwin Company) has
submitted a petition requesting assessment district financing of
infrastructure improvements for their Salt Creek I residential
development; and
WHEREAS, because of the complexi ty of the proceedings
and time constraints, the owner has requested that Thomas o.
Meade be retained as project manager for the district; and
WHEREAS, Municipal Financial Services, Inc., which is
performing both assessment engineering and project management
services, has agreed to the retention of Mr. Meade and has
submitted an amendment to their existing agreement deleting all
project management service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Agreement with
Thomas O. Meade for project management services for the Salt
Creek I Assessment District No. 90-1, a copy of which is on file
in the office of the City Clerk.
BE
Chula vista
agreement for
IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor
is hereby authorized and directed
and on behalf of the City of Chula
of the Ci ty of
to execute said
Vista.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public works
9077a
Presented by
\\~-1 jIlE-Z
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT entered into this day of
, 1991, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and
Thomas o. Meade, dba Municipal Finance Administration (herein-
after referred to as "Project Manager").
~ 1. ~ !! !!; ~ ~ !!; ~ !!:
WHEREAS, the Baldwin Company has requested the City to
perform a Feasibility/Financing Plan (hereinafter referred to as
the "F/F Plan") and to implement findings and recommendations
made therein, for the Salt Creek I Development.
WHEREAS, the City desires to prepare the requested F/F Plan
and to implement findings and recommendations contained therein,
and
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of retaining a Project Manager
to coordinate all activities of the staff and other retained
consultants as it relates to the preparation of the F/F Plan and
the continuing implementation of findings and recommendations
contained therein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED by and between
the parties hereto as follows:
MANAGEMENT SERVICES
SECTION 1.
The general and continuing services throughout the development
and implementation of the Feasibility/Financing Plan for the
project to be provided by the Project Manager, at the direction
of the city Manager or his designee, shall be the following:
A. . Feasibility/Financing (F/F) Plan:
1. In concert with City staff and the support consultants
retained by the City, establish a schedule for the
completion of the F/F plan.
2. Monitor the progress of development of the F/F Plan and
make status reports to the Director of Public Works.
3. Coordinate the activities of City staff and support
consultants in the collection of data and the
preparation of the F/F Plan.
4. Call meetings as necessary to facilitate data review
and the F/F Plan preparation process.
-1-
\\i:....~
5. Prepare and distribute meeting notes.
6. Raise policy issues and make recommendations as
required.
7. Coordinate the review of the draft F/F Plan by City
staff and property owners.
B. Assessment District Proceedings
1. Based on the completed F/F Plan, establish a schedule
for the completion of the proceedings and bond sale.
2. Monitor the progress of the proceedings and make status
reports to the Director of Public Works.
3. Coordinate the activities of city staff and the
consultants working on the proceedings.
4. Call meetings as necessary to facilitate the review and
approval of data and documents.
5. Assist and advise City staff in the implementation of
the assessment district proceedings.
6. Review documents and reports as required.
7. Attend City Council meetings as required.
C. Acquisition Agreements
1. Coordinate the activities of the support consultants
and the developer's engineer in the preparation of the
improvements to be acquired.
2. Coordinate the preparation of the acquisition agree-
ment.
SCHEDULE
SECTION 2.
The following is the estimated schedule for the services to be
provided:
A. Feasibility/Financing Plan. Commence April, 1991 - complete
July, 1991.
B.
Assessment District Proceedings.
complete December, 1992.
Commence July, 1991 -
-2-
~~-~
FEE FOR SERVICES
SECTION 3.
Project Manager shall be paid a fee based on an hourly rate of
$100.00 per hour, plus reimbursement for all out-of-pocket
expenses outside of normal office expenses. All fees will be
payable on a monthly basis upon an invoice submitted by the
Project Manager.
Fees shall be paid for management services as follows:
A. Feasibility/Financing Plan; estimated not to exceed
$2,500.00.
B. District Proceedings; estimated not to exceed $12,500.00
C. Acquisition Agreement; estimated not to exceed $1,000.00
The total remuneration for purposes of project management shall
not exceed $16,000.00
SERVICES BY CITY
SECTION 4.
City further agrees to furnish Project Manager, in a timely
manner, such maps, records and other documents and proceedings,
or certified copies thereof, as are available and may be
reasonably acquired by Project Manager in the performance of
these services.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
SECTION 5.
Project Manager presently has and shall acquire no interest
whatsoever in the Salt Creek I project, the subject matter of the
Agreement, direct or indirect, which would constitute a conflict
of interest or give the appearance of such conflict. No person
having any such conflict of interest shall be employed or
retained by Project Manager under this Agreement. Project
Manager specifically certifies that neither Project Manager nor
any other person employed or retained by Project Manager has
performed work for or on behalf of the Baldwin Company. Project
Manager specifically certifies, in addition, that no promise of
future employment or other consideration of any kind has been
made to Project Manager or any employee, agent, or representative
of Project Manager, by the Baldwin Company, any employee, agent,
or representative of the Project Manager regarding the subject
matter of this Agreement, or any future project in which Project
Manager has an interest.
~ -3-
~~.S
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT FOR CAUSE
SECTION 6.
If, through any cause, Project Manager shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and property manner his obligations under this Agreement,
or it Project Manager shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements, or stipulations of the Agreement, City shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to
Project Manager of such termination and specifying the effective
date thereof, at least five (5) days before the effective date of
such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished
documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports, and
other materials prepared by Project Manager shall, at the option
of the City, become the property of City and the Project Manager
shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for
any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other
materials up to the effective date of notice of termination, not
to exceed the amounts payable under section 4 hereinabove.
TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF CITY
SECTION 7.
city may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason
by giving written notice to Project Manager of such termination
and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30)
days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished and unfinished documents and other materials
described in section 7 hereinabove shall, at the option of City,
become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is
terminated by city as provided in this paragraph, Project Manager
shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for
any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other
materials to the effective date of such termination. Project
Manager hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or
compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth in
section 2 hereinabove in the event of such termination.
ASSIGNABILITY
SECTION 8.
project Manager shall not assign any interest in this Agreement,
and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City:
provided, however, that this Agreement may be assigned to a bank,
trust company, or other financial institution without such
approval. Notice of such assignment or transfer shall be
furnished promptly to City. Any assignment requiring approval
may not be further assigned without city approval.
"~.~
-4-
OWNERSHIP. PUBLICATION. REPRODUCTION AND
USE OF MATERIAL
SECTION 9.
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems, and any other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of city. No such materials or properties
produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be
subject to private use, copyrights, or patent rights by Project
Manager in the United States or in any country without the
express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted
authority to publish, disclose (as may be limited by the
provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise,
use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports,
studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties
produced under this Agreement.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
SECTION 10.
city is interested only in the results obtained and Project
Manager shall perform as an independent contractor with sole
control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under the Agreement. City maintains the right only to
reject or accept Project Manager's final work product as each
phase of this Agreement is completed. Project Manager and any of
Project Manager's agents, employees, or representatives are, for
all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor, and
shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them
shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, retirement
benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave, or other
leave benefits.
CHANGES
SECTION 11.
city may from time to time require changes in the scope of the
services by Project Manager to be performed under this Agreement.
Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of
Project Manager's compensation, shall be effective as amendments
to this Agreement only when executed in writing by both parties.
INDEMNITY
SECTION 12.
Consultant shall indemnify and hold Owner free and harmless from
any and all claims, losses, damages, injuries, and liabilities
arising from the death or injury of any person or persons,
including employees of Consultant, or from damage or destruction
of any property or properties, caused by or connected with any
\\~-1
-5-
negligent error act or omission by Consultant, his agents,
subcontractors, employees, or servants in connection with his
services under this Agreement.
ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS REOUIREMENT AND PROCEDURES
SECTION 13.
No suit shall be brought ar~s~ng out of this Agreement, against
the city, unless a claim has first been presented in writing and
filed with the City of Chula vista and acted upon by the City of
Chula vista in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Chapter 1.34 of the Chula vista Municipal Code, the provisions of
which are incorporated by this reference as is fully set forth
herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, District and Project Manager have executed
this Agreement on this day of , 1991.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PROJECT MANAGER
~()~
Thomas o. Meade
Municipal Finance
Administration
Mayor of the City of Chula vista
ATTEST
city Clerk
\\~-~
-6-
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
July 23, 1991
File No.
Councilwoman Shirley Grasser Horton
Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager~
John Lippitt, Director of Public wory
Questions on 7-23 Agenda
Item #11.
Municipal Finance Services, Inc. is the firm that is acting as the
Assessment Engineer for the Salt Creek Assessment District. They had
several tasks but the two primary tasks are Project Management and
Assessment Engineering. Assessment engineering is the process of
preparing all the Assessment diagrams, tax: rolls to the County Tax
Collector, review contract documents and prices of construction of the
facilities, and develop the method of spreading the costs of the
improvements, (Streets, sewers etc) to each tax: parcel. Municipal Finance
Services, Inc. is doing an adequate job of assessment engineering services,
but because they have never done a job in Chula Vista before, they were
not well equipped to do project management under our systems and
policies. The developer is facing a real time crunch because they want the
district formed prior to selling units, in order to include the information
of costs to prospective buyers. It was proposed that we should change
Project Managers, in order to move the project forward.
Tom Meade has been Project Manager on several of our Assessment
Districts and knows our policies and procedures very well. There are
complicating factors in this project because the off site sewer is outside
the City and in an unincorporated portion of County. Because of Mr.
Meade's experience, and the time crunch, we propose to switch Project
Managers.
What is the reason for cost difference between Municipal Finance
Services, Inc. and Meade for Project Management Services? The contract
with MFS, INC, was executed on April 2, 1991. They have therefore
done some project management services. ie. they had called the initial
meetings between all the parties, developed issues, and coordinated with
the other Consultants, ( ie, Financial, and Legal expertise for bonds).
There is still a lot of Project Management work to do, and in fact the
coordinating work necessary with the County was not originally
anticipated. Also anytime contracts are changed, there are some
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I:{ 11- <:.
Meeting Date 7/23/91
ITEM TITLE: a) Resolution 1'~C[4 Making appointments
District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road)
b) Reso 1 ut i on I ~ 7..75 Adopt i ng a map showi ng the proposed
boundaries of Assessment District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road)
in Assessment
c) Resolution 11.1.7l, Approving a proposed resolution of
intention and requesting consent and jurisdiction for
Assessment District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road)
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public WOrkS~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager jl:\ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_Noll
\) .~
Preparations are being made to bring the Otay Valley Road assessment district
to the Council in the near future for a publ ic hearing. A portion of the
proposed improvements and a parcel of land proposed to be assessed are outside
the City's boundary. As a preliminary step in the proceedings it is necessary
to request consent and jurisdiction from the County of San Diego to construct
the portion of the road and to assess the land outside the City.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In May of 1990, the City and the developer of the Otay Ri 0 Bus i ness Park
entered into agreements to attempt to finance the publ ic improvement of Otay
Valley Road from I-80S to the eastern City limits using 1913 Act Assessment
district proceedings. The City is currently preparing plans and
specifications for the widening and improvement of Otay Valley Road between
I-80S and the Otay Rio Business Park. The final 1000 feet (approx.)
approaching the Otay Rio Business Park is outside the boundary of the City.
The $15.0 mi 11 ion improvement project wi 11 be accompli shed in two phases.
Phase I will widen the existing two-lane road to six lanes with a median, curb
and gutter, and s i dewa 1 ks between I -805 and Ni rvana Avenue. Phase II wi 11
wi den the exi st i ng two- 1 ane road to four 1 anes with a medi an barri er and
graded shoulders from Nirvana Avenue to the northerly boundary of the Otay Rio
Bus i ness Park where the street has already been widened to three 1 anes. The
final 800 feet will transition from four lanes to three lanes. All of Phase
II, except the transition area, will be widened to six lanes with a median
when development of the Otay Ranch in the vicinity begins in the future.
A preliminary area of benefit has been determined for the assessment district
and it includes the parcel of land occupied by the Nelson-Sloan quarry
operation. This parcel is located outside the boundary of the City.
/2.-1
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 7/23/91
Under assessment district statutes, the City is required to request and
receive consent and jurisdiction from the County in order to construct
improvements outside its boundaries and to assess the cost of those
improvements to the district. It is also necessary to request and receive
consent and jurisdiction to assess land outside its boundary. Prior to
requesting consent and jurisdiction from the County, it is necessary for the
City to approve the resolution adopting the boundary map which constitutes the
formal action establishing the proposed boundaries and also approve a
resolution approving the proposed resolution of intention and requesting
consent. Upon receipt of consent and jurisdiction the City may begin the
formal assessment district proceedings.
As a part of the assessment district proceedings, as with all assessment
di stri cts, it is necessary to make certain appoi ntments for the record. The
appointments are as follows:
Director of Public Works
Superintendent of Streets.
2. The affi ce of the Superi ntendent of Streets be the
place of recordation of the assessment roll and
diagram.
appointed
as
the
1.
3. The Star News des i gnated as the newspaper for all
publications.
4. Municipal Finance Administration appointed as the
Project Manager.
5. Will dan Associ ates appoi nted as the Assessment
Engineer.
6. Brown, Harper, Burns & Hentschke appointed as Bond
Counsel.
7. Kadie-Jensen, Johnson & Bodnar appointed as Financi al
Consultant.
8. Establishing a special Improvement Fund.
All consultants appointed have been previously hired by the City Council by
Resolution 15627 approved May 22, 1990.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. The County does not charge the City for process i ng
the consent and jurisdiction request.
DDS/mad:AY081
WPC 5694E
/2 - 1-
tOUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
~~- / \,
I~ e/.
A-Y-081i
P-
I
. ,.;....,... f.
ITEM TITLE:
Item ~q.,. b, c.
Meetfng Date 5/22/90
Resolution '15~~7 Approving agreements with Thomas O.
Meade. Willdan Associates. Brown and Harpe. and Kadie-Jensen
IndJohnson for Special Assessment Servfces associated with
OU)' Valley Road (I-80S to Eastern City limits.) and Otay Rio
Business park publfc.improvements .
Resol uti on 15"2- e Approving a Reilllbursement Agreement
between the City of Chula Vista and the Chillingworth
Corporation for all initial consulting and administrative
costs and expenses for Otay Rio Business Park public
improvements
Resolution l!i~~~ Appropriating funds for etay Valley
Road Phase II (Nirvana Avenue to Eastern City limits)
Feasibility/Financing Stu~1J..~'
Director of Public Works~ VTV (, ~ .
Director of COlll11unity Development .
, .
SUBMITIED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes..!....No_)
The Redevelopment Agency and the developer of Otay Rio Business. Park are
attempting to finance the public improvement of Otay Valley Road from I-80S to
the eastern City limits and pUblfc improvements within the business park
through the assessment process. . Therefore. the City needs to hire an
assessment team. enter into an reimbursement agreement with Chf1lfngworth
Corporation and appropriate the funds to hire the assessment team. \
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolutions and authorize the
Mayor to execute said agreements and authorize the appropriation of $11.250
from the General Fund.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
. DISCUSSION:
On M~ 15. 1990. the Redevelopment Agency retOlllllended the hiring of the
Special Assessment team of Thomas O. Meade. Wf11dan Associates. Brown and
Harpe. and Kadie-Jensen and Johnson. and transferred the funds to the City to
pay for the services required to set up a district to finance the publfc
improvements from 1-805 to Nirvana Avenue. The developer of Otay Rio Business
Park (Chi11ingworth Corporation) has also requested the City look into the
feasibility of establishing a special district to finance the public
improvements associated with this subdivision. Staff recolll11ends that the same
team be hired to perform the feasibility stuqy and assessment proceedings for
both projects. .
I
'.
f
,
;\,..-~
.
-
Page 2. Item
Meetfng Date ~/ZZ/9U
Chfllingworth is proposfng to advance all funds assocfated wfth thefr
project.. Once t.he specfal assessment dfstrfct is formed and the bonds sold
the City wl1l need to refmburse Chl1lfngworth for the monies advanced. (Th;
Redevelopment Agency lIay also be 1"efmbursed from the sale of bonds.) The
City. therefor. needs to enter into a 1"eimbursement agreement wfth the
Chl111ngworth Corporatfon. Safd agreement is now before Councfl for approval.
The total cash necessary to pay for these servfces has been efther
appropriated by the Redevelopment Agency or advanced by the Chfllfngworth
Corporation wfth the exceptfon of $n .250 whfch is the Cfty's portfon of the
cost needed to perfonn the feasfbflfty study for Phase II (Nfrvana Avenue -to
the Eastern City Lfmfts). The funds are proposed to be approprfated from the
General Fund and may be 1"efmbursed should the project be included in the
transportatfon Dlr program.
FISCAL IMPACT: An costs associated wfth Otly Rfo Busfness Park wfn be
pafd by the Chl1lfngworth Corporatfon. The Redevelopment Agency has already
approprfated t.he funds needed for Otly Lakes Road Phase I (9~6-9960-:ST123).
However. addftfonal funds fn the amount. of $11.,250 need to be approprfited
from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund as a loan to the Otay
Yalley Project. . -
\/PC 4998E
.-......
.-
~,
.'
.
\ ').. 4:\-
"
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 15627
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AGREEMENTS WITH THOMAS O. MEADE, WILLDAN
ASSOCIATES, BROWN AND HARPE, AND KADIE-JENSEN AND JOHNSON
FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH OTAY
VALLEY ROAD (I-80S TO EASTERN CITY LIMITS) AND OTAY RIO
BUSINESS PARK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency and the developer of Otay Rio Business
Park are attempting to finance the public improvement of Otay Valley Road from
I-80S to the eastern City limits and public improvements within the business
park through the assessment process, and
WHEREAS, therefore, the City needs to hire an assessment team, enter into
an reimbursement agreement with Chillingworth Corporation and appropriate the
funds to hire the assessment team.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve agreements with Thomas O. Meade, Willdan Associates,
Brown and Harpe, and Kadie-Jensen and Johnson for Special Assessment Services
associated with Otay Valley Road (I-80S to Eastern City' limits) and Otay Rio
Business Park publ ic improvements, copies of which are on file in the office
of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista be, and
he is hereby authori zed and di rected to execute said agreements for and on
behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by
Approved as :to form by
il~LA rJ-- /!
U:-~lchard Rudolf .~
Ass i stant Ci ty Attorney...
- .
/~__ 5
~",<"m~
.- ~
tsolution No. 15627
Page 2
.J
.J
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 22nd day of May, 1990 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Councilmembers: Malcolm, McCandliss, Moore, Nader, Cox
Councilmembers: None
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers: None
Councilmembers: None
G~,eM'~
ATTEST:
B~A~that.~'
;
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 15627 .was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
Cal i forni a; at a regul ar meeti ng of sai d City Counci 1 hel d on the 22nd day of
May, 1990.
Executed this 22!l.d day of May, 1990.
)/.. -I.;
...-
7"
,
-'
. .
.
!
PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 90-2
CITY or CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
or SAN DIEGO, STATE or CAurORNIA
OT A Y VALLEY ROAD
(i) lil
e 8
8
8
(i)
(i)
(i)
I HDUY co," WT K _.. ,... fI8QIIOS[D-......s
. ASSl'SSIIlNf 1IS1IICf ~l....l!.'.!..Qf' 0tU "'~~lY (I SMI ....
SlAW: 01 CAUflIIIA. WAS ..--..nw IY 1HE an . K an
(I QIU "5IA.' A JIEGUI.AR Mf[WIC ..... tmJt CII " _ w
" .... IT........
em u.. CRY fI OIU lIS.
IUD. . _..GFn:I . .. Q1Y c:u. " .. em" CIlIA WITA
_ ,,,, ,...
em QIIIC, an " CHU .uA
::-.:r~DI5-.;~. ..'::i: :C-~==--
" .. CXIIIJY ar ... .... .. " CAYaIM
-..-
.....n_
If.
IUUTf ..." IlClIIID
_lOP'
8
8
LEGEND
PISTIlICT IllUN_
~ARCfL _y
lit
@
AS51SSIotENT /MIlER
Ill'"
K 8Cll.JrItMY AND PMCO.S AS SHOIN H[l[CII _
AS 3<<*f OM K A$SlSSClll'1i ,.w:o.. MAf'S (]I
H liXUIIlT fI SMI 0llGQ. STAll (If' CMEl8M.
-'. '.
'f
N
r
- '" .....
fil
'f;'W'7 WlLLDAJf ~.,.
'A'. ....---.--
-------
--
-
~
\
~
"
IIlE&T . 0' .
@
PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. 90-2
CITY OF' CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF' SAN DIEGO, STATE OF' CAUF'ORNIA
OlAY VALLEY ROAD
8
. OUT COUllT't
LAIGlnu.
. .
U:GEND
JImIIn _
,...ea. _V
"SKs-.or __
..,.,
H ......, .... f'MCD.S AS ,.,.. _ _
AS SHClM QJlI 1H( AWssar'S PMCD. IMPS (I
_ CJ>>iIIY . IMI .... RAW . CIUIII&
~
N
I
..,--
JlILlIlIK .. SUlAK
.
..
~........... ......-
'11II.-----
-------
.......
ORDER OF PROCEDURE
CITY OF CHU~ VISTA
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2
(OTAY VALLEY ROAD)
CITY.COUNCIL:
Adopt RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS: Formal appointment of
the Superintendent of Streets and the newspaper for legal
publication.
STAFF:
Present proposed Boundary Map, generally showing the
following:
A. Boundaries of proposed Assessment District;
B. . Extent of works of improvement.
CITY COUNCIL:
Adopt RESOLUTION ADOPTING BOUNDARY MAP: Formal action
establishing the boundaries of the Assessment District.
CITY COUNCIL:
Adopt RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION
AND REQUESTING CONSENT (RESOLUTION OF INTENTION ATTACHED AS
EXHIBIT ONLY AT THIS TIME).
. . .
l?-- ~
-r nfo Ur\~.h'o r\ 0 l'\ \~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDE~ THE INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; DECLARING
THE WORK TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY BENEFIT;
DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE ASSESSED TO PAY THE COSTS
AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
BONDS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS,
SECTION 1. The public interest and convenience require, and it is the
intention of this body, pursuant to the provisions of Division 12 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Municipal Improve-
ment Act 1913"), to order the installation of certain public improvements,
together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assessment
district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY
ROAD) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District").
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
A. The financing of certain public improvements described as
street improvements, including demolition, grading, paving, curb, gutter, side-
walk, street lighting, traffic signals, storm drains, landscaping, water main,
undergrounding of utilities and traffic striping, together with appurtenances
and appurtenant work, including acquisition of rights-af-way and easements, if
necessary, to serve and benefit properties located within the boundaries of
the Assessment District.
B. Said streets, rights-af-way and easements shall be shown
upon the plans herein referred to and to be filed with these proceedings.
c. All of said work and improvements are to be installed at
the places and in the particular locations, of the forms, sizes, dimensions
and materials, and at the lines, grades and elevations as shown and delineated
upon the plans, profiles and specifications to be made therefor, as herein-
after provided.
D. The description of the improvements and the termini of
the work contained in this Resolution are general in nature. All items of
work do not necessarily extend for the full length of the description thereof.
The plans and profiles of the work as contained in the Engineer' S "Report"
shall be controlling as to the correct and detailed description thereof.
E. Whenever any public way is herein referred to as running
between two public ways, or from or to any public way, the intersections of
the public ways referred to are included to the extent that work shall be
shown on the plans to be done therein.
F. Notice is hereby given of the fact that in many cases
said work and improvement will bring the finished work to a grade different
from that formerly existing, and that to said extent, said grades are hereby
changed and said work will be done to said changed grades.
l~-JD
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
SECTION 2. That said improvements and work are of direct benefit to the
properties and land within the Asses~ment District, and this legislative body
hereby makes the expenses of said work and improvement chargeable upon a
district, which said Assessment District is hereby declared to be the Assess-
ment District benefited by said work and improvements and to be assessed to
pay the costs and expenses thereof, including incidental expenses and costs
and which is described as follows:
All that certain territory in the District included within
the exterior boundary lines shown on the plat exhibiting the property affected
or benefited by or to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of said work
and improvements in the Assessment District, said map titled and identified as
"PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)", and
which map was heretofore approved and which said map or diagram is on file
with the transcript of these proceedings, EXCEPTING therefrom the area shown
within and delineated upon said map or plat hereinabove referred to, the area
of all public streets, public avenues, public lanes, public roads, public
drives, public courts, public alleys, and all easements and rights-of-way
therein contained belonging to the public. For all particulars as to the
boundaries of the Assessment District, reference is hereby made to said
boundary map heretofore previously approved and on file.
REPORT OF ENGINEER
SECTION 3. That this proposed improvement is hereby referred to WILLDAN
ASSOCIATES, who is hereby directed to make and file a combined report as
authorized by Section 2961 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California, said report to be in writing and contain the following:
A. Plans and specifications of the proposed improvements;
B. An estimate of the cost of the proposed works of improve-
ment, including the cost of the incidental expenses in connection therewith;
c. A diagram showing the Assessment District above referred
to, which shall also show the boundaries and dimensions of the respective
subdivisions of land within said Assessment District, as the same existed at
the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivi-
sions shall be given a separate number upon said Diagram;
D. A proposed assessment of the total amount of the
assessable costs and expenses of the proposed improvement upon the several
divisions of land in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by
such subdivisions, respectively, from said improvement. Said assessment shall
refer to such subdivisions upon said diagram by the respective numbers
thereof;
E.
installed under these
The description of the works of improvement
proceedings, and acquisition, where necessary.
to be
F. The total amount, as near as may be determined, of the
principal sum of any unpaid special assessments previously levied or pending,
other than those contemplated in these proceedings.
1'--\\
G. The true value of the parcels of land and improvements
which are proposed to be assessed. Said true value may be estimated as the
full cash value of the parcels as. shown upon the last equalized assessment
roll of the County.
When any portion or percentage of the cost and expenses of
the improvements is to be paid from sources other than assessments, the amount
of such portion or percentage shall first be deducted from the total estimated
costs and expenses of said work and improvements, and said assessment shall
include only the remainder of the estimated costs and expenses. Said
assessment shall refer to said subdivisions by their respective numbers as
assigned pursuant to Subsection D. of this Section.
BONDS
SECTION 4. Notice is hereby given that bonds to represent the unpaid
assessments, and bear interest at the rate of not to exceed the current legal
maximum rate of 12% per annum, will be issued hereunder in the manner provided
in the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915", being Division 10 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California, which bonds shall mature a maximum
of and not to exceed TWENTY-FOUR (24) YEARS from the second day of September
next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. The provisions of Part
11.1 of said Act, providing an al ternative procedure for the advance payment
of assessments and the calling of bonds shall apply.
The principal amount of the bonds maturing each year shall be
other than an amount equal to an even annual proportion of the aggregate
principal of the bonds, and the amount of principal maturing in each year,
plus the amount of interest payable in that year, will be generally an aggre-
gate amount that is equal each year, except for the first year's adjustment.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code
of the State of California, specifically Section 10603, the Treasurer is
hereby designated as the officer to collect and receive the assessments during
the cash collection period. Said bonds further shall be serviced by the
Treasurer or designated Paying Agent.
Refundinq
Any bonds issued pursuant to these proceedings and Division
(a) may be refunded, (b) the interest rate on said bonds shall not exceed the
maximum interest rate as authorized for these proceedings, and the number of
years to maturity shall not exceed the maximum number as authorized for these
bonds unless a public hearing is expressly held as authorized pursuant to said
Division 11.5, and (c) any adjustments in assessments resulting from any
refundings will be done on a pro-rata basis.
Any authorized refunding shall be pursuant to the above
conditions, and pursuant to the provisions and restrictions of Division 11.5
of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, commencing with
Sect ion 9500, and all further conditions shall be set forth in the Bond
Indenture to be approved prior to any issuance of bonds.
I~-\l
"MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913"
SECTION s. That except as herein otherwise provided for the issuance of
bonds, all of said improvements aha!l be made and ordered pursuant to the
provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of
the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
SURPLUS FUNDS
SECTION 6.
shall be used,
accordance with
purposes:
That if any excess shall be realized from the assessment, it
in such amounts as the legislative body may determine, in
the provisions of law for one or more of the following
A. Transfer to the general
any such transfer shall not exceed the
($1,000.00) or five percent (5%) of the total
fund; provided that the amount of
lesser of One Thousand Dollars
from the Improvement Fund;
B. As a credit upon the assessment and any supplemental
assessment; or
c. For the maintenance of the improvement.
SPECIAL FUND
SECTION 7. The legislative body hereby establishes a special improvement
fund identified and designated by the name of this Assessment District, and
into said Fund monies may be transferred at any time to expedite the making of
the improvements herein authorized, and any such advancement of funds is a
loan and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale of bonds as autho-
rized by law.
PRIVATE CONTRACT
SECTION 8. Notice is hereby given that the public interest will not be
served by allowing the property owners to take the contract for the installa-
tion of the improvements, and that, as authorized by law, no notice of award
of contract shall be published.
GRADES
SECTION 9. That notice is hereby given that the grade to which the work
shall be done is to be shown on the plans and profiles therefor, which grade
may vary from the existing grades. The work herein contemplated shall be done
to the grades as indicated on the plans and specifications, to which reference
is made for a description of the grade at which the work is to be done. Any
objections or protests to the proposed grade shall be made at the public
hearing to be conducted under these proceedings.
PROCEEDINGS INQUIRIES
SECTION 10. For any and all information
including information relating to protest
directed to the person designated below:
relating to these proceedings,
procedure, your attention is
\~-\3
JOHN LIPPITT, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
P. O. BOX 1087
CHULA VISTA, CA 92012
TELEPHONE: (619) 691-5021
PUBLIC PROPERTY
SECTION 11. All public
function shall be omitted
expressly provided and listed
property in the use and performance of a
from assessment in these proceedings
herein.
public
unless
NO CITY LIABILITY
SECTION 12. This legislative body hereby further declares not to obli-
gate itself to advance available funds from the Treasury to cure any
deficiency which may occur in the bond redemption fund. This determination is
made pursuant to the authority of Section 8769(b) of the Streets and. Highways
Code of the State of California, and said determination shall further be set
forth in the text of the bonds issued pursuant to the "Improvement Bond Act of
1915".
DIVISION 4 PROCEEDINGS
SECTION 13. It is the intention of this legislative body to fully comply
with the proceedings and provisions of the "Special Assessment Investigation,
Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931", being Division 4 of the Streets
and Highways Code of the State of California, and specifically the alternate
provisions thereof, being Part 7.5. A combined Report, as authorized by
Section 2961, will be on file with the transcript of these proceedings and
open for public inspection.
WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
SECTION 14. It is hereby further determined to be in the best public
interest and convenience and more economical to do certain work on private
property to eliminate any disparity in level or size between the improvements
and the private property. The actual cost of such work is to be added to the
assessment on the lot on which the work is done, and no work of this nature is
to be performed until the written consent of the property owner is first
obtained.
ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT
SECTION 15. It is hereby declared that this legislative body proposes to
levy an annual assessment pursuant to Section 10204 of the Streets and High-
ways Code of the State of California, said annual assessment to pay costs
incurred by the City and not otherwise reimbursed which result from the
administration and collection of assessments or from the administration or
registration of any associated bonds and reserve of other related funds.
If.-I~
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
~~
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
day of 1991, by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the
, 1991.
California, do
was duly
day of
Executed this _____ day of
, 1991.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
\ A. - \5
RESOLUTION NO. /1.,21 Y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MAKING APPOINTMENTS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY
VALLEY ROAD)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, is
considering the formation of a special assessment district, pursuant to the
terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for
the installation of certain public works of improvement, together with
appurtenances and appurtenant work, said special assessment district to be
known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD) (here-
inafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and,
WHEREAS, at this time, this legislative body is desirous of making the
required appointments and designating persons to perform certain duties, in
order to allow the proceedings to go forward to completion in accordance with
the provisions of law.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That the DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS is hereby appointed to
perform all 'of the duties and functions of the Superintendent of Streets as
said duties are specified and designated in the "Municipal Improvement Act of
1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California, for the above-referenced Assessment District.
SECTION 3.
diagram shall
assessment roll
record.
That the place for recordation of the assessment roll and
be in the Office of the Superintendent of Streets, and said
and diagram, upon recordation, shall be kept as a permanent
SECTION 4. That the STAR NEWS is hereby designated as the newspaper for
all publications as required by law and as necessary for completion of this
Assessment District.
SECTION 5. That MUNICIPAL FINANCE ADMINISTRATION is hereby appointed
the Project Manager for this project, and said Project Manager shall perform
all of the duties and responsibilities as they relate to said Assessment
District.
SECTION 6. That WILLDAN ASSOCIATES is hereby appointed the Assessment
Engineer for said proceedings, and said Assessment Engineer shall perform all
of the duties and responsibilities as set forth by law as they relate to said
Assessment District.
SECTION 7. That BROWN, HARPER, BURNS & HENTSCHKE, Attorneys at Law, is
hereby appointed to act as Bond Counsel for the purposes of preparing proceed-
ings and issuing an approving opinion attesting to the validity of the
proceedings and the enforceability of the bonds.
IlA-1
SECTION B. That KADIE-JENSEN, JOHNSON & BODNAR is hereby appointed as
Financial Consultant to assist in obtaining a proposal or bid for the sale of
bonds to be issued in order to finance said proceedings, and said bonds are
to be issued pursuant to the terms ~nd provisions of the 01 Improvement Bond
Act of 1915", being Division 10. of the Streets and Highways Code of the State
of California.
SECTION 9. That this legislative body hereby establishes a special
IMPROVEMENT FUND designated by the name and number of the Assessment
District, and into said fund shall be placed all proceeds from the sale of
bonds and cash collections. In order to expedite the improvements or acquisi-
tion under these proceedings and as authorized by law, funds from any avail-
able source may be transferred into said special fund. Any funds transferred
are a loan to the fund and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale of
bonds, including authorized incidental expenses, as well as costs for the
installation of the authorized public improvements, all as required and autho-
rized by law, and specifically Section 10210 of the Streets and Highways Code
of the State of California.
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the
day of
City Council of the City of Chula
1991, by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
12A-Z-
RESOLUTION NO. J (, '2.1.5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESS-
MENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has
been presented and has received a map showing and describing the boundaries
of the area .proposed to be assessed in an assessment district under the
provisions and authority of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the state of California; said
assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2
(OTAY VALLEY ROAD) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District").
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That a map of the Assessment District showing the boundaries
of the proposed Assessment District and lands and property to be assessed to
pay the costs and expenses of the proposed improvements designated as
"PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)" is
hereby submitted, and the same is hereby approved and adopted.
SECTION 3. That the original map of said proposed boundaries of the
proposed Assessment District and one copy thereof is to be filed in the
Office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 4. A certificate shall be endorsed on the original and on at
least one copy of the map of the Assessment District, evidencing the date and
adoption of this Resolution, and within fifteen (15) days after the adoption
of the Resolution fixing the time and place of hearing on the formation or
extent of said Assessment District, a copy of said map shall be filed with
the correct and proper endorsements thereon with the County Recorder, all in
the manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways
Code of the State of California.
Presented by
m by
~
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
day of 1991, by the
I;2.B~1
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
,COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
Ii Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the
, 1991.
California, do
was duly
day of
Executed this _____ day of
, 1991.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
\'-8 ~2..
RESOLUTION NO. J~ ;t7~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND REQUEST-
ING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.
90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA,
proposes to install certain public works of improvement, together with
acquisition where necessary, appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special
assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2
(OTAY VALLEY ROAD) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"),
and as set forth and described in the proposed Resolution of Intention
annexed hereto; and it is the opinion of this legislative body that the
purpose sought to be accomplished by said work, appurtenances and improve-
ments can best be achieved by a single comprehensive scheme of improvement,
wi th proceedings conducted pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code
of the State of California; and,
WHEREAS, it is required and hereby further requested that the consent of
the COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO (hereinafter referred to as "Consenting Agency") be
procured to the making of said improvements, acquiring necessary property and
rights-of-way, if necessary, and assessing benefited parcels, all as
described in the proposed Resolution of Intention, a copy of which is
attached hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That the proposed Resolution of Intention attached hereto
be, and the same is hereby adopted and approved as the proposed Resolution of
Intention for the work and improvements and appurtenances above referred to
in the Assessment District, and that the consent of the Consenting Agency is
hereby requested for the following:
1. Formation of the Assessment District;
2. Authority to order improvements;
3. Authority to maintain said improvements, as appropriate;
4. Authority and power to acquire rights-of-way, where necessary;
5. Power to assess benefited properties;
6. The assumption of jurisdiction by this legislative body for all
purposes in connection with the Assessment District;
7. The consent and approval of the enclosed proposed Resolution of
Intention; and,
8. Consent to and approval of the map forwarded indicating the extent
of territory included in the proposed Assessment District.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to forward a certified
copy of this Resolution, together with the proposed Resolution of Intention
attached hereto, and a copy of the map indicating the extent of the territory
included in the proposed Assessment District to the Consenting Agency.
11-Q.-1
SECTION 4. Certain of the works of improvement and properties to be
assessed are within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Consenting Agency,
and this legislative body expressly grants consent to the assessing of said
properties and construction of said wQrk.
SECTION 5. This request for consent is made pursuant to the provisions
of Section 10103 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
SECTION 6. That the City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the
Consenting Agency, its officers and employees, from any and all causes of
action, claims, losses or damages which may arise, directly or indirectly,
from the action of the Consenting Agency in reviewing and granting its
consent to the formation of the proposed Assessment District.
Present'ed by
Approved
~4
John P. Lippitt
Public Works Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
PASSED, APPROVED, and
Vista, California, this
following vote:
ADOPTED by the City Council of the
day of
City of Chula
1991, by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
\ ')..c. -2..
Item #12.
SR-125
CC: City Council
inefficiencies, catch up time etc. However, in this case we believe the
change, in the long run will be very cost effective.
The Consultants for this assessment District are, Municipal Finance
Administration, (Tom Meade) not to be confused with Municipal Finance
Services, Inc. (Assessment Engineers for Salt Creek.) Willdan
Associates, Assessment Engineers, Brown, Harper et al, Bond Counsel,
Kadie-Jensen, Johnson, financial Bond Consultant. There roles are as
follows:
1. Municipal Finance Administration (Tom Meade), Project
Management for the Assessment District.
2. Willdan Associates. They are the assessment Engineers and are
responsible for spreading the costs to each property owner, as well
as other duties discussed in item # 11.
3. Brown, Harper, Burns & Hentschke. This is the firm that acts as
the Bond Counsel. They prepare all the Resolutions, and legal
documents, and oversee the process, to see that it conforms with
the Law.
4. Kadie-Jensen, Johnson & Bodnar. They are the financial experts.
They review the appraisals for the assessed land to determine that
the debt can be carried. They also prepare the prospectus for the
bond sale. Most of our Districts publicly sell the bonds, rather
than a negotiated placement.
This item is not approving contracts with these consultants. that was done
over one year ago. But the resolution is a legal procedural requirement,
necessary for the proceedings
Caltrans was about 2/3 through the environmental and alignment review
process, when the Director of Caltrans issued a Franchise to California
Transportation Ventures (CTV, a Private Company) for a Toll Road.
Since January 1990, very little has been accomplished on the
Environmental and alignment studies. CTV has been attempting to
receive developer funds to complete the environmental studies. In
addition, the City of Chula Vista sued Caltrans and CTV for entering into
a Franchise without having conducted any environmental assessment on
the franchise agreement. This case is still pending and is being handled
by outside Counsel to the City. An update will be provided to Council in
August.
The staffs of the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, and County of San
Diego, and developers, would like Caltrans to finish the alignment studies,
adopt the route, then turn it over to who ever is going to build the facility.
ill
Q\\l.lk.)[:n~~
RANCHO DEL REV
AYoo\
'TAX DOLLARS AND ASSESSMENTS PAID BV RANCHO DEL REV RESIDENTS
ARE APPLIED TO THEIR SPECIFIC NEEDS
In order to make sure that tax dollars and assessments paid by Rancho del Rey residents are applied to their
specific needs, Community Facilities Districts and Special Assessment Districts will be utilized.
WHAT IS A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT?
A Community Facilities District (CFD) is a legally constituted financing vehicle formed by a local government
agency in accordance with the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended. Put simply, a Com-
munity Facilities District establishes a special tax as a means to provide security for the sale of bonds to con-
struct new public facilities. This form of financing is being utilized in many areas throughout California.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT?
The purpose is to assure financing for certain facilities, in this case schools. The state of California has respon-
sibility to provide funds necessary for school construction. Nevertheless, it is the school districts' responsibili-
ty to build the schools or otherwise provide adequate educational system capacity. In the event State funds are
not available, Community Facilities Districts can provide funding of school construction through the sale of tax-
exempt bonds paid off through the collection of special taxes. The builder/developer, however, has no authority
as to the location or type of educational facilities to be provided.
WHAT IS THE SPECIAL TAX?
There is an annual special tax associated with each specific Community Facilities District. This tax is part of your
annual property tax bill as collected by the County Tax Collector. Each residential unit will be assessed a maxi-
mum annual special tax in accordance with an adopted formula relating primarily to the size of the residen-
tial unit. The special tax will increase at a maximum 2% increase per year over a 25-year period. A schedule of
maximum special tax payments will be available to the homebuyer prior to the close of escrow (see attached
Exhibit A). It is important to note that the special tax cannot be increased above the stipulated maximum but
can be decreased should State or other education funding become available and the available funds be utilized
either to pay-down existing bond indebtedness or construct new facilities in lieu of additional bond sales.
WHAT EXACTLY WILL SPECIAL TAX MONIES BE USED FOR?
For repayment of bonds sold to fund both primary and secondary education system school capacity as deemed
necessary by the Chula Vista City School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District to accommo-
date children generated from RANCHO DEL REY.
WHO WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL TAX?
All landowners within the Community Facilities District, including commercial and industrial property owners,
will help retire the debt in accordance with pre-determined formulas.
WHY SHOULD COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES AS WELL AS
PROPERTY OWNERS WITHOUT CHILDREN PAY FOR SCHOOLS?
The responsibility of providing quality educational programs and facilities rests with the total citizenry of the
State of California since they, in total, are the ultimate benefactors of the process of education.
WHAT IS THE MAJOR ADVANTAGE OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT?
This financing mechanism provides assurance that adequate educational system capacity for quality education
programs will be available when and where needed.
WILL STATE FUNDS BE AVAILABLE?
Both the Chula Vista City School District and Sweetwater Union High School district have and will continue to
request State funding for schools within their respective districts. However. there will continue to be uncertainty
as to the availability of State funds both in terms of timing and amount. With this in mind, the Community Fa-
cilities Districts are intended to assure that financing for adequate school facilities will be available in the event
that State funding is not available in a timely manner.
page 1 of 2
,ill
U\"'1UltlLn
RANCHO DEL REV
TAX DOLLARS AND ASSESSMENTS PAID BV RANCHO DEL REV RESIDENTS
ARE APPLIED TO THEIR SPECIFIC NEEDS (continued)
WHAT IS A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT?
A Special Assessment District is a legally constituted financing vehicle formed by a local government agency
in accordance with the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, Put simply, a Special Assessment District estab-
lishes a special tax as a means to provide security for the sale of bonds to construct new public improvements.
This form of financing is being utilized in many areas throughout California.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT?
The purpose is to provide a financing mechanism for a local government agency to construct or acquire pub-
lic improvements. Assessment districts provide funding for public improvement projects through the sale of tax-
exempt bonds paid off through the collection of special taxes.
WHAT IS THE SPECIAL TAX?
There is an annual tax associated with each Assessment District. Assessment Districts 87-1 and 88-2 are assessed
and spread proportionally over every parcel of land within the districts that have benefitted by the expansion
of East "H" Street and Otay lakes Road, respectively. The method of making the assessment spread has been
determined by an Assessment Engineer and is in accordance with the benefit received. The level of benefit varies
according to land use and utilization of the improvements. These improvements include, but are not limited to,
street, sewer, utility, water, and drainage facilities. Assessments relating to these Assessment Districts are col-
lected on the PROPERTY TAX BILL. The special tax will be levied over a 25-year period. See Exhibit "t>:' for the
Schedule of Estimated Maximum Special Tax Payments.
WHO WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL TAX?
All landowners within the Assessment District boundaries, including commercial and industrial property owners,
will pay the special taxes.
WHAT IS THE MAJOR ADVANTAGE OF AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT?
This financing mechanism provides assurance that adequate public improvements will be provided when
needed.
HOW DO I GET SPECIFIC DETAILS ON THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
AND ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS WITHIN RANCHO DEL REY?
Your sales representative has more details and can answer other questions you may have. The City of Chula Vista
is the responsible governmental agency and can also be contacted with your questions. You will also be provided
with additional information at the time you purchase your new home.
*Please read and acknowledge Exhibit A. attached.
ACKNOWLEDGED:
BUYER:
BUYER:
SELLER:
SELLER:
DATE:
..
page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT J
NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS
NEIGHBORHOOD: SONRISA
BUILDER: McMILLIN COMMUNITIES
PLAN: 6042
SQUARE FEET: 1514
TAX PERIOD: 1990-1991
BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED: Between March 2,1989 and March 1, 1990 SO:''1R1SA
. .'. ..,..-...-..--
COMMUNllY FACILITIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT #3 DISTRICTS
TAX SWEETWATER CV ELEMENTARY DIST. NO. DIST. NO. lOTAL SPECIAL TAXES
PERIOD YR UNION H.5. SCH. DISTRICT 87-1 88-2 AND ASSESSMENTS
1990-91 1 $ 347 $ 221 $ 52 $ 352 $ 971
1991-92 2 353 225 52 352 982
1992-93 3 361 229 52 352 994
1993-94 4 368 234 52 352 1,006
1994-95 5 375 239 52 352 1,018
1995-96 6 383 243 52 352 1,030
1996-97 7 390 248 52 352 1,043
1997-98 8 398 253 52 352 1,055
1998-99 9 406 258 52 352 1,068
1999-00 10 414 264 52 352 1,082
2000-01 11 422 269 52 352 1,095
2001-02 12 431 274 52 352 1,109
'002-03 13 439 280 52 352 1,123
J03-04 14 448 285 52 352 1,138
2004-05 15 457 291 52 352 1,152
2005-06 16 466 297 52 352 1,167
2006-07 17 476 303 52 352 1,182
2007-08 18 485 309 52 352 1,198
2008-09 19 495 315 52 352 1,214
2009-10 20 505 321 52 352 1,230
2010-11 21 515 328 52 352 1,247
2011-12 22 525 334 52 352 1,263
2012-13 23 536 341 52 352 1,281
2013-14 24 546 348 52 352 1,298
2014-15 25 557 355 52 352 1,316
**BUYOUT COSTS** $4.550 $2.895 $520 $3.375 $11.341
HEstimated Open Space Maintenance District assessment for Year 1 is $270
NOTE: The unit you are purchasing is located within boundaries of community facilities districts and special assessment districts. The special
taxes and assessments shown above are in addition to the base property taxes on the property.
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
This District provides for the maintenance and servicing of public open space areas, community theme fencing, monumentation, drainage
facilities in Rice Canyon, and the staging area within Rancho del Rey. This assessment will be collected on the Property Tax Bill.
The open space maintenance district is administered by the City of Chula Vista and the assessment has not been determined at this time. It is
currently estimated, however, that the assessment, which is subject to annual adjustment as determined by the City of Chula Vista, will be
$270.00 in Year 1.
'schedule ab~ is an estimate of the Special Taxes and Assessments to be collected on your annual property tax bill. This amount will be
",aeased consistent with the Engineer's News Record Construction Index for the Los Angeles area.
Califomia law authorizes the lien of these assessments to be foreclosed within the same manner as tax liens are foreclosed or by the much faster
procedure of judicial foreclosure. Judicial foreclosure generally can be completed in a fevv months rather than the fevv years it takes for tax liens
to be foreclosed.
*NOTE:
ACKNOWLWGED:
The seller and/or its agents makes no assurances as to the
accuracy of the assessment rates stated above. Should you
desire additional information, please contact the Chula Vista
Elementary School District, the Sweetwater Union High School
District, and the City of Chula Vista.
BUYER
BUYER
DATE
PROJECT NAME
LOT
page 1 of 2
Ol'nON 1:
I agree to pay the following "buyout" costs:
Community Facilities Districts, #
District for $
3
, Sweetwater Union High School
Community Facilities Districts, #
District for $
3
. Chula Vista Elementary School
Special Assessment Districts # 87-1 , and # 88-2 , for a total of
$
(Open Space Maintenance District fees may not be paid in advance)
For all assessments checked above, I agree to pay $
I understand I will receive a supplemental tax bill in Year 1 to collect any discrepancy between projected and actual taxes.
OPTION 2:
I agree to pay all Mello-Roos taxes and SpeCial Assessments on an annual basis per the attached disclosure executed in the
Offer to Purchase.
I understand I will receive a supplemental tax bill in Year 1 to collect any discrepancy between projected and actual taxes.
8UYER
8UYER
DATE
TRACT
LOT NO.
.>
page 2 of 2
Department of Real Estate
of the
State of California
PIANNED DEVELOPMENr
FINAL SUBDIVISION PUBUC REPORT
In the miIltv of the application of
RANCHO DEL REY PAR'rnERSHIP,
A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARmERSHIP
FILE NO. :
066026IA-FOO
ISSUED:
MAR 2 3 1990
for 0 Final Subdivision Public Report on
by
MAR 2 2 1995((
r.
JAMES A. EDMONDS;Jtll.
Com . ssionCl'c:r '.
t~.......................,.....
-;:;::.........
~ """':"""'-,'
Deputy Commissioner .....
CHUIlI VISTA TRAcr NO. 88-1
"BEIJoICNI'E AT RANCHO DEL REY"
SAN DIEXD COUNl'Y, CALIFORNIA
EXPIRES:
CONSUMER INFORMATION
<Co THIS REPORT Is NOT A RECOM.\lE!'iDATlOS OR ESDORSEMEI\,. OFTHE SUBDlVlSIOS; IT Is II\'FORMATIVE
OI\1.V.
<. BWER OR LESSEE MUST SICS THAT (S)HE HAS RECEIVED ASD READ THIS REPORT.
<. A copy of this subdivision public repon along with a statement advising that a copy of the public
repon may be obtained from the owner, subdivider, or agent at any time, upon oral or written request,
must be posted in a conspicuous place at any office where sales or leases or offers to sell or lease
interests in this subdivision are regularly made. [Reference Business and Professions (B&P) Code
Section 1I018.1(b)]
This repon expires on the date shown above. All material changes must be reponed to the Depanment
of Real Estate. (Refer to Section 11012 of the B&P Code; and Chapter 6, Title 10 of the California
Administrative Code. Regulation 2800.) Some material changes may require amendment of the Public
Repon; which Amendment must be obtained and used in lieu of this repon.
Section 12920 of the California Government Code provides that the practice of discrimination in housing
accommodations on the basis of race, color,religion, sex, martial status, national origin, physical handicap
or ancestry, is against public policy.
Under Section 125.6 of the B&P Code, California real estate licensees are subject to disciplinary action
by the Real Estate Commissioner if they discriminate or make any distinction or restriction in negotiat-
ing the sale or lease of real propeny because of the race, color, sex, religion, ancestry, national origin, or
physical handicap of the client. If any prospective buyer or lessee believes that a licensee is guilty of such
conduct, (s)he should contact the Department of Real Estate.
,
READ THE ENTIRE REPORT ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES BEFORE CONTRACTING TO
BUY OR LEASE AN INTEREST IN THIS SUBDIVISION.
RE 618 (Rev. 12187)
COMMON INTEREST DEVELOPMENT
GENERAL INFORMATION
The project described In the attached Subdivision
Public Report is known as a common-interest
development. Read the Public Report carefully for
more Information about the type of development.
The development includes common areas and
facilities which will be owned and/or operated by
an owners' association. Purchase of a lot or unit
automatically entitles and obligates you as a
member of the association and, In most cases.
Includes a beneficial interest in the areas and
facilities. Since membership In the association is
mandatory. you should be aware of the following
Information before you purchase:
Your ownership in this development and your
ri9,hts and remedies as a member of Its association
will be controlled by governing instruments which
generally include a Declaration of Restrictions (also
known as CC&R's), Articles of Incorporation (or
association) and bylaws. The provisions of these
documents are intended to be, and in most cases
are, enforceable in a court of law. Study these
documents carefully before entering into a contract
:0 purchase a subdivision interest.
In order to provide funds for operation and
maintenance of the common facilities. the
association will levy assessments against your lot
or unit. If you are delinquent in the payment of
assessments, the association may enforce payment
through court proceedings or your lot or unit may
be Iiened and sold through the exercise of a power
of sale. The anticipated income and expenses of
the association, including the amount that you may
expect to pay through assessments, are outlined In
the proposed budget. Ask to see a copy of the
budget if the subdivider has not already made it
available for your examination.
RE 646 (Rev. 2/86)
Page 2 of 13
A homeowner association provides a vehicle for
the ownership and use of recreational and other
common facilities which were designed to attract
you to buy In this development. The association
also provides a means to accomplish architectural
control and to provide a base for homeowner
interaction on a variety of issues. The purchaser of
an interest in a common-interest development
should contemplate active participation In the
affairs of the association. He or she should be
willing to serve on the board of directors or on
committees created by the board. In short, "they. in
a common interest develorment is "you.. Unless
you serve as a member 0 the governing board or
on a committee apointed by the board. your control
of the operation of the common areas and facilities
Is 1imited to your vote as a member of the
association. There are actions that can be taken by
the governing body without a vote of the members
of the association which can have a significant
Impact upon the quality of life for association
members.
Until there Is a suffICient number of purchasers of
lots or units in a common Interest devolopment to
elect a majority of the governing body, it is likely
that the subdiVider will effectively control the affairs
of the association. It Is frequently necessary and
equitable that the subdivider do so during the early
stages of development. It Is vitally Important to the
owners of individual subdivision Interests that the
transition from subdivider to resident-owner control
be accomplished In an orderly manner and in a
spirit of cooperation.
When contemplating the purchase of a dwelling
in a common interest development, you should
consider factors beyond the attractiveness of the
dwelling units themselves. Study the goveming
instruments and give careful thought to whether
you will be able to exist happily in an atmosphere
of cooperative living where the interests of the
group must be taken into account as well as the
rnterests of the Individual. Remember that
managing a common Interest development is very
much like governing a small community . . . the
management can serve you well, but you will have
to work Jor Its success. [B & P Code Section
11018.1(c)]
File No. 066026IA-FOO
SPECIAL NOTES
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED A PRELIMINARY PUBLIC REPORl' FOR THIS SUBDIVISION,
YOU ARE ADVISED TO CAREFULLY READ 'lllIS FINAL REPORI' SINCE IT CONTAINS
INFORMATION THAT IS MORE CURRENT AND PROBABLY DIFFERENT FROM THAT
INCWDED IN THE PRELIMINARY REPORl'.
IF YOU ENI'ER INTO AN J\GREEMENT TO PURCHASE OR LEASE AN INTEREST IN THE
PROPER'IY COVERED BY 'lllIS PUBLIC REPORl', AND YOU SIGNED A RESERVATION
AGREEMENT UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF A SHORT FORM PRELIMINARY PUBLIC
REPORl', YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO RESCIND (CANCEL) 'lllE J\GREEMENT AND TO THE
RETURN OF ANY MOOEY OR OTHER COOSIDERATION THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN TCWARD
THE PURCHASE OR LEASE UNTIL MIDNIGHT OF THE FIFTH CALENDAR DAY
FOLLOWING THE IYI.Y YOU EXECUTE THE CCJm'RACT TO PURCHASE OR LEASE. YOU
MiW EXERCISE 'lllIS RIGHT WITHOUT INCURRIN:; ANY PENAL'IY OR OBLIGATION BY
NOTIFYIN:; THE DEVEIDPER (OR THE DEVEIDPER'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
OF SUCH CANCELLATION BY TELEXiRAM, MAIL OR OTHER WRITTEN NOTICE SENT OR
DELIVERED NOT LATER THAN MIDNIGHT OF THE FIFTH CALENl:lAR DAY FOLI.(WING
THE DATE THE CONI'RACT WAS SIGNED. THE NarIFICATION SHOUlD BE SENT TO:
RANCHO DEL REY PARmERSHIP
ATIN: MR. CHARLES SMITH
2727 HOOVER AVENUE
NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA 92050
YOUR ATTENTION IS ESPECIALLY DIRECTED TO THE PARAGRAPH(S) BELOW
ENTITLED:
RESrRICTIONS
HAZARDS
ASSESSMENTS
PURCHASE K>NEY HANDLING
WATER
THIS PROJEX:T IS A COMMON-INTEREST SUBDIVISION OF 'lllE TYPE REFERRED TO
AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. IT INCLUDES COMMON AREAS AND COMMON
FACILITIES WHICH WILL BE MAINTAINED BY AN INCORPORATED OWNERS
ASSOCIATION.
THE ASSOCIATION HAS THE RIGHT TO LEVY ASSESSMENTS AGAINST YOU FOR
MAINTENANCE OF THE COMMJN AREAS AND OTHER PURPOSES. YOUR CONTROL OF
OPERATIONS AND EXPENSES IS LIMITED TO THE RIGHT OF YOUR ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVES TO VOTE ON CERI'AIN PROVISIONS AT MEETINGS.
Page 3 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
SINCE THE COMMON PROPERTY AND FACILITIES WILL BE MAINl'AINED BY AN
ASSOCIATIOO OF HClMECMNERS, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THIS ASSOCIATION BE
FORMED EARLY AND PROPERLY. THE IlOMEX:MNER ASSOCIATIOO KJST HOLD THE
FIRST ELECTIOO OF THE ASSOCIATION'S GOVERNING BODY WITHIN 45 DAYS
AFTER 51% SELL OUT OF THE INTERESTS AUTHORIZED FOR SAIE UNDER THE
FIRST PUBLIC REPORT FOR THE SUBDIVISION; OR, IN ANY EVENT, NO lATER
THAN SIX MOOTHS AFTER CIDSING THE FIRST SALE (ROOUIATIOOS 2792.17 AND
2792.19). THE ~ ASSOCIATIOO MUST ALSO PREPARE AND DISTRIBUTE
A BAIANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENI' (REX:;UIATION 2792.22).
~UBDIVIDER STATES ALL COMMON FACILITIES WILL BE COMPLETED BY
APPROXIMATELY APRIL 1990.
THE SUBDIVIDER ADVISES THAT NO ESCROWS WILL CIDSE UNrIL ALL CXlMMJN
FACILITIES, IMPROVEMENTS, AND lANDSCAPING HAVE BEEN COMPLETED; A
NOTICE OF COMPLETION HAS BEEN FILED AND ALL ClAIM OF LIENS HAS
EXPIRED, OR A TITLE POLICY ISSUED TO THE ASSOCIATION AND EACH
PURCHASER CONTAINING AN ENDORSEMENT AGAINST ALL CLAIM OF LIENS.
(SECTIOO 11018.5 OF THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE.)
THE SUBDIVIDER /oIJST PAY ASSESSMENl'S TO THE IlOMID'iNERS ASSOCIATION FOR
ALL UNSOLD Im'S. THE PAYMENTS MUST COMMENCE ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE
KlNTH AFTER SUBDIVIDER CroSES FIRST SALE OF A 1m' IN THIS PROJECT.
(REGULATIONS 2792.9 AND 2792.16.)
THE SUBDIVIDER MUST PROVIDE YOU WITH A COPY OF THE ARTICLES OF
INCORPORATION, RES'IRICTIONS AND BYLAWS, BY POSTING THEM IN A PROMINENI'
LOCATION IN THE SALES OFFICE AND BY FURNISHING YOU COPIES PRIOR 'ro
CroSE OF ESCROW. THESE DOCllMENl'S CONI'AIN NUMEROUS MATERIAL PROVISIONS
THAT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT AND COOTROL YOUR RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, USE,
OBLIGATIONS, AND COSTS OF MAINl'ENANCE AND OPERATION. YOU SHOULD READ
AND UNDERSTAND THESE DOCUMENTS BEFORE YOU OBLIGATE YOURSELF TO
PURCHASE A LOT. (SECTION 11018.6 BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE.)
THE SUBDIVIDER STATED HE WILL FURNISH THE CURRENT OOI\RD OF OFFICERS OF
THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND EACH INDIVIDUAL PURCHASER WITH THE
DEPARI'MENT OF REAL ESTATE APPROVED B.lDGET.
THE SUBDIVIDER HAS INDICATED THAT HE INl'ENDS 'ro SELL ALL OF THE UNITS
IN THIS PROJECT; HOWEVER, ANY OWNER, INCLUDING THE SUBDIVIDER, HAS A
LEGAL RIGHT 'ro RENl' OR LEASE THE UNITS.
IF YOU PURCHASE FIVE OR MORE SUBDIVISION INl'ERESTS (LOTS/UNITS, OR
MEMBERSHIPS) FROM THE SUBDIVIDER, THE SUBDIVIDER IS IIDJUIRED 'ro NCYI'IFY
THE REAL ESTATE COMMISSIOOER OF THE SALE. IF YOU INl'ENO TO SELL YOUR
INl'ERESTS OR LEASE THEM FOR TERMS LONGER THAN ONE YEAR, YOU ARE
REQUIRED 'ro OBrAIN AN AMENDED SUBDIVISIOO PUBLIC REPORT BEFORE YOU CAN
OFFER THE INl'ERESTS FOR SALE OR LEASE.
,
Page 4 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
WARNIN3: WHEN YOU SELL YOUR Im TO SOMEONE EISE, YOU MUsr GIVE THAT
PERSON A COPY OF THE DOCLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS, ARI'ICLES
OF INCORPORATION, THE BYLAWS, AND A TRUE STATEMENT
CONCERNING ANY DELINQUENI' ASSESSMENl'S, PENALTI&S, ATl'ORNEY
FEES OR O'lllER CHARGES, PROVIDED BY THE RES'lRICTIONS OR C7I'HER
MANAGEMENl' DOCUMENTS ON THE Im AS OF THE Dl\TE THE STATEMENT
WAS ISSUED.
NOTE: IF YOU FORGET TO DO THIS, IT MAY COST YOU A PENALTY OF
$500.00 PLUS ATTORNEY'S FEES AND D!>.Ml\GES. (SEE CIVIL CODE
SECTION 1368).
THE SUBDIVIDER MUST MAKE AVAIlABLE TO YOU COPIES OF THE ASSOCIATION
GOVERNIN3 INSTRUMENTS, A STATEMENT CON::ERNIN3 ANY DELINQUENT ASSESS-
MENTS AND RELATED CHARGES AS PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNIN3 INSTRUMENTS
AND, IF AVAILABLE, CURRENT FINANCIAL AND RELATED STATEMENTS (SEE
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 11018.6).
INTERESTS TO BE CONVEYED: You will receive fee title to a specified lot,
together with a membership in the Belmonte at Rancho Del Rey Homeowners
Association and rights to use the ccmron area.
LOCATION AND SIZE: This subdivision is located at Otay Lakes Road
and Avenida Del Rey within the city limits of Chula Vista. Prospective
purchasers should acquaint themselves with the kinds of city services
available.
This is a single phase project Which consists of approximately 20.533 acres
divided into 33 lots in addition to the common area Lots C, D and E.
Ccmron facilities consisting of landscaping, streets and drives, sidewalks,
fences and walls, lighting, motorized gates, and entry monuments will be
constructed on the ccmron area.
Lots 3, 10, and 15 will be sold improved with residential structure. All
other lots will be sold as vacant lots.
MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION: The Belmonte at Rancho Del Rey Homeowners
Association, of Which you become a nenber at time of purchase, manages and
operates the common area(s) in accordance with the Restrictions, Articles
of Incorporation, and the Bylaws.
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONAL EXPENSES: The subdivider has sut:mitted a
budget for the maintenance and operation of the common areas and for
long-term reserves. This budget was reviewed by the Department of Real
Estate in December 1989. You should obtain a copy of this budget from the
subdivider. Under this budget, the monthly assessment against each
subdivision unit will be $144.82, of Which $22.70 is a monthly contribution
to long-term reserves and is not to pay for current operating expenses.
Page 5 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
IF THE BUDGET FURNISHED TO YOU BY THE DEVELOPER SHOWS A
KlNTHLY ASSESSMENl' FIGURE WHICH IS M LEAST 20% MORE OR AT
LEAST 10% LESS THAN THE ASSESSMENT AMOUNT SHOWN IN THIS
PUBLIC REPORT, YOU SHOULD CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF REAL
ESTATE BEFORE mrERm; INTO AN AGREEMENr TO PURCHASE.
The association may increase or decrease assessments at any time in
a=rdance with the procedure prescribed in the Restrictions or Bylaws. In
considering the advisability of a decrease, or a smaller increase, in
assessments, care should be taken not to eliminate amounts attributable to
reserves for replacement or major maintenance.
THE BUDGET INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THIS PUBLIC REPORT IS
APPLICABLE AS OF THE DATE OF BUDGET REVIEW AS SHOWN ABOVE.
EXPENSES OF OPERATION ARE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT ACCURATELY
AND EVEN IF ACCURATELY ESTIMATED INITIALLY, MOST EXPENSES
INCREASE WITH THE AGE OF FACILITIES AND WITH INCREASES IN
THE COST OF LIVING.
M:mthly assessments will coorrence on all lots on the first day of the month
following the closing of the first sale of a lot.
The remedies available to the association against owners lIIho are delinquent
in the payment of assessments are set forth in the Restrictions. These
remedies are available against the subdivider as well as against other
owners.
The subdivider has p:>sted a bond as partial security for his obligation to
pay these assessments. The governing body of the association should assure
itself that the subdiv ider has satisfied these obligations to the
association with respect to the payment of assessments before agreeing to a
release or exoneration of the security.
EASEMENTS: Easements for utilities, tree planting, drainage and other
purposes are shown on the Title Report and Subdivision Map recorded in the
Office of the San Diego County Recorder, as Map No. 12366.
RESTRICTIONS: This subdivision is subject to Restrictions recorded in the
Office of the San Diego County Recorder, on March 8, 1990, as File
No. 90-123833 and a Master Declaration of Restrictions for Rancho Del Rey
recocded August 29, 1989, as File No. 89-463940.
FOR INFORMATION AS TO YOUR OBLIGATIONS AND RIGHTS,
YOU SHOULD READ THE RESTRICTIONS. THE SUBDIVIDER
MUST M!\KE THEM AVAIIABLE TO YOU.
HAZARDS: Subdivider advises that a high energy voltage corridor is located
awroximately one (1) mile south of subject property.
,
Page 6 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
TAXES: The maximum amount of any tax on real property that can be
collected annually by counties is 1% of the full cash value of the
property. With the addition of interest and redemption charges on any
indebtedness, awroved by voters prior to July 1, 1978, the total property
tax rate in IIDst counties is approximately 1.25% of the full cash value. In
some counties, the total tax rate could be well above 1.25% of the full
cash value. For exClllple, an issue of general obligation bonds previously
approved by the voters and sold by a county water district, a sanitation
district or other such district could increase the tax rate.
For the purchaser of a lot or unit in this subdivision, the full cash value
of the lot or unit will be the valuation, as reflected on the tax roll,
determined by the county assessor as of the date of purchase of the lot or
unit or as of the date of canpletion of an improvanent on the lot if that
occurs after the date of purchase.
ASSESSMENTS: This subdivision lies within the boundaries of COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 3 and is subject to any taxes, assessments and
obligations thereof. This district was formed to finance the construction
of Chula Vista City school District facilities. In consideration of
financing such improvements, the district has encumbered each unit/lot
within this project to which each Purchaser will be subject upon
acquisition. Until the entire encunbrance has been paid in full, special
tax payments (principal plus interest) will be due twice yearly with the
owner's real property taxes until twenty-five years after the assessment is
added to the tax rolls.
The yearly payment for each unit/lot in this project for tax year 1990-1991
ranges from $450.00 for a 3,000 square foot of living area home, upward
depending on the square footage of living area in the home built on the
lot. The special tax payment may increase each year at a maximum of 2%.
All purchase rs should be aware, subject to any requirement of the lender,
and certain other requirements, if any, that each purchaser and all
subsequent to this assessment or can payoff the assessment at any time.
In the event of non-payment of the special taxes, the district is
authorized to enforce the payment of the special taxes due by the sale or
foreclosure of all or any part of the real property or the lien. A Notice
of Special Tax Lien ("Notice") for this district was recorded on
Februarv 23. 1989 as FilejPage No. 89 -092568 in the Official
Records of San Diego County, which, in addition to the above, contains
specific information concerning your obligations. Purchasers should obtain
a copy of this Notice from the title company in order to thoroughly
understand the effect of this district on their unit/lot. The
administration of this district will be provided by Chula Vista City School
District.
This subdivision lies within the boundaries of COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO.3 and is subject to any taxes, assessments and obligations
thereof. This district was formed to finance the construction of
Sweetwater Union High School District Facilities. In consideration of
financing such improvements, the district has encumbered each unit/lot
within this project to which each Purchaser will be subject upon
acquisition. Until the entire encumbrance has been paid in full, special
Page 7 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
tax payments (principal plus interest) will be due twice yearly with the
owner's real property taxes until 25 years after the assessnent is added to
the tax rolls.
The yearly payment for each unit/lot in this project for tax year 1990-1991
ranges from $690 (for a 3,000 square foot of living area home) upward
depending on the square footage of living area of the home built on the
lot. The special tax payment may increase each year at a maximum rate
of 2%.
All purchasers should be aware, subject to any requirement of the lender,
and certain other requirements, if any, that each purchaser and all
subsequent purchasers can either acquire a unit/lot subject to this
assessnent or can payoff the assessment at any time. In the event of
non-payment of the special taxes, the district is authorized to enforce the
payment of the special taxes due by the sale of foreclosure of all or any
part of the real property of the lien. A Notice of Special Tax Lien
("Notice") for this district was recorded on April 24. 1989 as FilejPage
No. 89-213040 in the Official Records of San Diego County, W'hich
in addition to the above, contains specific information Concerning your
obligations. Purchasers should obtain a copy of this Notice frem the title
company in order to thoroughly understand the effect of this district on
their unit/lot. The administration of this district will be provided by
Sweetwater Union High School District.
This subdivision lies within the boundaries of the OTAY LAKES ROAD
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-2 and is subject to any taxes, assessments and
obligations thereof. This district was fomed to provide funding for road
improvements. It is anticipated the projected 1990-1991 assessment for
each residential unit within this development will be $398. The
administration of this district will be provided by the City of
Chula Vista.
This subdivision lies within the boundaries of the aHa STREE:l' ASSESSMENl'
DISTRICT ro. 87-1 and is subject to any taxes, assessments and obligations
thereof. This district was formed to provide funding for road improve-
ments. It is anticipated the projected 1990-1991 assessment for each
residential unit within this developnent will be $86. The administration
of this district will be provided by the City of Chula Vista.
This subdivision lies within the boundaries of OPEN SPACE MA~E
DISTRICT NO. 20 and is subject to any taxes, assessments and obligations
thereof. This district was formed to provide maintenance of open space
areas. The budget for each fiscal year will be based upon the actual costs
provided for in the awarded contract for these services. This means
assessments can fluctuate from year to year as contracts expire. As of the
date of this Public Report, it is anticipated the projected 1990-1991
assessment for each residential unit within this developnent will be $270.
The administration of this district will be provided by the City of
Chula Vista.
Page 8 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
PURCHASE MONEY HANDLING: The subdivider must impowxl all fwxls received
from you in an escrow depository until legal title is delivered to you.
(Refer to Sections 11013, 11013.1 and 11013.2(a) of the Business and
Professions Code.)
If the escrow has not closed on your lot within one (1) year of the date of
your deposit receipt, you may request return of your deIDsit.
NOTE: Section 2995 of the Civil Code provides that: No real estate
developer shall require as a condition precedent to the transfer of real
property containing a single family residential dwelling that escrow
services effectuating such transfer shall be provided by an escrow entity
in Wlich the developer owns or controls 5% or more of the escrow entity.
'!HE SUBDIVIDER HAS AN INl'EREsr IN '!HE E'.SCRCM COMPANY WHICH IS TO BE USED IN
CONNECTION WI'!H '!HE SALE OR LFASE OF :wrs IN '!HIS SUBDIVISION.
SOILS CONDITIONS: Some lots will contain filled growxl. '!he information
concerning filled growxl, soils and geologic information is available at:
Office of the City Engineer/City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, California 92010.
GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS: '!HE UNIFORM WILDrn::; CODE, CHAPTER 70, PROVIDES FOR
LOCAL BUILDING OFFICIALS TO EXERCISE PREVENrIVE MEASURES OORrn::; GRADING TO
ELIMINATE OR MINIMIZE DAMAGE FROM GEOLOGIC HAZARDS SUCH AS LANDSLIDES,
FAULT MOVEMENTS, EARTHQUAKE SHAKING, RAPID EROSION OR SUBSIDENCE. THIS
SUBDIVISION IS LOCATED IN AN AREA WHERE SOME OF '!HESE HAZARDS MAY EXIST.
SOME CALIFORNIA COONl'IES AND CITIES HAVE AOOPTED ORDINANCES THAT MAY OR MAY
NO!' BE AS EFFECTIVE IN '!HE CONl'ROL OF GRADrn::; AND SITE PREPARATION.
PURCHASERS MAY CONTACT THE DEVELOPER, THE DEVELOPER'S ENGINEER, THE
ENGINEERING GEOLOGIsr AND '!HE LOCAL WILDING OFFICIALS TO DETERMINE IF THE
AOOVE-MENTIONED HAZARDS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AND IF 'lliERE HAS BEEN ADE);lUATE
CGlPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 70 OR AN EQUIVALENT OR MORE STRINGENT GRADING
ORDINANCE OORING '!HE CONSTRUCTION OF '!HIS SUBDIVISION.
WATER: The subdivider advises that the Otay Water District will supply
water services to each lot in this subdivision.
'!he subdivider discloses that the Otay Water District currently has a water
allocation program in effect. (Otay is the water district Wlich supplies
water to eastern Chula Vista.) '!he subdivider agrees to allocate to the
Lot being purchased one Equivalent !Melling Unit ("EDU") of water capacity,
Wlich allocation will become effective at close of escrow. Escrow is not
to close unless and until Escrow Holder receives a letter from Otay Water
District stating that one EDU of water has been assigned to the Lot being
purchased.
The Otay Water District's current IDlicies do not imIDse any time limit by
Wlich a residence must be built on the lot. However, the subdivider cannot
assure or warrant whether Otay Water District will change its current
IDlicies.
Page 9 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
The subdivider obtained an estimate ~ich show.; that the average cost to
install water and sewer fran property line to the house will be $175.00 for
the first 30 feet, plus $5.00 per foot extra for sewer and $3.00 per foot
extra for water lines over 30 feet. This price includes digging,
backfilling, compaction, labor and materials.
Vacant lot purchasers will be required to pay a water capacity fee of
approximately $800.00 and a meter fee of $107.50, in addition to the above
costs.
GAS, ELECTRICITY AND TELEPHONE: San Diego Gas and Electric advises in
part:
In accordance with our "RULES FOR THE SALE OF GAS AND ELECTRIC
ENERGY", filed with and approved by the California Public Utilities
Commission, electric and/or gas facilities can be made available to
this subdivision.
If purchaser is to pay any cost for the installation and/or extension
of utility service, the costs will be calculated in conformance with
our extension and service rules.
Our ability to serve future projects in our service territory will
depend on the supply available to us of fuel and other essential
materials, and on our obtaining goverl"ll1ent authorization to construct
the facilities required.
Pacific Teler:hone and Telegraph Company provides the following information:
This is to inform you that under its present plans The Pacific
Telej;hone and Telegraph Company expects to be in a position to provide
telej;hone service to applicants in the above subdivision in accordance
with requirements of and at rates and charges specified in its tariffs
on file with the California Public utilities Commission.
This tract will be served with underground distribution facilities.
In accordance with the above-mentioned tariffs, the applicants or
customer will be responsible for:
1) furnishing, installing and maintaining conduit on
the private property if the Telej;hone Company requires
it for the service connection wire or cable: or
2) providing or paying the cost of the underground
supporting structure on the private property (usually a
trench) if the telej;hone company determines buried
wire or cable is to be used for the service.
The subdivider obtained an estimate ~ich show.; that the cost of trenching
and service lines from the property line to the house for gas, electricity,
telephone and CATV will be $1,250.00 for the ..first 40 linear feet, plus
$9.50 per linear feet extra in excess of 40 feet. Discounts apply for two
houses or more. This reduces the cost of base price to $365.00 for 10 or
more houses.
Page 10 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
,
Vacant lot purchasers will be responsible to pay the costs
and hook-up of gas, electricity and telephone services.
pI"Op:!r utility ccxnpany for cost estimates.
for extension
Contact the
SEWAGE DISPOSAL: Vacant lot purchasers will be required to pay a capacity
fee of $2,000.00 ani a hook-up fee of $17.00 for sewer services. .
The subdivider advised there is currently a m:mthly sewer service charge by
the City of Chula Vista in the amount of $8.70.
SPECIAL FEES: Subdivider advises the following special fees will be
charged to the vacant lot purchaser when said purchaser obtains a buildin:l
p:!rmit or prior to occupancy:
Residential Construction Tax: $450.00 includes 1 bedroom - $25.00 each
bedroom thereafter.
Development Impact Fee: $2,850.00
Supplemental Developnent Impact Fee: $1,374.00
Traffic signal participation: $120.00
Hidden Vista Sewer reimbursement: $53.27 + .07 interest annually from
April 3, 1984.
STREETS AND ROADS: The private streets in this project will be maintained
by the homeowners association. The costs of repair ani maintenance of
these private streets are included in the budget and are a part of your
regular assessment.
SCHOOL INFORMATION: This project is served by the following school
districts:
CHUIA VISTA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 East "J" street
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Tel. No. (619) 425-9600
SWEElWATER WION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
1130 Fifth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92011
Tel. No. (619) 691-5553
Purchasers are encouraged to contact the above school districts for updated
information.
Page 11 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
\
If you need clarification as to the statements in this Public Report or if
you desire to make arrangements to review the documents submitted by the
subdivider which the Department of Real Estate used in preparing this
Public Report you may call:
Department of Real Estate
Subdivisions South
107 South Broadway
Suite 7111
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 620-2700
0075/AK/cgm
,
Page 12 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
.
MELLO-ROOS COKMuNITY
FACILITIES ACT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE
FACT SHEET: .SPECIAL TAXES.
RE FORM 697 (New 6/30/86)
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
The subdivilion described in the accompanying Final Subdivision Public Report is located
within the boundaries of a Community Facilities Oistrict created purauant to the Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of "82, as amended. A Community "cilities Oiatrict (CFO) is a
governmental entity formed by local agencies (i.... County Board of Supervisors, City
Council, school district, etc.) for the purposes of providing certain additional public
servic.s and financing a broad rsnge of public capital f.cHitiea through the levy of .pe-
cial taxe.. '!be Act has been used as a financing mechAniam for a variety of purposes
including provision of facilities such as street, water, aewage and drainage, and the pro-
vision of infrastructure to newly developing areas.
SPECIAL TAXES
If you purchase an intere.t in subdivided property within a CFO, you can expect to have a
.SPECIAL TAX. levied &9ain.t your interest which will likely bt collected with your general
property tax bill an.d be ,ub,ect to the same penalties and procedures for aale in case of
delinquency. In oonnect10n with the issuance of bonda by a erD, additional remedies are
provided with respect to dslinquent .special taxes including an expedited foreclosure proce-
dure pursuant to a resolution adopted by the legislativll body. prior to issuance of the
bonds or through a court foreclosure action. Pursuant to PropoO tion , 3, a special tax may
not be in proportion to the value of real property. ""aule ot; this prohibition, most
special taxes levied on properties within CFOs have been atructurdd on the basis of density
of development, square footage of construction, or flat acr..ge charges. The Act, however,
allows for considerable flaxibili ty in the method of apportiOOlllllnt of taxes, and the local
agencies MY have estalllished an entirely different methcd fer levying the special tax
against property in t1ltl CI"Il in question. In particular, the amount of tax may vary from
year to year, but mAY not exceed the maximum amount specified when the ero was created.
BONOS
"
A CFD may be created .olely to provide services permitted by the Act, however, many CFOS
presently in existence were created specifically for tho ~rpoao of levying the special tax
tG pay for bonds a~thoriJ.d by the CFO to finance the con.truetion of public capital faci-
lities. A capital fac111ty ill defined as any tangible or lI"a.1 uset with an expected life
of more than five y..re. Tile bond procedure is especially a4aptable and has been used in
newly developed area. filCh as new residential subdivisions. Each year, after bonds are
authorized, the leqUlat1v," body must fix and levy taxes an:! charges sufficient to pay
principal and intereat on any outstanding bonded indebte4n.'8, including any necessary
replenishment of bond r...rVe funds. Special taxes for debt ..rvice on bonds may continue
to be levied W1til the bond. are paid off which is common1y II t....nty-year peri od.
RESTRICTIONS ON CHANGES
The Mello-Rooa Act provides procedures for certain changes or addition. to the public faci-
lities, service., and If.ehl tax after the District has been .established. However, no
change. can be Nde thAt would reduce or terminate an .d~tin9 spec1al tax being used to
payoff any debt, inclliding bonded indebtedness, incurred in order to build or acquire
capital facilitiell if dCl1nw so would interfere with the timely lI".tirell\ent of that debt.
Information concernin9 the CFO and related special'taxes affecting this subdivision, can be
fOW1d under ':Assessments" in the accompanying Final subdivh10n Public Report.
RE FORM 697 (New 6/30/86)
0075!AK:cgm
Page 13 of 13
File No. 066026LA-FOO
cJJ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Iteal~~
Meet1~l:/91 ~
....,.".. 1(';l~2 ""ptt'g ~P'''' ~ ~'m" ..,
City's intention to establish Chu1a Vista Open Space Distr~ct
No. 24 and sett~ng the time ~~~lace for hearing thereon
Director of Public Works~~J1~
Director of Parks and Re~eatio~
City Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes___No-X-J
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On May 28, 1991, by Resolution 16178, Council initiated the proceedings for
the formation of Open Space Maintenance District No. 24, Canyon Views, and
ordered the City Engineer to prepare and file a report in accordance with the
Streets and Highway Code. The report is now before 'Council for review and
approval. .
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Approve the Engineer's Report.
2. Adopt a resolution declaring the Council's intention to form the proposed
di stri ct in accordance wi th Sect i on 17.07.020 of the Mun i c i pa 1 Code and
Section 22587 of the Streets and Highways Code.
3. Direct the City Clerk to notice the public hearing in accordance with
Sections 22556 and 22588 of the Streets and Highways Code.
4. Set July 23, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. as the date and time for public hearing.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Reoort on Prooosed Ooen So ace District No. 24 Canvon Views
I. Backaround
This report was prepared pursuant to City Council direction and in
compliance with the requirements of Division IS, Part 2, Chapter 1 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California and the Chu1a Vista
Municipal Code, Sections 17.07.
On August 9, 1988 by Resolution 13726, Council approved the tentative map
for Canyon View Homes, Chula Vista Tract 88-8. The final map (Hap No.
12507) was approved on October 27, 1989 by Resolution 15369. One of the
conditions of approval required that the open space lots created by the
map be included within an open space maintenance district. The
developer, Canyon View Homes, has petitioned for the formation of an open
space maintenance district to maintain said lots. However, since the
petition was received, a number of properties have been sold thereby
requiring a public hearing for the formation of the district.
A-If(l.~jIY1~1-
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 7/9/91
II. Boundaries of District
The boundary of the district corresponds to the boundary of Chula Vista
Tract 88-8, Canyon View Homes and is shown on the Assessment Diagram on
file in the Office of the City Engineer. A reduced copy, Attachment "A"
is included in this report. As permitted in the Streets and Highways
Code Section 22571, the details of the individual lots (lines, dimensions
and bearings) to be maintained are shown in the County Assessor's Maps
for. the properties on file in the San Diego County Assessor's office.
III. Maintenance Items
The areas to be maintained by maintenance contract consist of four open
space lots totalling 119,746 square feet and designated as lots C, D, E
and H on the Assessment Diagram. These are the highly visible slopes
adjacent to East H Street and Rutgers Avenue. The facil ities and items
of maintenance included within the District are as. follows:
1. Maintain landscaping and irrigation system improvements within the
designated open space lots.
2.
.
Maintain the stucco walls located within the open space lots.
3. Maintain drainage facilities within the open space lots.
The proposed maintenance program for Open Space District 24 consists in
general of the following:
1. Repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any
improvement.
2. Irrigation, fertilization, trimming, and replacement of dead or
diseased landscaping.
3. Weed abatement.
4. Removal of trimmings, trash and litter.
IV. Cost Estimate
The estimated annual cost for maintenance of Open Space Maintenance
District No. 24 Canyon Views is $26,500. This preliminary estimate is
based on information obtained from the developer.
Even though we do not expect to take over the district for maintenance
until January, 1992, staff proposes to assess for the full year. Under
the Code, a 50 percent reserve is required, but it can be built up over a
five year period. Spreading this reserve over five years would require a
10 percent higher assessment each year. By assessing for the full year,
the reserve would be built up in the first year without this increase to
Page 3. Item ;;1.0
Meeting Date 7/9/91
the first five years assessments. This approach would also prevent a
large jump in the assessment from a half year assessment in FY 1991-9Z to
a full year assessment in FY 199Z-93. The assessment this fiscal year if
assessed for 1/2 year would be $397.50. For the next four years, the
annual assessment assuming no change in costs would be $728.75. With
staff's proposal. assuming no change in annual costs, the assessment will
remain constant at $66Z.50 (see Attachment -D").
V. Assessment Schedule
The proposed district will contain 40 single family attached units. The
proposed distribution of assessments is shown in Attachment "Co. For
purposes of distributing assessments, each single family unit is
equivalent to one assessment unit. The estimated annual assessment for a
typical single family unit is $66Z.50.
Plats are available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. Cost of district formation are paid for by. the
developer through a deposit. Annual staff and administration costs are
included .in the assessment.
SE:OS-OZ5
WPC 5667E
.
- ~...
~.....
;'
. I
. OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 24,
OF THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA
~~--1
,
11
~'
ATTACHMENT A
td=--=:.-
i
.1
q
()J
\\
&ot".
~'::':, --
~. -------..-- --
. . ------- . ~
. --..-..........- .....-.e
------- -...
. ..--.- 9-.-
MK.._.--'l
. ~ ===-=-::::.:-"-:.-.-:.:~.=:-
........-...-.
."'""'....
,-----:..-"'---
------ --.-....-
... - .....
Ih.. __ __ __ en,. 0' ~MUlA V"fA 1______ .._ _
....._ _ _ _. ,_..._.. ..... .... CANYON ~w NOM!I
-_ m... ___ __ Mf"'~ACIr.A"'TI!N...ee'DISnItcT_,,,
-.. -".'''' .........
WPC 5668E
ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 24
CANYON VIEWS
FY 1991-92
llim
Contract Services
Ut llities
Materials
Landscape Supplies
City Staff Services
Backflow Cert if.
Trash Collection & Disposal
1991-92 Total Budget
ATTACHMENT B
$12,650
8,130
950
350
4,010
160
250
$26,500
ATTACHMENT C
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 24
CANYON VIEWS
. ALLOCATION OF COSTS
FY 1991-92
Residential Units - 100%
Total % of % of
iI of Lots Assessment/ Assessment Residential District
Res i dent ia 1 or Units Unit Units Assessment Assessment
Single
Family Lots 40 1.0 40 100.0 100.0
Total
Assessment
Residential 40 100.0
Annual Maintenance Costs - Open Space Lots - $26,500
Cost per EOU - S26.500 - $662.50 - Assessment for Single Family Unit Per Year
40
WPC 5668E
ATTACHMENT 0
ASSESSMENT BASED UPON CURRENT CODE
Estimated 10% Reserve of Previous Year Total Single Unit
.Ynr Annua 1 C1tll Estimated Annual Cost Reserve Amt. 40 - Assessment
1 $13,250* +0.10 (26,500)**- $ 2,650 - $ 0 - $397.50
2 26,500 +0.20 (26,500) . 5,300 2,650 - 728.75
3 26,500 +0.30 (26,500) . 7,950 5,300 . 728.75
4 26,500 +0.40 (26,500) . 10,600 7,950 . 728.75
5 26,500 +0.50 (26,500) . 13,250 10,600 . 728.75
.A.....ed for 1'2 y..r
**Relerve t. baled on I full-ye.r COlt to .chieve I 5-ye.r 'e.erve
of SOX per S.ctlon 17.07.030 of the Munfclpll Code.
STAFF'S PROPOSAL WITH CODE CHANGE
Estimated Previous Year Total Sin9le Unit
.Ynr Annual Cost Reserve Reserve Amt. 40 - Assessment
1 $13,250 +0.50 (26,500) . $13,250*** - $ 0 . $662.50
2 26,500 + 13,250 13,250 . 662.50
3 26,500 + 13,250 13,250 . 662.50
4 26,500 + 13,250 13,250 . 662.50
5 26,500 + 13,250 13,250 . 662.50
...full sox ....rv. I. .cqulr.d In flr.t year becau.e
.r... to be ..fnt.fned Ire not Iccepted until Janulry
...ultln, In 1'2 y.ar or SOX ...erva beln, accumulated
durin, the ~uly to ~anuary a..e...ent.
WPC 568lE
This item had a Council-imposed one-week turn-around time as a
result of motions passed at the meeting of July 16. Due to the
press of business in the city Attorney's office, the City
Attorney was not able to commence work on this project until
Friday morning, after the agenda had gone to print, and it was
not completed until Friday at 2:00 p.m. As soon as the City
Attorney realized the complexity of the report, and the breadth
of potential actions the Council could take, he realized that
this should have been placed as an action item. It is his intent
to suggest that treatment at the commencement of the Council
meeting.
COUNCIL AGENOA STATEMENT
Item I &
Meeting Date 7/23/91
Public Hearing to Form Chula Vista Open Space Maintenance
District No. 24, Canyon Views
Resolution '1.".~71 Ordering the improvements and the
formation of Open Space Maintenance District No. 24, and
confirming the diagram and as:~;~ent for said District
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public works~9frr{7
Director of Parks and Recreation)L'
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~~ ~~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
The developers of Canyon View Homes Subdivision have petitioned the City for
the format i on of an open space mai ntenance di stri ct in accordance with the
cri teri a contai ned in the Muni ci pal Code. On July 9, 1991, the City Council
set July 23, 1991 as the date for a public hearing on the proposed formation
of Open Space Ma i ntenance Di stri ct No. 24. The boundari es of the proposed
district are as shown on Exhibit 'A'.
ITEM TITLE:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Conduct the publ ic hearing to entertain protests from property owners
within the proposed district.
2. Adopt the resolution creating the District establishing the assessment of
$662.50 per unit.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On July 9, 1991, Council approved the City Engineer's report for the formation
of Open Space Maintenance Di stri ct No. 24 and set July 23, 1991 as the date
for a public hearing. Although it is anticipated that the district will not
be accepted for maintenance by the City until January 1991, Council approved
assessing $662.50 per unit for the full fiscal year in order to build up a 50
percent reserve within the first year and to avoid a large increase in
assessment in the next fiscal year. This is in accordance with the emergency
ordinance recently adopted by Council.
The open space lots have been 1 andscaped wi th drought res i stant plant i ngs
whi ch are now in an establ i shment peri od. The di stri ct will not be accepted
for maintenance by the City until the landscaping is fully established.
As directed by Council, the hearing has been noticed by the City Clerk in
accordance with Sections 22556 and 22588 of the Streets and Hi ghways Code.
After conducting the public hearing, the final step in the assessment district
proceedi ngs for the format i on of an open space maintenance di stri ct requ ires
that Council adopt a resolution which (1) orders the improvements, (2) forms
the open space maintenance district, and (3) confirms the district diagram and
assessment either as originally approved in the Engineer's Report or as
modified by Council subsequent to the public hearing. In accordance with
Section 22594 of the landscaping and lighting Act of 1972, said resolution
will establish the District and levy the first annual assessment.
\ ~,I
Page 2, Item I~
Meeting Date 7/23/91
A copy of the Engineer's report and previous agenda statement is attached for
Council's reference.
A plat is available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. Cost
developer through a deposit.
included in the assessment.
of district formation are paid for by the
Annual staff and administration costs are
EAF/mad:OS025
WPC 5699E
\;'2-
RESOLUTION NO. II. ~ 11_
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE
FORMATION OF OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NO. 24, CANYON VIEWS, AND CONFIRMING THE
DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT FOR SAID DISTRICT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the developers of Canyon View Homes Subdivision
have petitioned the City for the formation of an open space
maintenance district in accordance with the criteria contained in
the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on July 9, 1991, the City Council set July 23,
1991 as the date for a public hearing on the proposed formation
of Open Space Maintenance District No. 24, the boundaries of
which are as shown on Exhibit 'A', and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections
the Streets and Highways Code, the public
noticed by the City Clerk; and
22556 and 22588 of
hearing has been
WHEREAS, after conducting the public hearing, the final
step in the assessment district proceedings for the formation of
an open space maintenance district requires the adoption of a
resolution which (1) orders the improvements, (2) forms the open
space maintenance district, and (3) confirms the district diagram
and assessment either as originally approved in the Engineer's
Report or as modified by Council subsequent to the pUblic hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby order the improvements and
the formation of Open Space Maintenance District No. 24, and
confirm the diagram and assessment for said District in the
amount of $662.50 per unit for the full fiscal year as set forth
in the Engineer's Report prepared in accordance with Article 4 of
Chapter 1 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act for Open Space
District No. 24.
Presented by
ved as 0 form by
J J
, City At tor ney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
9072a
Bruce
\~-3
.July :-:3. 1991
AY 001
Ci ty Manager A~
Ci ty Manager tf .
Publ ic: WOl'ks Direc:tor~
GENEfU\[, QUE:;TIOW3 ON Af;SESSMENT DWl'RlCTS
To:
Via:
From:
Sid Morris. Assistant
Geof'ge Krempl, Deputy
Cliff SwansorJ, Depllty
City Engineer'
1. What. type of fac:ili ties does the Ci ty allow to be
included i.l~ assessment districts other than DIE' street::3?
The Engineering Departmen1, i" w.orking .on a formal policy
outlining the tYf,e of faei li tiefj whieh ore eligible to be
acquir'ed thr\)'."l.gh A.sseSQInent di str'j,C't financing. H01t7ever.
informaJ 1'1, the City h"" used t.he folloping guidelines:
EUELIL-.J MPRQ\lEJ':1EN'I'S
a. Residential Projects
[t is t.he City-s practice that only "collec.t.or" type
public improvements serving whole neighborhood A.reas, ur
greater, be publ icly financed. This appl ies to st.reet~::;,
water, sewer, atoem drain, and dry utili.ty systems.
"Local" type ptlblic improvenlf.:.nts arB not, e1 igiblf:.
b. Inchli.'3trial Project.:3 (Non-residential)
It is the CityJs pr.1(~ti(~e t.hat all public~ :improvements
within or- serving a r:on'-r'esidential project ace eligible
for public financing. 'T11is includes street.s. wFlter.
sewer, storm drain, and dry utility 8Yi.'3temi.~.
!:1.lXELLlillJillllli
The following may also be eligible i.'3ubject to certain
conditions:
Ct_ Right-of-way a.nd Ea.sements
b_ Design and Other ",,:oH" Costs
c _ nt'ad ing
:::. What. di;.:,closure is pr'ovided t.o t.l1e future proper'ty owner'
regarding the a3Se3~::l,ment dist.rict?
~,-h " \ ::>.
""\ 1,\ Vc-)
,l\liJr:g 07i th the dja,gr'c'm beLlg
Rscordf'r ~:.3 Office, the deve
to I,otenr,ial hc'-meOHnef';::: J"j(C'''
o!.~ f'ecof'..1 ;;.7i th t.l1f' (>)unty
r,.."o,rLh~~ a (j:(,':;"-:' l'-)slu'e netic>.:"
;:ttt,c1che( a s.;:,rople fnrrn.
" How many ac:r-::';) of c)p'?n space ar'e they"c' in U~),U 24 aTd, hOH
unit.s shar'E' in t.b,~ cost'/
There t1_r~;:, approximDtely 2.8 irTigated acres of o:pen spd,ce 2nd
cmly 40 hc,mes t.) p,h,::u'e thbt cost. See atta.cbed map.
CC: .,iPL
".
/
. I
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 24:
OF THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA
,,---J
,
\/
~'
I').
'''.t
~1<
't"
~
/'
2.8
40
E.Dl.\ '~
...o;:.~
~
(lJ
\\
:it-oS
.,.0
k---
a",~'< LA~E.s. "R D
1
\/\CIl'lI,Y MA?
j;\TS
lor....
,.... ...~
....r... '/ uaa.
4S- ------.......-.-
. .
---.--.----..
- ---------....----
--------
.. ....... --
lOT___ I
-...~ .
._'''-'~
M.e...TIOII
IIII'J'JII
...."H.
-.
<8> ..
....-....---. -. -_...._"-
_______.__ll._.
~--...-.
1......0VAL
.j
I.--.~--_.-
------ -----
-. .
"'.0. _"'_
.. - ......
-
- ,"_... _.. 1_.1._.. '"
tt~....~ --___
___ CITY 0'- (MULA VI 'A ... .._ ..
CANYON VIIW HOlle.
... __ OPEN SP"CIIIAfNTDlAIICI"oe.TIIICT NO. .4
. .-n.,.., ..........
,,--
_'10-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItemK
Meeting Date 7/23/91
SUBMITTED BY:
Report on endangered listing status of the California Gnatcatcher and
current regional and sub-regional efforts to prepare a habitat conservation
:=- ofp-",K tp ~"d"
City Manager.jQ ~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X )
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
Planning Department staff have been monitoring both state and federal government consideration
of petitions to list the California Gnatcatcher as an endangered species, which would prevent any
further loss of Gnatcatcher habitat until a comprehensive Habitat Conservation Plan is adopted
by the City and adjacent jurisdictions.
Staff has also been monitoring efforts by the County of San Diego, the Clean Water Program
of the Metropolitan Sewer Service Area, the Alliance for Habitat Preservation (a coalition of
developers), and SANDAG to begin preparation of regional Coastal Sage Scrub conservation
plan. Coastal Sage Scrub is a type of habitat which supports the California Gnatcatcher and
several other threatened species. Such plans would not attempt to preserve every existing acre
of Coastal Sage Scrub, but would propose a system of natural habitat areas which form an
interconnected and viable open space system.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Authorize the City Manager to send the attached letter to the California Fish and Game
Commission requesting that they coordinate a decision on listing the California
Gnatcatcher as an endangered species with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
2. Direct staff to prepare a work program for a habitat conservation program (HCP) for
areas within the city containing sensitive biological habitat areas, including coastal sage
scrub habitat, and investigate options for cooperation between City of Chula Vista habitat
preservation efforts and larger regional habitat preservation efforts within San Diego
County.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
14 -I
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 7/23/91
DISCUSSION:
California Fish and Game Commission August 1 Hearin!! on the Listing of the California
Gnatcatcher
Over the past several months, petitions have been filed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and California Department of Fish and Game requesting listing of the California Gnatcatcher as
an endangered species. On August 1, 1991, the California Fish and Game Commission will
consider listing the California Gnatcatcher as a "Candidate Species" for endangered status, which
will mean that a "taking," or loss of habitat where gnatcatchers occur, will not be allowed. In
addition, coastal sage scrub habitat which is currently unoccupied by California Gnatcatchers,
but could reasonably provide a living environment for the bird, must also be preserved. This
could affect a number of approved and proposed projects in Chula Vista, including Rancho del
Rey SPA III, Sunbow II, Rancho San Miguel, and Otay Ranch.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is following a different schedule for consideration of the
California Gnatcatcher, and will make a final decision on listing the species as federally
endangered at a later date, as late as September of 1992.
The draft letter which is attached to this report requests the California Fish and Game
Commission to coordinate the potential listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a candidate
endangered species, so that a concurrent action on listing can be taken with the U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. State and federal regulations on endangered species differ somewhat, and a
concurrent decision will remove overlap and confusion which could be caused by the State taking
action on listing prior to the Federal Government.
Habitat Conservation Plan
If the California Gnatcatcher is to be listed as endangered by either the state or the federal
government, "taking" of the species will not be allowed until a habitat conservation plan (HCP),
subject to standards set forth in the Federal Endangered Species Act, is completed and adopted
by the relevant local agency or agencies and approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
It is probable that, even if the California Gnatcatcher is not listed as endangered, local
jurisdictions will need to commit to preparing an HCP as a condition imposed by the State and
Federal regulatory agencies in order to avoid listing.
Therefore, it is appropriate for the city to begin preparations for work on an HCP effort. Staff
would propose that the habitat conservation planning studies be considered as the first phase of
an overall Greenbelt Master Plan, which would implement the greenbelt concept shown on the
Chula Vista General Plan. If authorized, staff would return to the Council with a proposed work
program for this effort, along with a cost estimate and timetable.
14.. 2.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 7/23/91
A question remains as to whether the City should pursue a separate HCP, or consider a joint
effort with the County of San Diego, the Clean Water Program of the Metropolitan Sewage
System, SANDAG, or the Alliance for Habitat Preservation (a grouping of developers which has
proposed a regional study program and preservation plan for coastal sage scrub). A brief
discussion of these efforts follows:
1. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On June 12, 1991, the Board of Supervisors authorized the County Planning Department
to proceed with establishment of a cooperative open space and habitat management plan
with three large property ownerships in Rancho San Diego and Jamul, immediately east
of the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence/Planning Area. This plan, which will be written
to federal HCP standards, will map all sensitive habitat lands in the area, amend existing
County plans, policies, and ordinances as necessary, set mitigation policies, establish an
area habitat acquisition plan, identify long term funding mechanisms, and identify the
ongoing management framework for the preserve area. The Nature Conservancy, a
private non-profit conservation group, has tentatively agreed to act as manager of the
natural preserve area created as part of this plan. It should be noted that the area
encompassed by this plan includes currently unincorporated areas which are within the
Chula Vista Sphere of Influence/Planning Area in the vicinity of Mt. San Miguel.
In addition, the County Planning Department is preparing a proposal pursuant to Board
of Supervisors direction which would create a regional open space and habitat
management program. This program would take the elements listed above for the South
County and apply them to the entire County unincorporated area, creating a regional
hierarchy for subregional programs such as the already approved South County program
discussed above. This program will be heard by the Board of Supervisors at their
meeting of July 31, 1991.
2. SAN DIEGO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM -- METROPOLITAN SEWAGE
SYSTEM
As a component of the implementation of the Clean Water Program, the City of San
Diego is preparing a Multiple Species Conservation Program for the area of the County
served by the Metropolitan Sewage System. This effort is intended to provide a plan for
preservation of habitat to mitigate both direct impacts (construction of facilities) and
secondary impacts (growth inducing impacts) of the expansion of the Metropolitan
Sewage System. Staff for the City of San Diego is administering the program. They
have completed a work program and hired a consultant to implement this program. The
timetable for the program estimates 30 months to completion.
llie - 3>
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 7/23/91
The region studied by the Multiple Species Conservation Program includes all areas
which currently connect to the Metropolitan Sewage System, and additional unsewered
lands to the east. The work program provides for a mapping effort which will map
existing and planned land uses, ownership and public lands, and location of sensitive
species and their habitat. Sensitive habitat lands which are publicly-owned will become
the "cornerstones" for a comprehensive system of natural preserves and interconnecting
corridors which will be presented as the ultimate goal of this plan. Finally, the program
will include an implementation strategy, which will discuss alternative acquisition
techniques such as public land purchase, mitigation banking for offsite impacts, easement
dedications and exactions, and whether condemnation powers will be necessary.
It should be noted that the entire City of Chula Vista Planning Area is within the
boundaries of the Clean Water Program's Multiple Species Conservation Planning Area.
3. SANDAG COORDINATING GROUP
SANDAG has formed a coordinating group in order to discuss habitat planning efforts
within the region, and develop coordinated strategies for dealing with these issues.
SANDAG also has an ongoing regional habitat mapping program for the sensitive habitat
within the County. However, SANDAG has not proposed to serve as the preparing
agency for a habitat conservation program at this time -- the coordinating group's
function is to exchange ideas and information between different jurisdictions and their
proposed programs.
4. ALLIANCE FOR HABITAT PRESERVATION
The Alliance for Habitat Preservation is a grouping of large-scale developers in San
Diego, Orange, and Riverside Counties which has developed a proposal for dealing with
the potential listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a candidate endangered species by
the California Fish and Game Commission. The proposal involves setting up a scientific
advisory panel, which would formulate a regional framework for a multi-species habitat
conservation plan, prepare guidelines and proposed boundaries for subregional habitat
conservation plans, and oversee the development of subregional plans. The Alliance has
already prepared studies on the location of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat in San Diego
County and on the minimum habitat area necessary for individual California
Gnatcatchers. The Alliance will present its plan to the California Fish and Game
Commission at their August 1 meeting as an alternative to candidate listing of the
California Gnatcatcher. Members of the Alliance include the McMillin and Baldwin
Companies, both major landowners in Chula Vista.
14 ~~
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 7/23/91
Also, the City of Chula Vista is currently participating in two inte:rjurisdictional efforts which
include habitat preservation plan components, I) the Dtay Ranch project in conjunction with San
Diego County, and 2) the Dlay River Valley Regional Park Program with San Diego County and
San Diego City. These efforts will need to be coordinated with the work program for the city's
RCP.
Staff will further review the merits of these regional and inte:rjurisdictional programs, and bring
forward recommendations on the best course to chart among these varying programs and
possibilities.
FISCAL IMPACT: Costs of preparing the RCP work program will be minor. Costs associated
with the RCP will be discussed in the work program to be presented to the Council.
Al13bcp.gh
\~-S
Iuly 23, 1991
Everett M. McCracken, Ir.
Chairman, California Fish and Game Commission
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Mr. McCracken:
The City of Chula Vista understands that the California Fish and Game Commission will
consider the listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a candidate state endangered species at its
meeting of August 1, 1991.
The City of Chula Vista requests that the Commission defer action on the listing of the
California Gnatcatcher. The United States Department of Fish and Wildlife is also considering
a petition to list the California Gnatcatcher as a federal endangered species. In order to
eliminate jurisdictional overlap and confusion, the State and Federal governments should
consider making a concurrent decision on the California Gnatcatcher listing. The U.S.
Department of Fish and Wildlife is still reviewing information preparatory to making such a
decision.
In response to the decline in Coastal Sage Scrub which is the habitat of the California
Gnatcatcher, the City of Chula Vista has developed several conservation and planning objectives,
including designation of a continuous 26-mile greenbelt in its recently updated City General
Plan. The preservation of a viable natural habitat area, including coastal sage scrub, is an
integral part of this greenbelt plan. Other habitat preservation efforts in which the City is
participating include a resource management plan for the 22,000 acre Otay Ranch property, and
an inteIjurisdictional effort to preserve and plan for a regional park facility along an eleven mile
stretch of the Otay River. The City's intent is to prepare a comprehensive habitat conservation
plan (HCP), in conjunction with adjacent jurisdictions, which would meet the standards for such
a document if the California Gnatcatcher or other coastal sage scrub species are listed as a
federal endangered species. The City's plan will be closely linked with regional habitat
conservation efforts, most notably the South County Open Space and Habitat Management Plan
being prepared by San Diego County, and the Multiple Species Conservation Program initiated
by the Clean Water Program of the San Diego Metropolitan Sewage System.
\ 1.\ ' (.,
Everett M. McCracken, Jr.
-2-
July 23, 1991
The City would prefer that the California Gnatcatcher not be listed at this time in order to
provide for more flexibility in balancing the needs of habitat preservation with other worthy city
aims. However, our plans to adopt a habitat conservation plan in conjunction with adjacent
jurisdictions and regional programs will proceed whether or not the California Gnatcatcher is
a listed species.
Sincerely,
(Listing.gh)
14-1
,.
- JUL 16 '91 15:33 BALDWIN CO. 619 259 024200000000
P.l
I
~1
--
FOR COUNCIL INFORMATION
The Baldwin Company
Of1//$mIJ1IfJr/p III building since 1956
July 16. 1991
M~. Bob Leiter
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Pourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91910
Dea~ Bob,
On August 1. 1991, the California Fish and Game Commission will
~onsider a petition seeking endange~ed or threat.ned status for the
California Onateatehe~. We believe that there is a need for
additional study prior to taking this action. The listing will
impact existing and future governmental improvement programs as
well as private development plans. We believe additional study can
b. undertaken wi thout endangering the species whi 1 e permi t ting
ongoing efforts at a multi-species protection plan to proceed.
Please consider the following information in preparation of any
remarks you may make to the commission prior to the listing.
1) Species Viability;
The u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service oonside~ed a petition fo~
emergency listing of the Gnatcateher in early January. 1991.
Emergency action was not taken. They will b. reviewing the
listing petition in a mo~e oonsidered manner over the course
of the next year. because they did not believe the species was
in immediate danger.
2) ~ulti Species Plan:
Many local and regional effo~ts are unde~way to p~ovide for
gnatcatchers and othe~ species th~ough p~eservation of
significant a~eas of habitat. Listing of the Gnatcatohe~ will
de~ail these efforts. The listini will refoous attention on
solving the immediate problems that such action will cause;
such as the halting of water reclamation plants. water
systems. road const~uction and other public projects necessary
to the well being of cities and the County. This issue will
mandate a diversion of both. manpower and fiscal resou~ce.
f~om all other efforts. The continuing pursuit of . multi
species preservation plan promises to p~otect the Gnatcatcher
and many other animals in a mo~e comprehensive manner than a
piecemeal, fragmented effo~t.
\~..cg'
11975 El Camino Real. Suite 200. SaIl Diego. CA 92130 · (619) 259-2900
~ JUL 16 '91 15:38 BALDWIN CO. 619 259 024200000000
P.1
I
---
3) EXDert Revie~t
Reoently, the underseoretary of the California Resources
Agency, Michael Mantell, appointed a panel of Conservation
Biologists to review all available data on gnatcatchers, their
habitat, and to develop criteria for preparing sUb-regional
conservation plans. These experts pOllsess the credentials and
experience necessary to review the technical data available
and provide proper recommendations. These experts were
selected from lists prepared by the National Resource Defense
Counci I and The Nature Conservancy. This unbiased panel
should be given ample time to provide considered opinion.
Their appointment alone, indicates the state believes that
there is a need for additional evaluation and a broad, multi-
species approach to conservation of natural resources. The
panel will review the scientific" data available about
gnatcatchers, their life history needs, and the extent of
their habitat, They will also review data on habitat
conversions and proposed open space systems. This will allow
the development of criteria for estahlishing sub-regional
preservation programs. To the extent this committee offers
a review of all elements of the Gnatoatcher issue, we support
this step prior to any emeqj'encY listing. This panel of
experts should be able to thoroughly review the scientific
data at hand, or undertake any further study required, in
developing criteria that will preserve many species (not just
gnatcatchers) without the severe economic disruption
experienced in Northern California when the Spotted Owl was
listed. (In addition, our concerns as outlined herein would
also be included within the proposed solution, and could
therefore assist in providing immediate governmental support
and both private and public funding sources).
The effect of a Gnatcatcher listing upon the city and County's
economy is potentially significant. We support a
scientifically researched and cooperatively determined
solution which can be implemented over a reasonable period
without placing the candidate species at risk. With the
appropriate blue ribbon panel bein9 available, we urge you to
write to the commission to defer a decision on the endangered
or threatened status for the Gnatcatcher until the scientific
panel has had a reasonable opportunity to study the issue and
propose a ooordinated and comprehensive solution.
~el"
I red M. Arbuokle
tice President
I~.. '\
.
PRELIMINARY
July 26, 1981
MATTERS RELATED TO 1HE AIR CARRIER
AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STIJDY
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION.
NOT APPROVED
Introduction
The matters discussed in this repon include requests from the City and County of San Diego, .
the role of the SANDAG Airport Delegation, and ground access planning for Otay Mesa. This
report is divided into four sections. Each section discusses one of the issues.
.
A. REQUESTS FROM THE CITY OF SAN DffiGO
Introduction
Tbe City of San Diego is requesting SANDAG to concur in the designation of Otay Mesa as an
air carrier airport site and join the City as a co-sponsor in a grant application to the Federal
Aviation Adminl~Qtion for Otay Mesa air carrier airport master plan funds. (Refer to the
attached City of San Diego resolution.) The airport delegation has analyzed the request and
discussed with staff the site deRignllt.ion process and it is our
. RECOMMENDATION
that the Board . of Directors designate Otay Mesa as an area suitable for air carrier airport
pIannlnl! purposes, aD<Il\IPPOrl all a OO-/iIIOnRnT an application by the City of San Diogo, os Wad
agency, to the Fedetal Aviation Administration for Otay Mesa air carrier aiIport master planning
funds.
-
\1~
Discussion
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSIOt~
NOT APPROVED
H the Board approves the recommendation, the following actions would occur:
1. The City of San Diego, acting as the lead agency, intends to prepare and submit a grant
application to the Federal Aviation Administration for master planning the Otay Mesa site.
SANnAG would cOoipOlUor the gr:mt nppliootion.
2. A "Bilateral Working Group, II which includes representatives of both national
governments, plus state and 10caI officials, has been appointed to discuss the institutional
and technical issues associated with an air carrier ailport on Otay Mesa. When the
participants believe the Working Group and the master planning project have made
sufficient progress, SANDAG should review the aviation policies in the Regional
Transportation Plan. Then, if warranted, the Board can update the policies to designate
Otay as a regional air carrier site, and adopt a revised policy on the future of Lindbergh
Field and NAS Miramar.
.
B. REQUFST FROM THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Introduction
The County of San Diego is requesting SANDAG to appoint a citizen to a San Diego County
Regional Ahport Authority Exploration Conunit:tee. (Refer to the attached Board of Supervisors
. Letter.) The ahport delegation has reviewed the request and it is our
RECOMMENDAnON
th:1t tho Bolll'd of Diuet01S Uj~dcLl...lu;" llli llli lnilial element of the master plan, an analysis of' the
air carrier airport operator and authority issue as suggested by the County of San Diego.
Di~cussion
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
NOT APPROVED
-
.
The issue of air carrier aiIport operations is important and should be evaluated after some
. success has been ~hown in the bilateral discussions. The work should be done by SANDAG as
an early clement m the master plan. Its cost would be financed through a grant from the Pederal
Aviation Administntion.
At last month's q1eetin~, the BOArd directed Rtllff to IlMIlHrr.', II ~marandum reguding the
various legal optjons available for airport operations or authorities. Attachmont3 is a
memorandum prepared by SANDAG'~ General Counsel that discusses the possible options.
,
C. ROLE OF THE SANDAC'i AIRPORT nELEG.A.TION
Introductiol.!
.
At last month's meeting, the Chairman asked tor Board dll'eCl.iun regarding the role of
SANDAG's airport delegation. The delegation is comprised of the Mayor of San Diego,
SANDAO's Chairman, and the past Chairman of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors
and the San DiegoUnlfIed Pon District. Tile delegation was formed a year ago to address the
question: Is there' a strong bona fIde interest on tho part of the United States and Mcxlco in
developing an air <;artier airport on Olay Mesa? It is our
RECOMMENDATION
that the Board of Directors of tho San Diego Association of Governments authorize tho
membership of the SANDAG Ahport Delegation to participate in thC bilateral discussions
regarding the use of Olay Mesa as an air ca.rricr aitport sito and continue to advise the Board
regarding all matters related to the air carrier site selection study.
"JUL l( .~l l4.~( ~.V. H~oVL. ~~
P.:>
I
Di .
SCUSSIOn
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
NOT APPROVED
w nlVitlwing the progress made to diU.e lIJ\d the work, both near tcnn and long term, we have
oome to the following conclusions that support our recommendation:
1. The delegation's work is incomplete. At this point in time we do not know whether an
.
agreement between the two countries can be reached. Therefore, the question posed
earlier in the lntl.'oduction is yet to be answered.
.
2. The bilatera1 worldng group is the right group to answer the question and the SANDAG
delegation should participate in the discussions and report results to the SANDAG Board.
3. Since the inception of the delegation's work, members have consulted with representatives
of the two federal governments, California and Baja California offlCials, and other public
and private sector representatives. The delegation understands the technical and policy
iRRlles related to the alltxm effort. This knowledge and e....peJ.i= should be helpful to
SANDAG and we wish to continue in advising the Board on these matters.
D. OTAY MESA AIR CARRIER AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS
.
Introduction
The Delegation members have received many comments regarding the ability and willingness
. of all of the air travelers in the region to use an airport at Otay Mesa. Comments also have
been made re&arding the impacts of airport traffic on the highway system and ori local streets
and roads. SANDAG should analyze and forecast traffic impacts of an Otay Mesa airport. We
believe this effort can begin in parallel with the bilateral discussions and would not conflict with
the master plan process. Therefore, it is our
-
RBCOMMBNDAnON
that the Board authorize staff to initiate funding inquiries to the Department of TransportatiQn
and prepare a scope of work to address a comprehensive review of the ground access issue to
Otay Mesa.
MAYOR JACK DOYLE
COUNCILMEMBER RON ROBERTS
Attachments
.
SUPERVISOR LEON WlWAMS
COMMISSIONER MEL PORT\VOOD
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
NOT APPROVED