The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008/04/15 Agenda Packet I declare under penalty of perjury that I employed by the City of Chula Vista in t~: Office of the City Clerk and that I posted this ocument on the bulletin board according to I requirements. #/tt/oS . -tl Signed --e;J ~v~ ~~:: ~~~~ < OlY OF CHULA VISTA Cheryl Cox, Mayor Rudy Ramirez, Councilmember David R. Garcia, City Manager John McCann, Councilmember Ann Moore, City Attorney Jerry R. Rindone, Councilmember Donna Norris, Interim City Clerk Steve Castaneda, Councilmember This agenda contains the items from the Special Meeting of the City Council continued by minute action on April 3, 2008. April 15, 2008 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall 276 Fourth Avenue CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, Rindone, and Mayor Cox PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 through 5) The Council will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or staff requests that an item be removed for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of March 11, 2008 and the Special Meeting of March 11,2008. Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes. 2. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE III PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP FOR 18.4 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND WUESTE ROAD (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) Page 1 - Council Agenda htto:/lwww .ch ulavistaca.,?ov April 15, 2008 PRII Windstar Pointe Resort Master, LLC (Applicant/Developer) is proposing to develop an apartment project, consisting of 494 units, on an l8.4-acre buildable portion of a 30.5- acre site (Windstar Pointe Resort Project). The remaining 12.1 acres are dedicated open space. The project consists of amending Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area Plan to remove the existing "Active Seniors" designation for 18.4 acres and replacing it with a new designation that allows for the development of a market-rate multi-family residential project. This ordinance was introduced on April 8, 2008. (Planning and Building Director) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance. 3. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE "SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM-PHASE 1, FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006 AND FISCAL YEAR 2006/2007 AND FISCAL YEAR 2007/2008 VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (SW-240A)" PROJECT, AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF AVAILABLE SEWER FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUNDS INTO THE PROJECT FROM THE EXISTING 2006/2007 AND 2007/2008 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) On March 5, 2008, the Engineering and General Services Director received 7 sealed bids for the project. The project will replace existing broken sewer mains and laterals, repair cracked sewer lines, and replace asphalt concrete pavement in various locations throughout the City. (Engineering and General Services Director) Council adopt the resolution. 4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA IMPLEMENTING THE SAFELY SURRENDERED BABY PROGRAM AND DESIGNATING CHULA VISTA FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE SURRENDER SITES In 2001, SB1386 became law and established the Safely Surrender Baby program. The purpose of the law is to encourage parents to bring unwanted infants, up to 72 hours old, to reception centers such as hospitals or fire stations, rather than abandon them in dumpsters or bushes. No names are required and the parent(s) will not be subject to prosecution for child abandonment. The Fire Department is requesting that Council adopt the resolution that designates the City's nine fire stations as safe baby havens. (Interim Fire Chief) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $45,000 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE TRANSIT FUND FOR UPGRADING THE SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM AT THE JOHN LIPPITT PUBLIC WORKS CENTER AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007/2008 TRANSIT CAPITAL BUDGET (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Page 2 - Council Agenda httn:llwww.chulavistaca. gOY April 3, 2008 The current security camera system, which dates to 2002, at the Public Works Center needs to be enhanced and upgraded to increase security. The existing system does not use low light level cameras and fails to focus on critical areas of the Public Works Center, such as the Natural Gas Fueling Station, Hydrogen Electrolizer, and Fuel Dispensers. (Public Works Director) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Council on any subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on any iSsue not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to three minutes. ACTION ITEMS The Item(s) listed in this section of the agenda will be considered individually by the Council, and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. If you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 6. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CHARGING FULL COST RECOVERY FEES FOR ANY NON-CITY-SPONSORED EVENTS REQUIRING POLICE SERVICES OR OTHER CITY STAFF AS PART OF THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT A request has been made to replace the City's policy of charging full cost recovery for police services with a reduced rate for those services at two upcoming non-city-sponsored events. Full cost recovery includes all expenses associated with hiring officers for an event (hourly rate, gas, uniform, vehicle and other city overhead). Due to severe budget constraints, staff does not recommend approving a reduced rate for either event. (Communications Director/Police Chief) Staff recommendation: Council accept the report. 7. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A LAND OFFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND OT A Y LAND COMPANY FOR CONVEYANCE OF 210 ACRES TO THE CITY FOR UNIVERSITY/REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION PURPOSES One of the key goals of the Chula Vista General Plan is the development of a university/regional technology park. Successful implementation of the land offer agreement would further this goal through the receipt by the City of 210 acres of developable/mitigation land as well as two million dollars for university recruitment/planning. (Planning and Building Director) Page 3 - Council Agenda htto:! /www.chulavistaca. 2:0V April 15, 2008 Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A LAND OFFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND OTA Y LAND COMPANY FOR CONVEYANCE OF 210 ACRES TO THE CITY FOR UNIVERSITY/REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION PURPOSES, ACKNOWLEDGING THE OFFERS OF DEDICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF ONE MILLION DOLLARS FOR UNIVERSITY RECRUITMENT AND PLANNING PURPOSES BUDGET WORKSHOP If you wish to speak on any of the items listed below, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 8. Report on the City Manager's Proposed Budget Reductions. (City Manager) 9. Consideration of Elimination of Scheduled COLA Salary Increases for Management and Hourly Employees. Executive, Senior, and Middle managers are scheduled to receive a 4% salary increase in January 2009. Unclassified hourly employees are scheduled to receive a 4% salary increase in July 2008, which was delayed from January 2008, and a 4% salary increase in January 2009. Due to the financial constraints the City is experiencing, it is recommended that these scheduled salary adjustments for all management and unclassified hourly employees be eliminated. (City Manager) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ELIMINATION OF THE SCHEDULED FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 COST OF LIVING SALARY INCREASES FOR MANAGEMENT AND UNCLASSIFIED HOURLY EMPLOYEES, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO REINSTATE ALL OR PART OF THE PAY RAISES DEPENDENT UPON THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING 10. Continuation of Fiscal Year 2008/2009 Mayor and Council Budget from the March 6, 2008 workshop and the April 3, 2008 special meeting. OTHER BUSINESS 11. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS 12. MAYOR'S REPORTS Page 4 - Council Agenda httD:/ /www.chulavistaca. 20V April 15, 2008 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Castaneda CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION TO ADJUST THE FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 MAYOR'S BUDGET This proposal would adjust the Mayor's budget to two times that of one Council Office budget. This item was continued from the special meeting of April 3, 2008 and from the regular meeting of April 8, 2008. Councilmember recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO ADJUST THE FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 MAYOR'S BUDGET CLOSED SESSION Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney's office in accordance with the Ralph M Brown Act (Government Code 54957.7). 14. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(b) Two cases IS. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) Doss, Angela v. City ofChula Vist<!, San Diego Superior Court, Case No. GIS28616 Deanna Morv, et aI. v. City of Chula Vista, et aI., United States District Court, Case No. 06 CV 1460 JAH(BLM) Deanna Morv, et a!. v. City of Chula Vista, et a!., United States District Court, Case No. 07-CV-0462 JLS (BLM) ADJOURNMENT to the Regular Meeting of April 22, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. In compliance with the AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista requests individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity or service, request such accommodation at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the City Clerk for specific information at (619) 691-5041 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) at (619) 585-5655. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired. Page 5 - Council Agenda httD:/ Iwww.chulavistaca. frOY April 15, 2008 DRAFT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA March 11,2008 6:00 P.M. A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chu1a Vista was called to order at 6:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: McCann, Ramirez, and Mayor Cox ABSENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda (excused), Rindone (excused) ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Garcia, City Attorney Ann Moore, Interim City Clerk Norris, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY . OATHS OF OFFICE Albert Sides to the Board of Appeals and Advisors Interim City Clerk Norris administered the oath of office to Mr. Sides, and Councilmember McCann presented him with a certificate of appointment. . PRESENTATION BY CONSERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIRECTOR MEACHAM ON THE STATUS OF THE BAYFRONT ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE Assistant City Manager Tulloch and Director of Environmental Services Meacham presented a brief update on the Bayfront Energy Infrastructure, namely the removal of lattice towers north of J Street, relocation of the Bayfront Substation, and removal of the South Bay Power Plant. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items I through 4) Items 3 and 4 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion by a member of the public and by Councilmember Ramirez respectively. 1. APPROV AL OF MINUTES of February 19,2008. . Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes. Page I - Council Minutes March 11, 2008 /1} -/ DRAFT CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) 2. ORDINANCE NO. 2008-3105, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.25 - "RECYCLING", TO IMPLEMENT A CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING PROGRAM (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) This ordinance is one component of the City of Chula Vista's Assembly Bill 939 Integrated Waste Management Plan to divert material from the landfill - converting waste to a resource. Adoption of the ordinance addresses the declining waste diversion by creating a program to recycle construction and demolition materials. This ordinance was introduced on March 4, 2008. (Public Works Director) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance. 3. Item 3 was removed from the Consent Calendar. 4. Item 4 was removed from the Consent Calendar. ACTION: Mayor Cox moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered the balance of the Consent Calendar, headings read, text waived. Councilmember Ramirez seconded the motion and it carried 3-0, with Deputy Mayor Rindone and Councilmember Castaneda absent. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 3. A. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA EXCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, BP-5, 1-805, RAS-17, BP-4, BP-2, AND OR-4 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, BP-5 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) C. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-805-2, RAS-17, BP-4 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) Page 2 - Council Minutes March 11, 2008 /4-;;Z DRAFT ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) D. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA INCLUDING PROJECT BP-2 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) E. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA INCLUDING PROJECT OR-4 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) Adoption of the ordinances establishes a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee program for Western Chula Vista to provide for future transportation facilities needs and adequately mitigate impacts created by new development. These ordinances were introduced on March 4, 2008. (Engineering and General Services Director) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinances. Harold West spoke in opposition to the proposed Transport Development Impact Fee, stating it would negatively affect homeowners' ability to improve their homes. He suggested lower taxes and permit costs in old town, collecting taxes upon sale or after completion, and the possibility of a bond. He stated that the City needed to work harder to seek ways to encourage homeowners and business owners to improve their properties, not discourage them with increasing taxes and fees. Peter Watry, representing Crossroads II, spoke in support of the proposed ordinances, stating that the two principles they embody, simultaneous development of the private and public sector; and, when growth causes a needed increase in infrastructure, growth pays for the infrastructure, were as important for the west as for the east. Director of Engineering and General Services Griffin responded to questions and concerns of the speakers. Councilmember McCann stated he could not support the item. He felt that the proposed fee increase would be a deterrent for business activity. It was the consensus of the Council to continue Item 3 to the Council Meeting of March 18, 2008. No action was taken. Page 3 - Council Minutes March 11, 2008 /,4-3 DRAFT ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued) 4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER I, 2007 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2008 FOR PROJECTS OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THAT UTILIZE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION FUNDS All local agencies receiving federally assisted funds from the Federal Highway Administration are required to submit a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program. The DBE Program is designed to allow contractors/consultants owned and controlled by minorities, women and other socially and economically disadvantaged persons to have the opportunity to bid and work on projects funded by the Federal Highway Administration. (Engineering and General Services Director) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Councilmember Ramirez requested a report from staff in a year regarding the City's participation in accomplishing the goals of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program. ACTION: Councilmember Ramirez moved to approve staff recommendation and offered Resolution No. 2008-067, heading read, text waived. Councilmember McCann seconded the motion and it carried 3-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS Sandra Hodge, representing Alternative Education Robotics Program, recognized local student winners of the 2008 "All Star Robotics" competition, and the 2008 "For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology" award to Eastlake High School. Manuel, a local student representing the Eastlake High School robotics team, announced that Eastlake High School was the winner of this year's "Rookie Inspiration" award, and that the team would be competing next in a national robotics event this year. Star Garcia, a local student, thanked the Mayor and Councilmembers for their support in the team's endeavor to win the "All Star Rookie" award in the regional competition, and announced that the team would be competing next in a national competition in Atlanta. Adrian Alonso, Eastlake High School student thanked the Mayor for recognizing and supporting the students. Tommy Stenvall, representing Amswede Recycling, stated that small businesses and trash companies were being charged more for waste disposal than Allied Waste, and he felt that this was a conflict of interest, since Allied is the dump operator. He suggested that the City look at including private business enterprises such as Amswede to keep recycling separate from the trash industry; otherwise, the conflict of interest would make it almost impossible to have a successful recycling program. Page 4 - Council Minutes March 11, 2008 I/J - Il DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM, EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM (ESG), AND THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM As a Housing and Urban Development entitlement community, the City receives grant funds under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) and the Home Investment Partnership Act (HOME) programs. The funds are distributed among local non-profits, housing developers and City departments in order to provide decent housing, economic opportunities and suitable living environments for low-moderate income persons. Prior to distribution of the grant funds, the City must conduct a minimum of two public hearings to solicit public input on the community development and housing needs to establish funding priorities for the program year. This item was continued from the meeting of March 4, 2008. (Redevelopment and Housing Assistant Director) City Manager Garcia introduced the item and staff presented the Federal Grant Programs for 2008/2009. Mayor Cox opened the public hearing. The following members of the public submitted request to speak cards in support of the item, but did not wish to speak: . Janai Quintana, Lakeside resident, representing South Bay Adult Day Health Care Joe Zilvinskis, Chula Vista resident, representing Interfaith Shelter Network Margarita Hokovin, Bonita resident, representing Chula Vista Community Collaborative Jennette Lawrence, San Diego resident, representing Family Health Centers of San Diego Kathryn Lembo, San Diego resident, representing South Bay Community Services Lisa Kramer, representing Community Access/Cheneweth Foundation Donald Lynn, Chula Vista resident, representing Thursday's Meal Since there were no members of the public who wished to speak, Mayor Cox closed the public hearing. Council accepted the report and no formal action was taken. At 7:14 p.m., Mayor Cox recessed the City Council Meeting to convene the Sl?ecial Meeting of the City Council. The Council Meeting reconvened at 7:16 p.m. WIth Mayor Cox, Councilmember McCann and Councilmember Ramirez present. OTHER BUSINESS 6. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS There were none. Page 5 - Council Minutes March 11, 2008 /11- 5" DRAFT OTHER BUSINESS (Continued) 7. MAYOR'S REPORTS Mayor Cox extended an invitation to the community for the Mayor's State of the City address on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. She urged attendees to park in the parking structure behind Marie Callendars. Mayor Cox also recognized Boy Scout Troop 804, which was present at the meeting to eam their merit badge for Citizenship in the Community. Mayor Cox stated that a community meeting was scheduled for Saturday, March 15,2008, from 11 :00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., at the Otay Recreation Center, with opportunities for those residents who reside south ofL Street and west ofI-805 to offer input on their vision for the community. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS Counci1member Ramirez spoke with respect to the recent budget reductions that had resulted in the elimination of printing and distribution of recreation brochures, and replaced with online posting of the recreation programs. He suggested that a small number of brochures be printed and placed at the public library and recreation centers to accommodate residents who would not have access to a computer. Councilmember McCann thanked the community members who attended a recent community meeting at Arroyo Vista Elementary School to address assaults in the area. He also thanked Police Officers Captain Wedge, Sergeant Sallee, and Detective Picone, who provided information and safety tips to residents. He also recognized City Manager Garcia for his participation at the meeting. CLOSED SESSION Closed Session was cancelled and the following item was not discussed: 9. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 Title: City Attorney ADJOURNMENT At 7:22 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of March 18, 2008 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. ~ -=: Lorraine Bennett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk Page 6 - Council Minutes March 11, 2008 //1- & DRAFT MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA March 11,2008 7:00 P.M. A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City ofChula Vista was called to order at 7:14 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: McCann, Ramirez, and Mayor Cox ABSENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda (excused), Rindone (excused) ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Garcia, City Attorney Moore, Interim City Clerk Norris, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett ACTION ITEM 1. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUBMIT TO THE CITY CLERK AN ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION E, THE MEASURE REGARDING ALLOW ABLE BUILDING HEIGHTS, TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SAMPLE BALLOT FOR THE JUNE 3, 2008 ELECTION The Council previously approved placement of an initiative measure on the June 3, 2008 ballot. California Elections Code section 9282(a) allows the legislative body to submit an argument against an ordinance placed on the ballot by petition. ACTION: Mayor Cox moved that the City Council authorize the Mayor to write the argument opposing Proposition E, the Height Initiative, and rebuttal, if any, and submit it to the City Clerk on behalf of the City Council. Councilmember Ramirez seconded the motion and it carried 3-0. ADJOURNMENT At 7:16 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to the next Regular Meeting of March 18, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ~ -- Lorraine Bennett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk Page 1 - Council Minutes March 11,2008 /6-/ ORDINANCE NO. O\\O~ f>S)O~ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF C2A ~~PROVING AMEND:MENTS TO THE E ill PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT ~ ONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP FOR 18.4 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND WUESTE ROAD I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS the area of land, which is the subject of this Ordinance is diagrammatically represented in "Exhibit A" attached to and incorporated into this Ordinance, and commonly known as Windstar Pointe Resort, and for the general purpose of general description herein consists of18.4 acres located at the southwest comer of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road intersection within the EastLake III Planned Community ("Project Site"); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department on May 16, 2007, by PIT Windstar Pointe Resort Master LLC, requesting approval of amendments to the EastLake ill Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map; and, WHEREAS, the Residential Multi-Family 1 ("RM-l") land use district is being created as a "Project Specific Land Use District" to allow specific types ofland uses only in conjunction with the construction of the approximate 494 rental units; and C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various entitlements and agreements, including: (1) a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Affordable Housing Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 2002-220 on July 17, 2001, and amended on June 20, 2006, for the EastLake III Seniors Project; and., (2) Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2839 on July 24, 2001, and amended by City Council Ordinance No. 2963 on May 18,2004, and further amended on June 20, 2006, for the EastLake III Seniors Project; and H:\AUOmey'lFinal RI!lSQsl2008\04 08 08\Wlnd$llll' PoinIe R.=ort {clean eeL04-oa..08.00c2_1 Ordinance No. Page 2 D. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on February 13,2008, and voted 6-1-0-0 to forward a recommendation to the City Council on the Project; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning COmmission at the public hearing on this project held on February 13,2008, and the minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and E. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notices of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and, WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council of the City ofChula Vista on April 8, 2008, in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, City ofChula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at 6:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same; F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance WHEREAS, at the same City Council hearing at which this Ordinance was introduced for frrst reading on April 8, 2008, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved Resolution , by which it approved amendments to the EastLake III Sectional Planning Area Plan, Design Guidelines, the Public Facilities Financing Plan, the Air Quality Improvement Plan and the Water Conservation Plan; G. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Quality Act ("CEQA") and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent documents have occurred; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an Addendum to this document, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02 . H:\Attomey\Final RaQS\2008\04 08 08\Windstar Pomtc ResQrt (ch:an ecl_04-0S-Q8.d.oc. 2-2 Ordinance No. Page 3 NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine and ordain as follows: A. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN The City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the EastLake ill Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The residential nature of the proposed use would be consistent with the adopted high-density residential designation for this project site and compatible with the surrounding residential and open space land uses of the EastLake area. B. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS The City Council approves the amendments to the EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map as represented in Exhibit B. III. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by James D. Sandoval Director of Planning and Building ~ H:\At~;na1 R~oa08\WindstarPointeRcsort(;h:lllllccLO<l-Q&..OS.doQ-3 Mountain Hawk Pork '" ~ ar ::0 Q. PROJECT lOCATION OlYmoic Trainina Center EXHIBIT A 2-4 \. LOWER OrAY LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~v~ CllY OF '~CHUlA VISTA " 4/15/08, Item :7 SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE "SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM- PHASE 1, FY 05/06 & FY 06/07 & FY 07/08 VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (SW-240A)" PROJECT; AUTHORIZINO THli: TRANSFER OF AVAILABLE SEWER FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUNDS FROM THE EXISTING 2006/07 & 2007/08 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM INTO THE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT DIRECTOR OF ENG E RING AND GENERAL SERVICE~o- CITY MANAGER ASSIST ANT CITY MA A ER S 7 4/5THS VOTE: YES [3J NO 0 ITEM TITLE: SUMMARY On March 5, 2008, the Director of Engineering and General Services received seven (7) sealed bids for the "Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase 1, FY 05/06 to FY 07/08 various locations in the City of Chula Vista (SW-240A)" project. The project will replace existing broken sewer mains and laterals, repair cracked sewer lines, and replace asphalt concrete pavement in various locations throughout the City of Chula Vista. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. RECOMMENDATION Council adopt resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. 3-1 4/15/08, Iteml Page 2 of 4 DISCUSSION Based on the results of compiled data inspections, including those performed with a closed circuit television camera, the rehabilitation of existing sewer lines was recommended. A number of access areas identified by the Public Works Department require replacement. Certain sections of pipe are cracked and need to be replaced, repaired or relined to prevent groundwater infiltration or leaching ofraw sewage into the ground. The general scope of the project involves the replacement of existing broken sewer mains and laterals, the installation of pipe lining to repair cracked sewer lines, the replacement of sewer access holes, trenching, and asphalt concrete pavement. The project will include all labor, material, equipment, tools, transportation, mobilization, control of sewage flows, installation of root barrier, traffic control, removal and disposal of existing improvements, protection and restoration of existing improvements, and other miscellaneous work necessary for the proj ect. The locations and types of work to be done are detailed in Tables A through C (Attachment 1). On February 15, 2008, Engineering and General Services staff advertised the "Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase 1 FY 05/06 to FY 07/08 various locations in the City of Chula Vista (SW-240A)" project. The apparent low bidders were contingent upon a base bid and three additional alternate bids (Alternate lA - Location at Lost Creek Road, Alternate 2A - Location at Telegraph Canyon Road, and Alternate IB - Use of Top Hat Lateral) (Attachment 2). Alternate IB utilizes top hat laterals which permanently seal the lateral connection to keep roots out. It also stops infiltration of ground water, which can cause overloading of treatment plants and ex-filtration of sewer water into the ground. This system is a specialty liner designed to seal connections on lined pipe less than 24 inches in diameter. It is a fiberglass laminate fully impregnated with an ultra violet curing resin which is installed using equipment that inflates and pushes the liner into the connection, leaving a 2- to 3-inch brim in the main pipe. Installed from inside the main pipeline after lateral reopening, it provides a watertight seal at the connection. The actual line has a shape simular to a top hat, hence the industry terminology "top hat". However, due to the current market for the use of lateral top hats, staff determined to reserve the use of lateral top hats as a means of sewer rehabilitation for a later time or when the manufacturing of the lateral top hats provide more positive benefits. Tonight's action will award the contract contingent upon the submitted base bid and two alternate bids (Alternate lA and Alternate 2A) totaling $457,325. ALTIB CONTRACTOR BASE BID (not ALT 1A ALT2A TOTAL recommen:~d at this time KTA Construction, Inc. - EI Cajon, CA $385,258.00 $340,600.00 $15,467.00 $56,600.00 $457,325.00 Burtech Pipeline, Inc. - Encinitas, CA $470,327.50 $570.500.00 $14,185.00 $88,600.00 $573,112.50 Erreca's, Inc. - Lakeside, CA $551,928.50 $256,100.00 $20,998.00 $82,242.00 $655,168.50 3-2 4/15/08, Item~ Page 3 of 4 ALT1E CONTRACTOR BASE BID (not ALT lA ALT2A TOTAL recommended at this time) $52,260.00 MJC Construction - Chula Vista, CA $679,837.50 (mathmaticaJ $17,790.00 $52,500.00 $750,307.50 error) Bonita Pipeline, Inc. - National City, CA $682,615.95 $471,564.60 $28,858.82 $44,092.76 $755,567.53 Weir Construction Corp. - Escondida, $867,479.60 $474,164.60 $28,860.82 $44,092.76 $755,608,71 CA The low bid by KTA Construction, Inc, of $457,325 is $142,675 (40%) below the Engineer's estimate of $758,369. The Engineer's estimate was based on average prices for similar types of work completed during the last two years. Staff verified the references provided by the contractor; their work record has been satisfactory. After reviewing the low bid, staff recommends awarding a $457,325 contract to KTA Construction, Inc. ofEl Cajon, California. The locations of the proposed work are located throughout the City. Eighty-five percent (85%) of the repairs are located within the west side of Chula Vista and the remaining fifteen (15%) percent are located in the east side ofI-805 Freeway (Attachment 3). Approval of this resolution will authorize an inter-project transfer and authorize City staff to expend all available funds and increase the value of the contract as necessary due to unforeseen circumstances. Unforeseen circumstances may cause an increase in quantities beyond what was anticipated during the preparation of the project specifications. Due to the age of the City streets in the western part of the City, "unforeseen circumstances" may occur during the removal of the existing sewer mains and excavation occurring within the street. Field conditions could also differ from the proposed improvement plans and specifications. As a result, additional material may be required to rehabilitate the proj ect site, which could lead to possible "Change Orders" to the contract. This is a typical situation with all sewer rehabilitation projects built in this area. According to City Council Policy No. 574-01, if a change order exceeds the cumulative contract change order aggregate amount allowable to be approved by the Director of Public Works Operations, City Council approval is required. Under said City Council Policy the amount would be $51,300. However, approval of tonight's resolution will increase the Director of Public Works Operations' authority to approve change orders as necessary up to the contingency amount of $91,465. If this money is not used during construction, the unexpended funds will be redistributed back to the appropriate original funding source. DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action 3-3 4/15/08, Item 3 Page 4 of 4 FISCAL IMPACT Wage Statement The contractors who bid on this project were not required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed by them for the work performed under this project. No special minority or women- owned business requirements were necessary as part of the bid. However, a "Notice to Contractors" was sent to various trade publications in order to encourage disadvantaged businesses to bid on the project. Disclosure Statement Attached is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement (Attachment 4). Funding Sufficient Sewer Facility Replacement funds were previously appropriated as part of the FY 2005/06, FY 2006/07 and FY 2007/08 Capitallmprovement Program (CIP) budgets for sewer rehabilitation projects. It is proposed that these funds be combined and transferred into the "Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase I FY 05/06 to FY 07/08 various locations in the City of Chula Vista (SW-240A)" project to perform the required work. FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION A. Contract Amount B. Contingencies (approximately 20%) C. Staff Costs: Design Staff (12%) Construction Inspection (18%) $457,325 $91,465 TOTAL $54,879 $83,321 $ 686,990 FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION Inter-Project Transfers to SW240A: A. Sewer Facility Replacement funds FY 2005/2006 (SW239) B. Sewer Facility Replacement funds FY 2007/2008 (SW250) Available Balance: C. Sewer Facility Re lacement funds FY 2006/2007 (SW240) $70,276 $593,002 TOTAL $23,712 $ 686,990 Upon completion of the project, the improvements will reqUlre only routine City sewer maintenance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Table A through Table C of work to be done 2. Bid Summary Sheet, Alternative lA, Alternative 2A, and Alternative lB 3. Plats of work locations to be done 4. Disclosure Statement from KT A Construction, Inc. Prepared by: Roberto Yano, Engineering and General Services M:\General Services\GS Administration\Council Agenda\SW240\SW240A Phase 1 \sW240A A 113 Sewer Rehab Program FY 05-08 rev4.ml.doc 3-4 w I U1 TABLE A (SEWER REHABILIATION PROGRAM, FY '05/'06, FY '06/'07, FY '07/'08 SW-240) SEWER SEGMENTS TO BE REPLACED/LATERAL CONNECTIONS TO BE REPAIRED, PROTRUDING LATERALS TO BE CUT AND JOINTS LATERALS TO BE WRAPPED WITH ROOT BARRIER P T T LATERAL WYE- NUMBER LATERAL WYE- P L SIZE FOOTAGE 0 A CONNECTIONS OF CONNECTIONS I A LOCATION OF TO BE FROM M DEPT P TOBE SECTIONS TO BE RE- DESCRIPTIONS P T PIP REPLACED M,H. # ,H H(ft) E WRAPPED TOBE OPENED AFTER E S E (It) W/ROOT REPAIRED RE-LINING # # BARRIER Spot Repair 185' @: 28' - 78'; 95'- 3 105', 110' - 132', 140'-164', 170'- 701 8" 6 I 215',224' - 228', 396'- 400', 455'- I I SECOND VCP 185' 3859 6 7 8 IS 10 37 465',497' - 503', 525' - 531'; 15 A VENUE 2 Lateral Repairs; 37-Lateral Re- O open; 265'-Root Barrier; 605'.Re- linin!? I Spot Repair 72' @: 3'-18', 54'.60', 199 I 65'.72', 85'-91', 109'-124', 136'- 2 2 SECOND 8" 72' 1691 8 7 9 6 9 8 142', 159'-165', 188'-194', 212'- VCP 2 218'; 257' LEFT TO SURVEY, 6- AVE 3 9 Lateral Repairs; 8-Lateral Re-open; llO'.Root Barrier; 325'-Re-line 4 Spot Repair 82' @: 7'-45'; 650 EAST 8" 0 I 77'-83', 112'-118', lJ3' -139', 3 3 MANOR VCP 82' 3969 3 8 8 9 7 10 195'-201',276'-286',296'-306'; 9- DRIVE I Lateral Repairs; to-Lateral Re-open; 2 127'.Root Barrier; 315'-Re-lining 940 5 I Spot Repair 42' @:38'-44'; 8" 5 81'-87; 111'-120'; 146'-152',218'- 4 4 GUATAY 42' 5578 6 9 3 6 II 227",282'-288'; 3-Lateral Repairs; AVE VCP 8 3 II-Lateral Re-open; 58' Root 2 Barrier; 356' -Re-lining )> ~ o .I s:: m z -l 1- W I a> TABLE A (SEWER REHABILIATION PROGRAM, FY '05/'06, FY '06/'07, FY '07/'08 SW-240) SEWER SEGMENTS TO BE REPLACED/LATERAL CONNECTIONS TO BE REPAIRED, PROTRUDING LATERALS TO BE CUT AND JOINTS LATERALS TO BE WRAPPED WITH ROOT BARRIER P T T LATERAL WYE- NUMBER LATERAL WYE- P L SIZE FOOTAGE 0 A CONNECTIONS OF CONNECTIONS I A LOCATION OF TO BE FROM M DEPT P TO BE SECTIONS TO BE RE- DESCRIPTIONS P T PIP REPLACED M,H, # ,H H (ft) E WRAPPED TO BE OPENED AFTER E S E (ft) W/ROOT REPAIRED RE-LINING # # BARRIER SpotRepair-150'@:4'-22', 97'-106', 110'-131', 162'-172', 175'-181 " S 203'-209', 218'-224', 231'-237', 310 8" 4 D 243'-249', 265'-271', 218'-287', 5 5 ROOSEVEL PVC 150' 5496 9 6 V 14 17 28 298'-310' 343'-350', 360'-366', TST S 386'-392', 403'-412', 429'-440'; 7 14-Lateral repair; 28-Lateral re- open, 220' -Root Barrier; 440' -Re- lining 6 SpotRepair-76'@:46'-52', 100'- 15\ EAST 8" 1 D 109', 151'-175', 217'-226', 249'- 6 6 ORLANDO VCP 76' 6133 3 8 V 9 6 10 265', 280'-292'; 9-Lateral repair; ST S IO-Lateral fe-open, 12t'-Root 7 Barrier; 330' -Re-lining Spot Repair 66'@:20'-26',68'-74', 9 D 88'-94',97'-103', 119'-125', 198'- 7 7 46 MINOT 8" 66' 934 3 8 V 12 9 0 207',-211'-217', 228'-234', 285'- AVE VCP 300'; 12'-Lateral repair; Q'-Lateral 5 S fe-open, 126'.Root Barrier; D'.Re- lining 5 2 505 "F" 8" 3 Spot Repair 20' @: 0' - 20'; 8 8 STREET VCP 20' 5328 2 9 2 0 1 0 0' -Lateral repair; 0' -Lateral fe-open 3 20' -Root Barrier; 0' -Re-Iining 9 lJ,) I -.j TABLE A (SEWER REHABILIATION PROGRAM, FY '05/'06, FY '06/'07, FY '07/'08 SW-240) SEWER SEGMENTS TO BE REPLACEDILATERAL CONNECTIONS TO BE REPAIRED, PROTRUDING LATERALS TO BE CUT AND JOINTS LATERALS TO BE WRAPPED WITH ROOT BARRIER P T T LATERAL WYE - NUMBER LATERAL WYE - P L SIZE FOOTAGE 0 A CONNECTIONS OF CONNECTIONS I A LOCATION OF TOBE FROM M DEPT P TO BE SECTIONS TO BE RE- DESCRIPTIONS P T PIP REPLACED M.H. # .H H(ft) E WRAPPED TOBE OPENED AFTER E 5 E (ft) W/ROOT REPAIRED RE-LINING # # BARRIER 6 1 Spot Repairs 36' @: 66'-72'; 16320CALA 8" 9 79'-85'; 132'-138'; 149'-155'; 9 9 A VENUE VCP 36' 6892 I 8 6 6 6 7 212'-218'; 280'~286'; 6-Lateral 6 Repairs; 66'-Root Barrier; 7-Lateral 0 Re-open; 308' -Re-lining 6 I Spot Repairs 42'@:43'-49', 86'- 1648 OCALA 8" 9 92',109'-1\5',156'-162',179'- 10 9 AVENUE VCP 42' 6910 0 8 6 7 7 7 185',273'-243',316'-322'; 6 7-Lateral Repairs; 42'.Root Barrier; 9 7-Lateral Re-open; 348'-Re-lining 3 Spot Repairs 158'@: 50'.77',84'. 574 D 90',105'-114',122'-162',168'- 11 10 GARRETT 8" 158' 331 2 8 V 4 10 7 208',222'-238',248'-254',288'- VCP 2 294', 298'-310';4-Lateral Repairs; AVE 7 S 178' -Root Barrier; 7-Lateral Re- open; 322' -Re-lining 1293 6 D Spot Repairs 114'@4'.34',46'. 8" 1 82',85'-109',120'-126',192'-198', 12 II JOSSELYN VCP 114' 6140 4 6 V 8 7 10 211'-217',269' -281'; 8-Laler AVE S Repairs, 154'-Root Barrier, 10- I Lateral Reopen, 310' Re-lining 1246 6 D Spot Repair 90' @ 6'-12',57'-63', 13 JOSSELYN 8" 90' 6141 I 6 V 5 6 6 105'-1\5',123'-133',140'-176', 11 VCP 4 194'-216'; 5-Lateral Repairs, 115' AVE 8 S Root Barrier, 218' Relining w I 00 TABLE A (SEWER REHABILIA nON PROGRAM, FY '05/'06, FY '06/'07, FY '07/'08 SW-240) SEWER SEGMENTS TO BE REPLACED/LATERAL CONNECTIONS TO BE REPAIRED, PROTRUDING LATERALS TO BE CUT AND JOINTS LATERALS TO BE WRAPPED WITH ROOT BARRIER P T T LATERAL WYE- NUMBER LATERAL WYE- P L SIZE FOOTAGE 0 A CONNECTIONS OF CONNECTIONS I A LOCATION OF TO BE FROM M DEPT P TO BE SECTIONS TO BE RE- DESCRIPTIONS P T PIP REPLACED M.H. # .H H(It) E WRAPPED TO BE OPENED AFTER E S E (It) W/ROOT REPAIRED RE-L1NING # # BARRIER APPROX. TOTAL FOOTAGE REPAIR (8") 1,133 ft TOTAL LATERAL TO BE REPAIRED 100 APPROX. TOTAL 3,876 ft TOTAL LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED 141 RE-LINE w I CD TABLE B (SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM, FY '05/'06, FY '06/'07, FY '07'/08, SW-240) SEWER PIPES TO BE LINED / LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED P T P L FOOTAGE TO A 2002 I A LOCATION SIZE OF BE LINED FROM TO DEPTH P THOMAS LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED P T PIPE (It) M.H. # M.H.# (It) E BROS. E PAGE S # I I 749 SECOND 8"VCP 605 3859 3660 7 182 1330, C-I 37 AVENUE 2 2 221 SECOND 8"VCP 325 1823 1691 7 199 1310, B-5 8 AVENUE 650 EAST 3 3 MANOR 8"VCP 315 3969 4032 10 199 1330, A-I 10 DRIVE 4 4 940 GUATAY 8"VCP 356 5578 55827 6.5 193 1330, E-I II A VENUE 310 5 5 ROOSEVELT 8"VCP 440 5496 5497 6 DVS 1310, B-7 28 STREET 152 EAST 6 6 ORLANDO 8"VCP 330 6133 6137 6.5 193 1330, F-3 10 STREET (.0) I ..... o TABLE B (SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM, FY '05/'06, FY '06/'07, FY '07'/08, SW-240) SEWER PIPES TO BE LINED / LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED P T P L FOOTAGE TO A 2002 I A LOCATION SIZE OF BE LINED FROM TO DEPTH P THOMAS LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED P T PIPE (ft) M.H. # M.H.# (ft) E BROS. E PAGE S # 9 9 16480CALA 8"VCP 348 6910 6909 8 166 130, H-5 7 A VENUE 9 10 16320CALA 8"VCP 308 6892 6910 8 166 1330, H-5 7 A VENUE 10 11 574 GARRETI 8"VCP 322 3311 3227 7 DVS 1310, B-7 7 A VENUE 1293 11 12 JOSSELYN 8"VCP 310 6140 6141 5 DVS 1310, F-3 10 A VENUE 1246 11 13 JOSSELYN 8"VCP 218 6141 6148 5 DVS 1310, F-3 6 AVENUE APPROXIMATE TOTAL 3,876 FT FOOTAGE 8-INCH TOTAL LATERAL TO BE RE-OPENED 141 c,) I ~ ~ TABLE C (SEWER REHAB. PHASE I, SW-240) IF FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE, ADDITIONAL SPOT REPAIRS I SEWER PIPES TO BE LINED I LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED P T P L FOOTAGE TO A THOMAS I A LOCATION SIZE OF BE LINED FROM TO DEPTH P BROS. LATERALS TO BE RE-OPENED; P T PIPE (It) M.H. # M.H.# (It) E PAGE SPOT REPAIR E S # 1 9' Spot Repair@:, 35' .44'; 14A lA LOST CREEK 8" 140 12325 12326 12 DVS 1310, B-6 8" SEWER GOES DOWN AN ROAD EMBANKMENT WITH INFILLTRATION REPAIR NEEDED 0 TELEGRAPH 12' Spot Repair@: 55'.6]', 15A 2A CANYON 15" 600 4154 4168 15 179 1331,A-I 214'.220' ROAD INFILLTRATlON REPAIR (HIGH TRAFFIC VOLUME) APPROXIMATE LINEAR APPROXIMATE LINEAR APPROXIMATE LINEAR FEET 140' FEET 600' FEET O' RE-LINING (S" VCP): RE-LINING (15" VCP): RE-LINING (24" VCP): (.0) I ~ "" BID PROPOSAL To the Honorable Mayor and City Council of the City of Chula Vista. The undersigned aclmowledges that he/she has carefully exnmined the pInts nnd specificntions for: SEWERREHADILITATIONPROGRAM-PHASE 1, FY '05/'06 & FY '06/'07 & FY '07/'08 V ARlOUS LOCATIONS IN TIlE CITY OF CIruLA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (SW-240) and that he/she has examined the locntion of the proposed work and has rend the accompnnying instructions to bidders, and hereby proposes to furnish all materials, nnd do all the work required to complete the said work in accordance with said plats, specifications, nnd Specinl Provisions for the unit price or lump sum set forth in the following schedule. The Contracto~ has ninety (90) working dnys to complete the project. The City retains the right to modifY or reduce the project scope nnd the City shall retain the right to climinnte individual bid items from the low bidder's proposal prior to or nfter the awnrd of the contrnct for nny reason. There will be no ndjustments in compensntion ns pemlitted in Section 3-2 of the Standnrd Specifications. Should the City modifY the scope of the project, the contract will still be nwarded to the lowest responsible bidder for the grand totnl of all the bid items listed in the proposal. Part A (Pipe #1; Plat 1) 749 SECOND AVENUE MH # 3859 TO MH # 3660 8"VCP Item Deseription Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Fignres Removnl and Disposal of I Lump ~ 1. Existing Improvements Sum {p1!;JU Trench Shori!lg 138 Lineal I~ 2. Feet ):-. ~ .:<> () I s: m z -l Total tfil ~ /3J ~ 5 Item Desedption Qty Unit Unit Pdce ill Words Ullit Cost ill Total Figures Television Taped Inspection Lineal IA-~ ~}3cJ ~{)S. 8tJ 3. of Existing Conditions 605 Feet I ,,~ (CCTV) Repair of 8- Inch Sewer Lineal ~ ~~ 4. Main with Deep Lift 138 .... / ~3.2D.fX) Feet 1-40- As halt Concrete Pavement Repair of Sewer Lateral's Sj 7 t,/J. /)0 5. WYE I TEE-Connection to 16 Each 7:J(po '" the Sewer Main Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal '" t)37S./YJ 6. from WYE I TEE 85 Of Connection to Existin Feet 15 - (.oJ Furnish and Install Root Lineal ~~ ~~ ~ 030.EO I 7. 206 ~~ ~ Barrier Feet -' (.oJ 8. Pipe Lining of 8-Ineh Sewer 605 " Lineal 1:' jt/9Lf1J.frJ a.- Main Feet z.(5 - Re-opening of Existing ~o<dJ).LD 9. Lateral WYE I TEE- 37 Each -"1 Connections (PO Traffic Conlrol & Lump ~o. vl/O S (1) lV 10. Protection and Restoration I "':. of Existing Improvements Sum So,) . SUBTOTAL PART A: sJ!lftfW , 6 Part n (Pipe #2; Plat 2) 220 SECOND AVE MH 111823 to MH #1691 8"VCP (.0) I .... .j:> Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Figures 1. Removal and Disposal of 1 Lump .;f~~~t~ t'iXJ. [)o Existing Improvements Sum &(JO~ 2. Trench Shoring 72 Lineal ~~ ~>>O 702. 'tfJ Feet / ,,~ Television Taped Lineal f)u~ ',4> ,3.).5: CO 3. Inspection of Existing 325 Feet 10",- Conditions lCCTY) Repair of 8-Inch Sewer Lincal IJ)u ---fl.. . j, j n ~ / b/ ()JO /JO 4. Main with Deep Lift 72 Feet H~ ~ Asphalt Concrete Pavement /ii'YJ Repair of Sewer Lateral's ~ '-1',. iJJ."f ~ A.,"'" />/~ .,,(/SdD. (}O 5. WYE / TEE-Connection to 7 Each .... the Sewer Main _ 'e ~~ ~GO ~ Install Sewer Lateral Pipe '. Lineal ----..1..-11 . riJJMw; .~~ o? &c:?S': lJJ 6. from WYE / TEE 35 71""' 7f., n ~ oN Connection to Existing Feet I 75'~ Furnish and InstaIl Root Lineal I--r-.. "'~ .If) c5 5tJ.W 7. 110 1.w ~<.t;. Barrier Feet b I . 8. Pipe Lilling of 8-Inch 325 Lineal ( ~h.- IJ';H --UnA/!.., I ~a:> ce /W.Eo Sewer Main '0 y: .... Feet / Zg, ~ Re.opening of Existing :\.'-./ ..J_~ ,dlJ,A/J.. ~. 9. Lateral WYE / TEE- 8 Each 1/ "T ~ ~ ~fO. [t) Connections 7S- Traffic Control & Lump 1-; . --1'.01/. .J ~ ~.):) Sf):J. /X) 10. Protection and Restoration 1 5OJ"'<. of Existing Improvements Sum J " SUBTOTAL PART B: 7 co2b, 97~. ED / M :IGeneral ServiceslDesignlSW240lSW240SpecsPhase 1_ Rev9I.doc Part C (Pipe #3; Plat 3) 650 EAST MANOR DRIVE ME tI 3969 to MH # 4032 S"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Fignres l. Removal and Disposal of I Lump 't~ {pbO~ I W, ()::J Existing Improvements Sum 2. Trench Shoring 82 Lineal ~ /~ !J .l)tJ Feet Television Taped Inspection Linear ~ 3/4ZL> 3. of Existing Conditions 314 Feet ""::' CCTV Repair of 8-Ineh Sewer Lineal 'ft) I!; 4Ro. ED 4. Main with Deep Lift 82 Feet I1O~ As halt Conerete Pavement Repair of.~ewer Lateral's JtJ w 5. WYE / TEE -Conneetion to 9 Each 7ft> ':;bO"<- ~ oJL/I).[:lJ I ~ the Sewer Main (TI Install Sewer Lateral Pipe ~1}? Lineal o? 7W.lXJ 6. from WYE / TEE 45 '. '" Connection to Existin Feet (PO - I 7. Furnish and Install Root 127 Lineal ~lO /;; Jr {YJ Barrier Feet <-'-' 5- 8. Pipe Lining of 8" Sewer 314 Lineal t:pEfJ ~ 7W.C:O Main .' Feet W~ Re-opening of Existing ~f1).fO , 9. Lateral Wye/Tee 8 Each 7.5'-'<- Connection . Traffic Control & Lump S1?Bo 10. Protection and Restoration I of Existing 1m ravements Sum ?-oJ SUBTOTAL PART C: ~J? 9-'15 [0 / 8 M :\General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpeesPhase 1_ Rev9I.doe Part D (pipe #4; Plat 4) 940 GUATAY AVENUE MH II 5578 10 MIl # 5582 8"VCP w I ~ Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Item Figures 1. Removal and Disposal of I Lump ( ~/>~~~A) &(JX)- &/))./)0 Existing Improvements Sum 7- 7 2. Trench Shoring 42 Lineal 1/1JJiJ JIl. I, ~b:) J"t- 1/.1 fV . Feel Television Taped Inspection Lineal ~ 8JA70 3. of Ex is ling Conditions 356 Feet ~ 35'10. LD (CCTV) / Repair of 8-Inch Sewer Lineal IJu ~~j.n .dJf:j cS; 2f/D1XJ 4. Main with Deep Lift 42 ~ Asphal t C;oncrete Pavement Feet 1) ;, I-1D Repair of Sewer La leral' s ~,tk ~ jA~J ::::1- ~ !){JO.!b 5. WYE / TEE-Conneclion to 3 Each .... the Sewer Main ?J.9IJau~f)1J :, t, il '. Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal \ ..J, h, 7f.J--cjr-v ~ "'" !; )eJ,.r.80 6. from WYE / TEE 15 Feet ~. ~ 8b~&? 75 ~ Connection to Existing ~ '/< Furnish and Install Root Lineal -/,~. , /lQJJlJnl.A ~tv .... d 9tJ.lJtJ 7. Barrier 58 Fect /,- '<' 6 . '/11M-< -t '/ '-Y ,....Jd/1 lu>"2.8 8. Pipe Lining of 8- Inch Sewer 356 Lineal. 99iRf. /XJ Main Feet' ,7, Z.S"'" Re-opening of Existing ---J:.~ .,::;t. cE., ^ ..Jh A /1 , ~J:J' ,R~&:J 9. Lateral WYE / TEE - II Each j/ (/ IJ 75"< Connections Traffic Control & Lump tz;. y~~~ SW. [tJ 10. Protection and Restoration I of Existing Improvements Sum { . ?"(oJ '" en SUBTOTAL PART D : 9 ~/6&b. !JJ / M :IGeneral ServiceslDesignlSW240\SW240SpecsPhnse 1_ Rev9 I .doc Unit Unit Price ill Words Unit Cost in Total Item Description Qty Fignres 1. Removal and Disposal of 1 Lump ~~ ~ !pm. f}:J Existing Improvements Sum 0.;) 2. , Trench Shoriog 150 Lineal ~f)i) (g). f}o Feet "::- Television Taped Inspection Lineal ~M )j 1/J.lP 3. of Existing Conditions 440 Feet /~ (CCTV) Repair of8-Inch Sewer Lineal u> 4. Main with Deep Lift 150 Feet ) ZJtjt). !Jo As halt Concrete Pavement c..> Repair of Sewer Lateral's <>' .,s;ZJLjIJ.fJo I 5. WYE / TEE-Connection to 14 Each - ~ '1;,foJ ..... the Sewer Main Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal ..., 0;..:1 S!J /)0 6. from WYE / TEE 70 - Connection to Existin Feet ::; Furnish and Install Root Lineal .... i /fYJ.!)J 7. 220 - Barrier Feet 5 8. Pipe Lining of 8-lnch Sewer 440 Lineal Main Feet '" 9 ..3;2j) . [i) V3 - Re-opening of Existing c-2;/ l}O.UO 9. Lateral WYE / TEE- 28 Each uJ Connections 7.5 - Traffic Control & Lump ~ 10. Protection and Restoration Sum .::;'7':>> ~ slJO !)o of Existing Improvements SU8TOTAL PART E : 4cfsaJ.CD / 10 M: IGeneral ServicesIDesignISW240\SW240SpecsPbasel_Rev91.doc Part E (Pipe #5; Plat 5) 31 0 ROOSEVELT STREET MH # 5496 to MIl # 5497 B"Vep Part F (Pipe #6; Plat 6) 152 E. ORLANDO STREET M1I # 6133 to MH # 6137 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Fignres 1. Removal and Disposal of 1 Lump '" ~ tfJ. 2tJ Existing 1m rovements Sum (JO - 2. Trench Shoring 76 Lineal &~ 7~.Lo Feet "::" Television Taped Inspection Lineal t2n-~ >>;fA") 3. of Existing Conditions 330 Feet / <>~ 330. itJ (CCTV Repair of 8-Inch Sewer Lineal {[kL ~ 4. Main with Deep Lift 76 Feet /-10"':. /[)t~.to As halt Concrete Pavement ao (.0) Repair of Sewer Lateral's I 5. WYE I TEE-Connection to 9 Each <>:. 3, oZ4IJ. !P ~ bO (Xl the Sewer Main Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal 6. from WYE I TEE 45 Feet ~ ~3 7$:[:0 Cnnnection to Existin .:;- 7. Furnish and Install Root 121 Lineal (p()S &J Barrier Feet ~"" ::> 8. Pipe Lining of 8-Inch Sewer 330 Lineal ,,~ c;? c24!J. tlJ Main Feet 23 - Re-opening of Existing 7SD.{:o 9. Lateral WYE I TEE- 10 Each ~- Connections Traffic Control & Lump .s [;t). [}tJ 10. Protection and Restoration Stirn ')(:)cJ ~ of Existing Improvements SUBTOTAL PART F: c2~ 3Sh.ltJ 11 M: \General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpeesPhase 1_ Rev91.doe Part G (Pipe #7; Plat 7) 46 MINOT AVENUE MH # 934 to MH # 935 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words 1. Removal and Disposal of 1 Lump Existin 1m rovements Sum 2. Trench Shoring 66 Lineal /fk~ .~~ Feet Television Taped Inspection Lineal 1!Ju~ fX%iJo 3. of Existing Conditions 323 Feet CCTV Repair of 8-Inch Sewer Lineal 4. Main wit\! Deep Lift 66 Feet to) As halt Coricrete Pavement t Repair of Sewer Lateral's --' <0 5. WYE / TEE-Connection to 12 Each the Sewer Main Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal 6. from WYE / TEE 60 Feet Connection to Existin 7. Furnish and Install Root 126 Lineal Barrier Feet Traffic Control & Lump 8. Protection and Restoration of Existing Improvements Sum Unit Cost in Total Figures ~ ZtJ. 80 00 - "'~ ~Io.m "'" 3~3. ()D - / '" 9~.[b o - ~ 4; ~.!>> 3 0- ... -I; sftJ. do . -) - ..., 1taJ. f)o 5- ..?'"(:;oU<- s-~fb SUBTOTAL PART G: 021). /7 9., /)D / 12 M :\General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpecsPhase I_Rev9I .doc Part H (Pipe #8; Plat 8) 505 F Street MH # 5328 to MH # 5329 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Figures t. Removal and Disposal of Lump s[i). f)O Existin 1m rovements Sum 0-00 ";: 2. Trench Shoring 20 Lineal /fJv- ~ ~ao olD. !)o Feet. / "'~ Television Taped Inspection Lineal ~ ~<b 3. of Existing Conditions 20 c.XJ .ft; (CCTV Feet IV".- Repair of.8-1och Sewer Lineal d.) g[)O.fb (.0) 4. Main with Deep Lift 20 I Feet }};1~ ..v N As halt Concrete Pavement / c.J - 0 p~ 7. Furnish and Install Root 20 Lineal / ltJ. fJj Barrier Feet ~~ .:> - Traffic Control & Lump 8. Protection and Restoration 6iYJ. !)J of Existing Improvements Sum 5'0;) ~ SUBTOTAL PART II: 3; 91-1) fjt) 13 M :\General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpecsPhase 1_ Rev91.doc Part I (Pipe #9; Plat 9) 1648 OCALA AVENUE MH # 6910 to MH # 6909 8"VCP Item Description 1. Removal and Disposal of Existin 1m rovements 2. Trench Shoring Television Taped Inspection 3. of Existing Conditions (CCTV Repair of 8-Inch Sewer 4. Main with Deep Lift As halt Concrete Pavement Repair of. Sewer Lateral's (.0) 5. WYE / TEE:Connection to I the Sewer Main "" ~ Install Sewer Lateral Pipe 6. from WYE / TEE Connection to Existin 7. Furnish and Install Root Barrier 8. Pipe Lining of 8-1nch Sewer Main Re-opening of Existing 9. Lateral WYE / TEE - Connections Traffic Control & 10. Protection and Restoration of Existing Improvements Qty 76 330 76 45 121 330 Unit Lump Sum Lineal Feet Lineal Feet Lineal Feet 7 Each Unit Price in Words ///)(J /ffl) ;ft17fbO Unit Cost in Total Figures LV (f?O - I v-':' J~ 1) !;1/IJ. fj) <Y. d SoW./):) ?;;t.O ' ~ ~37.s. !Jo 5 5"'- IPO..s.lfJ Ub 9,eYj/). [fJ Zb- --~ t 7SfXJ ~ ~ ..... ?a:.>- -.5l1J. [JO Lineal Feet Lineal Feet Lineal Feet 9 Each SUBTOTAL PART I : d,~ SIP!. [f) / M: \General Services\Desiga\SW240\SW240SpecsPhnsc 1_ Rcv91.doc 14 Lump Sum Part J (Pipe #10; Plat 9) 1632 OCALA AVENUE MH # 6892 to MH # 6910 8"VCP Item Description 1. Removal and Disposal of Existin 1m rovements 2. Trench Shoring Television Taped Inspection 3. of Existing Conditions (CCTV Repair of 8-Inch Sewer 4. Main with Deep Lift As halt Concrete Pavement (,) Repair of Sewer Lateral's I 5. WYE I TEE-Connection to '" the Sewer Main '" Install Sewer Lateral Pipe 6. from WYE I TEE Connection to Existing 7. Furnish and Install Root Banier 8. Pipe Lining of 8-Inch Sewer Main Re-opening of Existing 9. Lateral WYE/TEE- Connections Traffic Control & 10. Protection and Restoration of Existing Improvements Qty 76 330 76 45 121 330 6 Unit Unit Pdce in Words Unit Cost in Total Fignres Lump ~~ '" m.lb Sum Lineal '/~ 7~.ZtJ Feet ~ Lineal J3D. !Jo Feet ljJ / ~ Lineal Feet /-'1.0"0 ~ bJ/iJ. Lv Each =7 /IPD. [XJ ~ ~ '?C.o - Lineal 3. 37S.[X) Feet ~ ~- Lineal kos: CD Feet ti"~- Lineal ~ d2I/IJ. E/) Feet ""- Each <.v .,S,<S: to 5' - Lump ~ sf)J. !}o Sum ~ ~ 6CV' SUBTOTAL PART J ; ~i, DSI tD / 15 7 M :\General Serviees\Design\SW240\SW240SpecsPhasel_ Rev91.doc Part K (Pipe #11; Plat 10) 574 GARRETT AVENUE MH # 3311 to MH # 3227 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total FigUl'es 1. Removal and Disposal of 1 Lump ~ ~~ ~ tm, !1J Exislin 1m rovements Sum o ' 2. Trench Shoring 158 Lineal ~ft) Is-REf) Feet .,o- J ' Television Taped Inspection Lineal %~ 3. of Existing Conditions 322 Jd~-m CCTV Feet "'~ Repair of 8-Inch Sewer Lineal 4. Main with Deep Lift 158 Feet v:. 02) jJ).lJo As halt Concrete Pavement 0 w Repair of Sewer Lateral's d; S.;W.UO I 5. WYE I TEE-Connection to 7 Each '" N the Sewer Main ':? c) w Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal i eSfjt). rJo 6. from WYE I TEE 20 Feet w Connection to Existin ~ . ? 7. Furnish and Install Root 178 Lineal f93/3fJ Barrier Feet ~ r ' ..s 8. Pipe Lining of 8-Inch Sewer 322 Lineal ~ Main Feet w- D '!P. f:t) Re-opening of Existing I;;:) 9. Lateral WYE I TEE - 8 Each -""- & [j). [tJ Connections ) Traffic Control & Lump 10. Protection and Restoration .stJJ. &J of Existing Improvements Sum 5"00 -< SUBTOTAL PART K: 08 dd.b - zj) / 16 M: IGeneral ServiceslDesignlSW240lSW240SpecsPhase 1_ Rev91.doc Part L (Pipe #12; Plat 11) 1293 JOSSELYN AVENUE MH # 61140 to MH #6141 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Ulli! Cost ill Total Figures L Removal and Disposal of 1 Lump ~ ~()r) ....- !f)/}() Existin 1m rovements Sum 00 - 2. Trench Shoring 114 Lineal ~ 117?!XJ Feet "'~ Television Taped Inspection Lineal ~~ 3. of Existing Conditions 310 Feet r:- 0/[J. 8tJ CCTV) Repair of 8- Inch Sewer Lineal IS; 9cf,IJ.bJ 4. Main with Deep Lift 114 Feet .... As halt C;oncrete Pavement 0' c..> Repair of Sewer Lateral's c0 f cPr). /)) I 5. WYE / TEE-Connection to 8 Each ..., '" .j:> the Sewer Main ;&<) - Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal 6. from WYE / TEE 40 Feet ,."' ~lt1J.ZO Connection to Existin ') 7. Fumish and Install Root 154 Lineal 770. ft) Barrier Feet ~ J 8. Pipe Lining of 8-Inch Sewer 310 Lineal /ilP ~ tfIJ.1b ~- Main Feet z.s - Re-opening of Existing dJt4Jill. . ~J.? 7SD.to 9. Lateral WYE / TEE- 10 Each '" - ~ Connections .) Traffic Control & Lump ~~ 10. Protection and Restoration r.SttJ.U0 of Existing Improvements Sum fJ) ~ou:. SUBTOTAL PARTL: 33, sb1-- ZO / 17 M: IGeneral ServiceslDesignlSW240lSW240SpecsPhasc 1_ Rcv9I.doc Part M (Pipe #13; Plat 11) 1246 JOSSELYN AVENUE MH#6141 toMH#6148 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words I. Removal and Disposal of I Lump Existin 1m rovements Sum 2. Trench Shoring 90 Lineal 11k~ , ;8lJ Feet Television Taped Inspection Lineal I!k- ~ ~8D 3. of Existing Conditions 218 CCTVl Feet Repair of 8-lnch Sewer Lineal 4. Main with Deep Lift 90 Feet As halt Concrete Pavement (,) Repair of Sewer Lateral's I 5. WYE I TEE-Connection to 5 Each N the Sewer Main U1 Install Sewer Lateral Pipe Lineal ir 6. fTom WYE I TEE 25 Feet Connection to Existin 7. Furnish and Install Root 115 Lineal ~~ ~Jd Barrier Feet 8. Pipe Lining of 8-Inch Sewer 218 Lineal Main Feet Re-opening of Existing 9. Lateral WYE I TEE - 6 Each Connections Traffic ContTol & Lump 10. Protection and Restoration of Existing Improvements Sum SUBTOTAL PART M : 18 Unit Cost in Total Figures ~ flJ .80 I <P~ 9~.!:o / ""- c2! II.;P <.0,:. /oJ; tPfP.[f) 0 '" /![t).f):J o ' fJSto ~ S7S. ty) 5 - 23~- t /Di-W .....- .lj.SD. tn -S '" j"'L>> - 0fj).lYJ d'!; &~. ro M:\General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpecsPhasel_ Rev91.doc ALTERNATE BID LOCATION (Pipe UIAj Plat lA) LOST CREEK ROAD MH 1112325 to MH 1112326 8"VCP Item Description Qty Unit I. Removal and Disposal of I Lump Existing Improvements Sum 2. Trench Shoring 21 Lineal Feet TeJevision Taped Inspection . Lineal 3. ofExistjng Conditions 140 Feet (CCTV) Repair of 8-Inch Sewer Main Lineal 4. with Deep Lift Asphalt 21 Feet Concrete Pavement c..> I Repair of Sewer Later!' s I Each N WyelTee Connection en Install Sewer Lateral Pipe '. Lineal from the Main Sewer Pipe 5 Feet 5. Furnish and Install Root 115 Lineal Barrier Feet 6. Pipe Lining of 8-Inch Sewer 140 Lineal Main .' Feet Re-opening of Existing 7. Lateral WYE / TEE- I Each Connections Traffic Control & Protection Lump 8. and Restoration of Existing 1 Sum Improvements M: IGenera! Services\DesignlSW240lSW240SpecsPhase I_Rev91.doc Unit Price in Words {)O,[jJ ~~80 ~~?V ~~ ~ !Jf)EiJ . SUBTOTAL PART lA : 19 Unit Cost in Figures Total z"-:" ~ oI/-;W. to .!?o~ 3/ lEo.to c...:> '" (p[j), t:b &u"O - ~ tAS.!:D 25 . 0"~ 'tJ. Cb ~ /j [tt). !p SO - SOD "" 0ttl. [J) .... !; r:f1). fjo r!?0c:> - IS; 4t 7 l:o / ALTERNATE BID LOCATION (Pipe 112A; Plat 2A): TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD MH # 4154 to MIl # 4168 lS"VCP W I '" ...... Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Item Description Qty Unit Figures 1. Removal and Disposal of I Lump +-- fl. ~ . },.) ~.I}IJ./. ~u: /'''00 "":- &ttJ. tb Existing Improvements Sum Trench Shoring 12 Lineal 2- ~..~ ~~ ~EtJ. fJJ 2. Feet ..." So Television Taped Inspection J? AI ~l}:) Lineal :/j.' II,. ~ 3. of Existing Conditions 600 I; jJ ftJ. (JJ (CCTYl Feet ,,:>""" Repair of 15-Inch Sewer ~ \..f!e ..tJA~ Lineal bJ rJ-tJ. fJJ 4. Maio with D,eep Lift 12 Feet ~ ~80 Asphalt Concrete Pavement 5Cl?~ Furnish and Install Root Lineal --;;: A. 111_1.~ ~iV !fl W. fb 7. 60 /t4-- '7 Barrier Feet ~ /0 - Pipe Lining of 15-Inch Lineal t r--.-.1. .u:1 ,:.. ~ ~t/J - ~ an.fb 8. 600 .~ '15~ Sewer Main . Feet 1/ v '7, '( Traffic Control & Lump {J;2voV~ =1 [f:t).W 10. Protection and Restoration I Sum dJJ~ ~Jo of Existing Improvements "'- ~ SUBTOTAL PART 2A : \ 50/ kW. to 20 M :IGeneral ServiceslDesignlSW240lSW240SpecsPhase t _ Rev9I.doc ALTERNATE BID ITEM (lB.): It shall be noted that tills bid item may not be nsed in the construction of the project and, if so, no compensation will be allowed for this bid item. Yonr bid package will be non-responsive and incomplete withont a snhmitted bid for the ALTERNATE BID ITEM (lA). The Grand Total Base Bid mnst inclnde this ALTERNATE BID ITEM (lA). Item Description Qty Unit Unit Price in Words Unit Cost in Total Figu res (,) I N OPTIONAL: SADDLE ex> 1. CONNECTION WITH 260 EA CONCRETE ~ (pm.fD ENCASEMENT 3(po "" 2. LATERAL TOP HAT CIPP 260 EA 9,O~ ~ W.ltJ SUBTOTAL ALTERNATE BID ITEM (lB): 3410 !o f:lJ . 'to , 21 M:\General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpccsPhase 1_ Rev9I.doc W I N CD FINAL GRAND (BASE BID) TOTAL: PART A + PART B + PART C + PART D + PART E + PART F + PART G + PART II + PART I + PART J + + PART K + PART L + PART M + ALTERNATE BID LOCATIONS (IA) + ALTERNATE BID LOCATION (2A) + ALTERNATE BID ITEM (lB) 797; 9dS tv . CONTRACTOllS MUST SUBMITT A SUBTOTAL FOR EACH STREET ADDRESS AND A BASE BID TOTAL OF ALL STREET ADDRESS COMBINED WITH THE ALTERNATE BID ITEM (IA) FOR THE FINAL GRAND (BASE BID) TOTAL. YOUR BID PACKAGE WILL BE NON-RESPONSIVE AND INCOMPLETE WITHOUT A SUBMITTED SUBTOTAL FOR EACH STREET ADDRESS AND A SUM OF ALL THE STREET ADDRESS WITH ALTERNATE BID ITEM (IA) FOR A FINAL GRAND (BASE BID) TOTAL CONTRACT COST. The City retains tbe rigbt to modify or reduce tbe project scope and tbe City sball retain tbe rigbt to eliminate individnal bid items from the low bidder's proposal prior to or after tbe award of tbe contract for any reason. Tbere will be no adjustments in compensation as permitted in Section 3-2 of tbe Standard Specifications. Sbould tbe City modify tbe scope of tbe project, tbe contract will still be awarded to tbe lowest responsible bidder for tbe FINAL GRAND (BASE BID) TOTAL of all tbe bid items listed in tbe proposal. 22 M: \General Services\Design\SW2401SW240SpecsPhasel_Rev9! .doc The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required Contract, with necessary bonds, within ten (10) working days after having received notice that the Contract is ready for signature, the proceeds of the check or bond accompanying his/her bid shall become the property of the City of Chula Vista. Licensed in accordance with License Expiration Date / ~ I Signature of bidder: Act providing for the registration of Contractors, License No. 'J,9:5z..~1 '" contrac?'s State License Classification . A' ..... ..' ..' IIII..J (If an individual, so state. If a firm or co-partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individuals, co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, also names of President, Secretary, Treasurer and manager thereof. and affix the Corporate Seal thereto.) IL,A . (' C> ),Jl.;',cu L,.'-"C>..v (Business Name) ~ -UJI.. . 192-0 C'" A/\n:.. L( c.:;-. t:f ICJoj Dated: ::, -.5 ,200$ ,r:L (p.~f'J, LA. ~2-"'"t..o (Business Address) (p I q - 5102.- 071 &-1 (phone Number) TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 9 -5' . :? -12-':;2.--17 23 M:IGeneral ServicesIDesign ISW240lSW240SpecsPhase 1_ Rev9I.doc 3-30 ATTACHMENT _ 3 I ~ h SECOND AVE SPOT REPAIRS (MHI 3859 10 MHI J550) SECTION LOCA nON LENGTH LA TERAL DESCRJPlIONS 28.0' 78.0' 50.0' :J ROOTS. AND LATeRAL omCT 95.0' - 105.0' 10.0' '", ROOTS. AND LATERAL DEFECT 110.0' - 132.0' 22.0' 1- ROOTS AND LA 1ERAL DEFECT 140.0' - 164.0' 24.0' 2 ROOTS AND LATERAL DEFECT 170.0' - 215.0' 45.0 2 ROOrs AND LATERAL DEffCT 224.0' - 280.0' 5.0 1 ROOTS. AND LA TERAL DEFECT 396.0 400.0 6.0 1, ROO AND LATERAL DEFECT 455.0' 465.0 10.0' 2 ROOTS. AND l.A7ERAL DEFECT 497.0' - 503.0' 6.0 1" ROOTS AND LA 1E'RAL DEFeCT 525.0' 5Jl.0' 5.0' 1 ROOTS AN LA AL oucer ....... .;.. <C IJ) '" o o o;::.z. -:l:.O -> '6',;;;" en <C >'A <0 ::------\ '" % DRAWN BY: PO TEN G. SAN PEDRO DA TE: SHEET Dl 01 11 08 OF 11 SHTS. rJn.E: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA T10N (SW240) PREPARED BY: paTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YAND 3-31 \\ ~ ~\ ~ ~\~ Q~ \\ V"l ~~\l\ r" ~ ~~ M r ~~ JJ _ -r - ~~ ~~G: t"\ -;::::;--- ~ ~ V"l~~E~ E~ -;::::;--- ~E ~ 0> .". -;::::;--- ~ G ~ W~~~ ~" vep SWR - 325' *SECOND A V ~ <J:) <J:) SPOT REPAIRS ("'Hf 1691 10 "'HI 1823) SECTION LOCA nON LENGTH LA TERAL DESCRIP7IDNS 3.0' 18.0' 15.0' 1 ROOTS. AND DEFECnve: LATERAL 54.0' 60.0' 5.0' 1 ROOTS. AND DEFECTTVf: LATERAl.. 65.0' 72.0' 6.0' I ROOts. AND OUOCTlve LA7EFIAL 85.0' - 91.0' 6.0' 0 ROOTS IN JOINTS 109.0' - 124.0' 15.0' 2 ROOTS. ANa OUOCTlve LA 7EFIAL 136.0' - 142.0' 6.0' 0 ROars tN JOINTS 159.0' - 165,0' 5.0' 1 ROOTS. AND DEFECTIVE: LATERAL 188.0' - 194.0' 6.0' 0 ROOTS IN JOINTS 212.0' - 218.0' 5.0' 0 ROOTS IN JOINTS 257.0' SURvey A8ANDONEO -\ ~ z o ")> ^ V"l ")> <. DRAWN BY, POTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA TE: SHEET 02 01-17-0B OF 11 SHTS. nTLE: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA TION (SW240 PREPARED BY, POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YANO 3-32 ------...../ DRAWN BY: paTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA fE: SHEET OJ 01-11-08 OF 11 SHTS. TITLE: 11 .D'- 11110' <<.0' - tfs'o'-:tOUY 6.0" :>>& . _ Q' I t1' 'SDG&E un\TY :mljlN WORK~uEA \ \--- CS M~ ~~ "" J sf ~ .---::: ~ ..--;::::; ~Jk\ \\ CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABIUA TlON (SW240) PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YAND 3-33 .-- I ~ 8" vep SWR - 356' *GUA TA Y AVE SPOT REPAIRS (MHj 5578 to MHj 5582) SEcnON LOCA 710N LENGTH LA TERM DESCRIPTIONS 38.0' 44.0' 6.0' 0 ROOTS IN 1/IE' JOINTS 81.0' 8Z0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS AND LA 7ERAL DEFECT 111.0' 120.0' 9,0' 1 CRACK. AND LATERAL DEFECT 146.0' 152.0' 6.0' 1 ROO AND LA7ERAL DEFECT 218.0' - 227.0' 9.0' 0 ROOTS IN JOINTS CRACKS 82.0' - 88.0' 6.0' 0 ROO AND LA W1AL DE'FE'CT ~ 'Z- ~ '1J ~ 1"\ ~ *SDG&E UTILITY WITHIN WORK AREA INK~T --- C ~ ~ 7/n.E: PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YANO ORA WN BY: PO TEN G. SAN PEDRO OA TE: SHEET 04 01-11-0B OF 11 SHTS. CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlATION (SW240) 3-34 vEL1 51 '7 1<005;5497 3.,. MH jf G .....-::;:::::; E'iEL1 51""'-::;:::::; I<OO~ G~ 1 ~ 1EI<AL5 " 101AL LA ~ vEL1 51 I< DOSE ~5496 310 MH jf .....-::;:::::; G SPOT REPAIRS (MHI 5496 to MHI 5497) *ROOSEVEL T ST SECl10N LOCA 710N LENG7H 4.0' - 22.0' 140' 97.0' - 106.0' 9.0' 170.0' 7.JJ.O' 21.0' 162.0' - 172.0' ro.o' 175..0' - 781.0 6.(J' 21UO' - 209.0' 6.0 274 - 224. 6.0 231.0 - 237.0 6.0' 243.0' - 249.0' 6.0 265.0' - 271.0' 6.0' 2810' - 287.0' 6.0' 29B.f)' - 310.0' 12.0' .J4.J. . - 350.0' 6.0 .360.0' - 366.0' 6.0' .386..0' - .392.0' 6.0' 4O.J.0' - ",,2.Q' 9.0' 429,0 - 440.0 no' LA 1ERAL OCSCRIP1JONS 2 AND 'CT ROOTS IN rn JOINTS J DO AND LA7!:RAL ONCT 2 ROOTS. AN LA TERAL 0 CT o ROO c JOINTS o R TS IN n-I JOINTS o 7S IN THE JOiNTS .2 ROO AND LA mc'AL DEFECT o ROOTS IN TH JOINTS o ROOTS iN THE JOINTS o ROOTS IN , ROOTS. AND LA 7E'RAL DEFECT 1 ROOTS IN TME JOINT & LA 7E1i'AL t ROO N 1H << LA7!71'A " ROOrs IN 'THE JOINT ct' A ~ r ROO AND ~L DEFFCr 2 ROOTS. AN LA1'ERA 0 CT *SDG&E U77UTlES WITHIN WORK AREA -<\ ~ ::0 --\ "'- \~ DRAWN BY: paTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA TF:: SHEET 05 01-11-08 OF 11 SHTS TIlLE H 51 CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlATION (SW240) PREPARED BY: paTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YANO 3-35 ''"!::RAL5 - L LA' IOIA :::::--::::: ::::::--::: G ~ ANDO \ 0 51-----=::: 1 E. oRL UOR~ ~H #6137 \ ! ~ YJv\p\A 51 E OL 8" VCP SWR - 330' *E ORLANDO ST SPOT REPAIRS (MH# 5133 fo MH# 5737) SEcnaN LOCA 710N WiG7H LA TCRAL DESCRtPl10NS 45.0' - 52.0' 6.0' 1 LATF:RAL DEFECT '00,0' - 109.0' 9.0' 2 ROOTS. AND LATERAL DEFECT 151.0' - 175.0' 24.0' 2 CRACl<S AND LATERAL DEFECT 17.0' - 228.0' 9.0' 2 ROOTS AND LAJeRAL Df:FECT 249.0' - 265.0' 16.0' a ROOTS IN JOlNTS. CRACKS 280.0' - 292.0' 12.0' 2 ROOTS AND LATffiAL DUECT ~\ lJ) '" ^' ")> -\ P"\ ")> < *SDG&E U77UTY WITHIN WORK AREA G-- ~ -----=::: ~ ORLANDO 151 E#'6133 MH \~ Cl lJ) ~~ G) . I E PALOMAR ~ -----=::: ---:: G ---:: -----=::: -----=::: \ G -----=::: ~ DRAWN BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA TE: SHEET 06 01-11-08 OF 11 SHTS. TITLE: PREPARE{) BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROveD 8 Y: ROBERTO YANO CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA T10N (SW240) 3-36 *M/NOT A V SPOT REPAIRS (MHI 9J5 10 MHI 9J4) SECTION LOCA TlON LCNCTH LA TERAL DeSCRIPTIONS 20.0' - 26.0' 6.0' , ROO AND LAlCRAL DeFECT 68.0' - 74..0' 8.0' 1 ROO AND LA TCRAL DEFECT 88.0' 94.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS AND LA :AL DF:FECT 97.0' 103.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS, AND LA TeRAL DUECT 119.0' - 125.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LA 7mAL DEFECT 198.0' - 207.0' 9.0' 2 ROOTS. AND LA :AL DEFECT 211.0' 217.0' 6.0' 1 ROO AND LATE1i'AL DEFeCT 22&0' - 234.0' 6.0' 1 ROD AND LA JEl;'AL €FFCT 285.0' - 300.0' 15.0' .3 ROOTS. AND LATERAL DEFECT I ~ *SDG&:E UTlUTY WITHIN WORK AREA ~ a "-i \~ DRAWN BY: paTEN G. SAN PEDRO DAlE. SHEET 07 01-11-08 OF 11 SHTS. 17n.E: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA T10N (SW240) PREPARED Br.. paTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED Br.. ROBERTO YANO 3-37 SPOT REPAIRS (MH# 5328 to MH# 5329) SECTION LOCA TlON LENG111 . LA TERAL DESCRIPTIONS 0.0' - 20.0' 20.0' 0 REPLACE CAST IRON MAIN F ST 0:>.. ';Cl o z. V) -:2:: ';Cl ""1J ""1J \TI #5326 M\1 r 51 ~ 51 CE:N1t:R DRAWN BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA fE: SHEET 08 01-11-08 OF 11 SHTS. TITLE: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA TION (SW240) PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YANO 3-38 \ 1632 OCALA MH #6892 ;::::--- TAifA TA CT C:l )1 r r >- M ::0 >- r-- U) ~ TESOTA CT c ::.--- ~G 1648 OCALA I" MH #6910 ex, a '" ~ \=:i ~ -< ::0 ):,. ~ r-- >- M ::0 >- r-- U) co DRAWN BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA TE: SHEET 09 01-11 08 OF 11 SHTS. TITLE: I ~ SPOT REPAIRS (MHI 6892 10 MHI 6910) SEcnON LOCAnON LENGTH LA1E:RAL DCSCRIPnONS 66.0' 72.0' 6.0' 1 ROO AND LA TERAL DEFeCT 79.0' - 85.0' B.D' 1 ROOTS. AND LATERAL DEFeCT 732.0' 738.0' 6.0' 1 00 AND LA7ERAL DEFECT 149.0' - 155.0' 6.0' t ROOTS. AND LATERAL DEFECT 22.0' - 218.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LATERAL DE:FECT 280.0' 285.0' 6.0' ROO AND LATERAL DEITCT SDG&E WITHIN WORK AREA OCALA A V SPOT RCPAIRS (MHI 6970 /0 MHI 6909) SeCTION LOCAl1ON LENGTH LA7FRAL DESCRfPnONS 43.0' - 49.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS AND LATERAL DEFECT 85.0 - 92.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LATE:RAL DEFECT 109.0' 115.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LATE:RA DEFECT r56.0' - 162.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LA1CRAL DEFECT '79,0' 185.r:r 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LATERAL GEneT 273.0' 243.0' 6.0' 1 ROOTS. AND ATERAL DEFFCT 3160' - 322.0' 6.0' 1 00 AND LATERAL DEFECT ~ ...... '-' ~ ~ <: ~ :::,. 'l; f5 ~ i:5 c5 CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA T10N (SW240) TANBARK ST G E =------. MAIN ST ,I PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVf:D BY: ROBERTO YANO 3-39 ~H51 -\ ":I:. =jj CJ ")> < $\ $'r\1'-$\1'- ~r 8" vep SWR - 322' *GARRETT AVE I ~ G"'l ")> Al Al '" -\ -\ "> < SPOT REPAiRS ("'HI 3311 TO "'HI 3227) 5EcnON LOCA nON lENGTH LA TERAL DESCRIPTIONS 50.0' - 77.0' 7.0' 0 Room IN ]HE JOiNTS 84.0' 90. a' 5.0' , ROOTS. AND LA7ERAL DfFECT 105.0' - 714.0' 9,0' 1 ROO AND LATERAL DEFECT '22.0' 16.0' 40.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LA1CRAL DfFCCT 168.0' - 2 .0' 40.0' 1 ROOTS. AND LA7FRAL DEFECT 222.0' - 228.0' 6.0' 0 ROOTS IN THE JOINTS 232.0' 238.0' 6.0' , ROOTS AND LATCRAL DEFFCT 248..0' 254.0' 6.0' 0 ROOrs iN THE JOiNTS 288.0' - 94.0' 5,0' 0 ROOTS IN THE JOfNTS 298.0' - 3ro.o' 12.0' 0 ROOrs IN THE JOINTS *SDG&E WITHIN WORK AREA 1. $\ ------ c:c I.J\ -..\ + 'is:. (;):s:. ">- Alv; Alv; '" ~ -\ ~ -\ "> < DRAWN BY: paTEN G. SAN PEDRO DATE: SHEET 10 01 11 08 OF 11 SHTS. TITLE: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA TION (SW240) PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YANO 3-40 j s~ ---- G"---=::: "xo\<.() ~ ~~ G0 /\\'<a, ~ 0">1,1\ ~GV \~ ~y. \\ ~ JOSSEL YN A VE ~ SOG&:E WITHIN WORK AREA SPOT REPAIRS (MH, 61.fB 10 IIHI 61"") SEC'nON LOCATTON LENt17H U7mAL DESCRJP7lONS 6.0' - 12.0' 6. . , ROO AND l.A7al.4L DEFECT 57. . _ 6:s.0' 6.0' 0 ROOTS IN "THe Jt:iNTS '0'-11' faD' 2 ROO DLA 'CT 1no' - 1J.l.D' 10.0' 0 ROOTS IN THe 'N '40.0' _ 175.0' 0" TS IN J()I, CRAO<S 194 O' _ 16J)' 0' , ROO AND LA1ER'A 0 T I TRANQUlL~ ~ ~ "" ;::.~ ~ :J:.~ ""'0> 0> <- -:;.~ ~ <>>1,1\ '" '::. "Z. .". ~;, ~ -0" << nn 1,1\1,1\ ~~ ,," \ \ .". ':i '=6 ~<. ~. - ;S.;S. ~~ JOSSEL YN A VE ~ SOG&:E WITHIN WORK AREA SPOT REPAiRS (JIHI 6J40 (D MH/ 6141) SEC71DN LOCA,71ON LENGTH LAl'ERAL OESCRtP'OONS 4.0' _ (J' 30.0' ROOTS IN JOIN LAl'E1W. DEFFCT 46.0' _ o' 36.rr ROOTS IN JOIN LA DEFn:T 85.0' - , o' n.D' ROOTS IN JOIN LA 7E1\'AL DEFEa 120.0' - '26.0' 6.0' ROO AND 192.0' - '9ao' 6.0' 21UJ' - 17.0' 6.0' 69.0'- . 0' ~\\ ORA WN BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO OA TE: SHEET 11 01-11-08 OF 11 SHT5. lITLE: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA T10N (SW240) PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: ROBERTO YANO 3-41 , -I , '--../ C r '" z '" < ;;; '" <: ". '" '" '" '" r l'1 n ". z -< ~ '" Cl Z -; <: -< -' ~ >- '" <t U 1 OLYMPI 0 K\ AY 7 SP{Jrfl!:iJAIR{MH/ /2.J2S ~ WIlmS} &CIIOHl.OC U/oT;;H NO.LAIERAl. " 'RJP1Iaf uQ'_ ~t.a. 6" () /NA'.lfR"'~'RE>Xi1 lh'CMASGU.cE$lC8 p...!:Z I,]tJ. J-6 DRAWN BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO DATE: SHIIT IA 01-22-08 OF 2A SH7S. nTLE: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA T10N (SW240) 3-42 PREPARED BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO APPROVED BY: R08ERTO YANO '<-l-/ fJ " 0: 7 SPar fiSWR {lIH1 '2m - JIlfll2.]2S1 SCCNCH ux:. /LNc;rn NO. UolIRAL (]#'..sr:fij!I;;CW .ui1-i7.rr fr 0 ;;mu.r.lAT/Q'lf/Er.l1R 214.l1'-2JO.Q' of Q JtOf1U..THATJrJIREi'MR t J IHOUAS ct1!DE:;cae p,1ct 1J31, -'-I \'S. l't'oIEit W\1ll - ",00' ~J.ol. U'5~ TELEGRAPH CANYON RO Hl'l~ '1\69 --- DRAWN BY: POTEN G. SAN PEDRO DA TE: SHEET 2A 01-22-0B OF 2A SHTS. TITLE: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SEWER REHABILlA TION (SW240) 3-43 "CBELLFLOIJER cr J> '" i! BAR.N Owl Cr STRA"~ r:;;.urc "CC~~ --------- PREPARED BY.' POTE:N G. SAN PEDRO APPROvrD BY.' ROBERTO YANO ACHMENT 1- CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to COWlcil Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the COWlcil, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following infonnation must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the ~lication or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. ~ L J-.-.I J} J'W1VG1-!.~..J -jl A-=\ lO'<<.J;- IL'\.A. r:u.:. z:" . 2. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity. ?^--'-' \. N. ,;~ ^ 'L/.l-l W.J ')l MI. B^-^-, ~.) L. Ih...o'U-\,,~ v'rf::-u..;-- 3. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. j\......-' I.. i'-I. 1/7t'.A,^"-A..J.'-"", F'''~ ~ h...ull"lA-<"-' ,Grw .s.uJ';-. , 5. Has any person' associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official" of the City ofChula Vista as it relates to this c.antract within the past,l2 months? Yes_No.$- 30 M: \General Services\Design\SW240\SW240SpecsPhase 1_ Rev9I. doc 3-44 If Yes, briefly descnbe the nature oithe financial interest the official** may have in this contract. 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the Chula Vista City Council? No":j. Yes _liyes, which Council member? 7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official" of the City ofChula Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes _ No + liYes, which official'. and what was the nature of item provided? Date: ':::.'<:',0:::' c IJ) )/111/ Signature of Contractor! Applicant p;V"1 ," 'W'C' . '] /'..-V l H, )J rlA.J 1\ '1A-J vA> Print or type name of Contractor! Applicant . Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, assOCiatiOn, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit. ." Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members. . 31 M: \Geoeral Services\Desigo \SW240\SW240SpecsPhasel_ Rev9I.doc 3-45 RESOLUTION NO. 2008- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE "SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM-PHASE 1, FY 05/06 & FY 06/07 & FY 07/08 VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA (SW-240A)" PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF AVAILABLE SEWER FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUNDS INTO THE PROJECT FROM THE EXISTING 2006/07 & 2007/08 SEWER REHABILITATION PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT WHEREAS, on March 5, 2008, the Director of Engineering and General Services received seven (7) sealed bids for the "Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase 1, FY 05/06 to FY 07/08 various locations in the City ofChula Vista (SW-240A)" project; and WHEREAS, the project will rehabilitate existing broken sewer mains and laterals, repair cracked sewer lines and replace asphalt concrete pavement in various locations throughout the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the project will include all labor, material, equipment, tools, transportation, mobilization, control of sewage flow, installation of root barrier, traffic control, removal and disposal of existing improvements, protection and restoration of existing improvements, and other miscellaneous work necessary for the project; and WHEREAS, bids were contingent upon a base bid and three additional alternate bids (Alternate IA - Location at Lost Creek Road, Alternate 2A - Location at Telegraph Canyon Road, and Alternate 1B - Use of Top Hat Lateral); and WHEREAS, due to the current market for the use of lateral top hats, staff determined to reserve the use of lateral top hats as a means of sewer rehabilitation for a later time or when the manufacturing of the lateral top hats provide more profitable benefits; and WHEREAS, tonight's action will award the contract contingent upon the submitted base bid and two alternate bids (Alternate IA and Alternate 2A) totaling $457,325; and ALTIE CONTRACTOR BASE BID (not ALT1A ALT2A TOTAL recommended at this time) KTA Construction, Inc. - El Cajon, CA $385,258.00 $340.600.00 $15,467.00 $56,600.00 $457,325.00 Burtech Pipeline, Inc. - Encinitas, CA $470,327.50 $570,500.00 $14,185.00 $88,600.00 $573,112.50 Erreca's, Inc. - Lakeside, CA $551,928.50 $256.100.00 $20,998.00 $82,242.00 $655,168.50 H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\04-1S.08\SW240A Sewer Rehab Program FY 05.08 Resorg~~ 6 Resolution No. 2008- Page 2 ALT1E CONTRACTOR BASE BID (not ALTIA ALT2A TOTAL recommended at this time) $52,260.00 MJC Construction - Chula Vista, CA $679,837.50 (mathmaticaJ $17,790.00 $52,500.00 $750,307.50 error) Bonita Pipeline, Inc. - National City, CA $682,615.95 $471,564.60 $28,858.82 $44,092.76 $755,567.53 Weir Construction Corp. - Escondido, $867,479.60 $474,164.60 $28,860.82 $44,092.76 $755,608.71 CA WHEREAS, the low bid by KTA Construction, Inc. of $457,325 is $142,675 (40 percent) below the Engineer's estimate of$758,369; and WHEREAS, tonight's resolution will increase the Director of Public Works Operations' authority to approve change orders as necessary up to the contingency amount of$91,465; and WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the bid and is recommending awarding the contract to KTA Construction, Inc. ofEl Cajon, California; and WHEREAS, this project concentrated on sewers that were mainly west of the I-80S freeway, having 85 percent located in the west side of Chula Vista and the remaining 15 percent located on the east side of the I-80S freeway and no locations are located within Montgomery Area at this time. NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City Chula Vista does accept bids and award a contract for the "Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Phase I, FY 05/06 & FY 05/07 & FY 07/08 various locations in the City of Chula Vista (SW -240A)" project authorizing the transfer of available Sewer Facility Replacement Funds into the project from the existing 2006/07 & 2007/08 Sewer Rehabilitation Program, and authorizing staff to increase quantities to expend all available funds for this project. Presented by: Approved as to form by: Jack Griffin Director of Engineering and General Services ~CA,,~~~~~\i Ann Moore ' City Attorney H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\ResoslOO8\04-IS.08\SW240A Sewer Rehab Program FY 05-08 Reso3L2'4 7 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~\'f:. CITY OF ~CHULA VISTA April 15, 2008 Item~ SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA IMPLEMENTING THE SAFELY SURRENDERED BABY PROGRAM AND DESIGNATING CHULA VISTA FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE SURRENDER SITES FIRE CHIEF jb- CITY MANAGER ITEM TITLE: 4/5THS VOTE: YES NO X SUMMARY In 2001, SB1368 became law and established the Safely Surrender Baby program. The purpose of the law is to encourage parents to bring unwanted infants, up to 72 hours old, to reception centers such as hospitals or fire stations, rather than abandon them in dumpsters or bushes. No names are required and the parent(s) will not be subject to prosecution for child abandonment. The Fire Department is requesting that Council adopt the resolution that designates the City's nine fire stations as safe baby havens. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defmed under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it does not involve a physical change to the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060[c][3] of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary. RECOMMENDATION Council adopt the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable. 4-1 April 15, 2008 Item-i- Page 2 DISCUSSION Infant abandonment is an event that does not occur very often, but when it does, it often results in serious injury or death. In 2001, SB1368 became law and established the Safely Surrender Baby program now codified, in relevant part, at California Health and Safety Code section 1255.7. The purpose of the law is to encourage parents to bring unwanted infants, up to 72 hours old, to reception centers such as hospitals or fire stations, rather than abandon them in dumpsters or bushes. No names are required and the parent(s) will not be subject to criminal prosecution for child abandonment. The baby will receive needed medical treatment and be placed in an adoptive home. There is a mechanism for parents to reclaim the infant within 14 days if deemed appropriate by County Child Protective Services. The Safely Surrendered Baby law established hospitals as safe haven sites and allowed the Counties to designate other facilities, such as fire stations, as safe haven sites. On December 11, 2007, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors approved the designation of fire stations that are staffed full-time as safe haven sites as documented in Attachment 1. Fire stations are located in the communities where people work and live, and fire stations have always been thought of as places where people can go to get help. A local fire station can be less intimidating than a hospital. This action by the City Council is necessary to approve the use of local fire stations, which will be posted with signs designating the fire stations as safe surrender sites. Statewide, 182 newborns have been safely surrendered in California since the law was enacted. Unfortunately, infants continue to be illegally abandoned, resulting in injury and death. In north San Diego County, two abandoned infants have been found dead in the past two years. It is frightening to consider how many abandoned infants were never found. The opportunity of hope for a potentially abandoned infant that a fire station safe haven provides will benefit the community. Implementation The Fire Department will conduct in-service training (1ST) sessions for all suppression personnel with respect to the care and handling of infants that may be brought to the City's fire stations under this program. The Fire Department will develop and place into use additional standard operating guidelines that provide specific directions to fire personnel for the implementation of the Safely Surrender Baby Program. Included in these guidelines will be directions regarding: how to interact with the parente s) who wish to surrender their baby, notification of proper authorities, and proper documentation of the event. DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action. FISCAL IMPACT The total cost to implement this program is less than $500 per year to purchase the necessary program materials. Funds are available in the Fire Department's Fiscal Year 2007-2008 budget to cover the expenses related to implementing this program. There will be no additional impact to the general fund as a result of approving this recommendation. 4-2 April 15, 2008 1tem~ Page 3 ATTACHMENT 1: Supporting documents from County of San Diego, dated December 11, 2007. 4-3 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GREG COX First District DIANNE JACOB SeeondDistrict AGENDA ITEM PAM SLATER-PRICE Third Districl RON ROBERTS Fourth Dislricl BILL HORN Fifth District DATE: December 11, 2007 TO: Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE-SURRENDER BABY SITES (DISTRICT: All) SUMMARY: Overview The Board of Supervisors has demonstrated a continuing commitment to the welfare of children in San Diego County through a number of actions in recent years. In line with State law, in 2001 the County's Health and Human Services Agency, Child Welfare Services division (CWS) established policies and procedures for parents or individuals with legal custody to safely surrender an infant 72 hours old or younger without fear of criminal prosecution. The State law and local policy is aimed at preventing unnecessary abandonment and death of helpless children. Currently, safe- surrender sites include public and private hospitals. In an effort to better ensure the safety and well-being of children, today's action seeks Board approval of a resolution to expand the provisions to safely surrender an infant at appropriate local fire agencies that are fully staffed 24 hours a day. The County's CWS staff has collaborated with County Fire Chiefs to develop protocols and procedures to create a safety net to further protect infants who are at risk of abandonment and potential death in San Diego County. Recommendation(s) CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Adopt the Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego to Adopt the Use of City and County Fire Agencies as Safe Surrender Sites." Fiscal Impact There is no known fiscal impact as a result of this action. Business Impact Statement N/A ATTACHMENT 1 Version 1,7-HHSA 4-4 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE SURRENDER BABY SITES (DISTRICT: All) Alternatives N/A Advisory Board Statement This Board Letter was reviewed and accepted by the Commission on Children, Youth and Families Executive committee on November 16, 2007. BACKGROUND: The "Safely Surrendered Baby (SSB) Law," commonly known as the "Safe Arms for Newborns," or "Safe Haven" (SB 1368), was initially implemented January 1,2001, in response to the increased number of abandoned baby deaths in California. Governor Schwarzenegger signed legislation on October 7,2005, extending the law permanently as of January 6, 2006. In line with State law, the County of San Diego has developed policies and procedures to protect children at risk of abandonment. The intent of the law is to prevent exposing infants to the risk of being unsafely and illegally abandoned and to offer a last resort to parents who, in a time of severe emotional distress, may believe they have no other options. It is believed that by allowing parents to legally surrender their child to personnel at a hospital emergency room or fire station, they will do so, ensuring the child's safety. Moreover, the law provides a means for a parent or individual who has lawful custody of an infant to safely surrender their child without fear of being prosecuted for criminal child abandonment. Over the last three fiscal years, there have been four babies abandoned in San Diego county. Today's action would extend the safe-surrender sites to fire agencies that are staffed 24 hours a day. Designated fire station personnel will do the following: . Post clear signage at designated safe-surrender sites that infants may be safely surrendered; . Post clear signage at non-designated sites that it is not a safe-surrender site, and provide a contact number for additional information; . Notify dispatch and request paramedic and/or ambulance assistance; . Place a coded, confidential ankle bracelet on the child; . Make a good faith effort to provide the parent or individual surrendering the child a medical information questionnaire to complete and return; . Ensure that a medical screening examination and any necessary medical care is provided to the minor child; . Contact CWS and inform them of a surrendered infant. The policy will permit the paramedic to assume the custody of the infant, initiate hospital contact, and continue to assess and provide for any medical needs of the infant. The Paramedic shall transport the infant to the receiving hospital and transfer custody to a designated hospital employee. In accordance with State law, neither a safe-surrender site nor its personnel shall be - 2 - 4-5 ATTACHMENT 1 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE SURRENDER BABY SITES (DISTRICT: All) subject to civil, criminal, or administrative liability for accepting a surrendered child in the good faith belief that the action is required pursuant to Health and Safety Code 1255.7. Linkage to the County of San Diego Strategic Plan This action is directly aligned with the County of San Diego's Strategic Plan in that it provides for the health and safety of at-risk children by allowing parents or individuals to confidentially surrender an unharmed newborn at a public or private hospital or local fire agency, designated by a county Board of Supervisors, without fear of criminal prosecution. Respectfully submitted, II "\J r~"C -' WALTERF. EKARD Chief Administrative Officer - 3 - 4-6 AlTACHMENT 1 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TUESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2007 MINUTE ORDER NO. 3 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE- SURRENDER BABY SITES (DISTRICTS: ALL) OVERVIEW: The Board of Supervisors has demonstrated a continuing commitment to the welfare of children in San Diego County through a number of actions in recent years. In line with State law, in 2001 the County's Health and Human Services Agency, Child Welfare Services division (CWS) established policies and procedures for parents or individuals with legal custody to safely surrender an infant 72 hours old or younger without fear of criminal prosecution. The State law and local policy is aimed at preventing unnecessary abandonment and death of helpless children. Currently, safe-surrender sites include public and private hospitals. In an effort to better ensure the safety and well-being of children, today's action seeks Board approval of a resolution to expand the provisions to safely surrender an infant at appropriate local fire agencies that are fully staffed 24 hours a day. The County's CWS staff has collaborated with County Fire Chiefs to develop protocols and procedures to create a safety net to further protect infants who are at risk of abandonment and potential death in.San Diego County. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no known fiscal impact as a result of this action. RECOMMENDATION: CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Adopt the Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego to Adopt the Use of City and County Fire Agencies as Safe Surrender Sites." ACTION: ON MOTION of Supervisor Slater-Price, seconded by Supervisor Horn, the Board took action as recommended, on Consent, adopting Resolution No. 07-246 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO ADOPT THE USE OF CITY AND COUNTY FIRE AGENCIES AS SAFE-SURRENDER SITES. AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn AlTACHMENT 1 4-7 State ofCalifomia) County of San Diego) ~ I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of the Original entered in the Minutes of the Board of Supervisors. THOMAS J. PASTUSZKA Clerk of the Board of Supervisors BY~~ nVI ' ,all.. Deputy 4-8 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2008- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA IMPLEMENTING THE SAFELY SURRENDERED BABY PROGRAM AND DESIGNATING CHULA VISTA FIRE STATIONS AS SAFE SURRENDER SITES WHEREAS, SB 1368, Safely Surrendered Baby Program, became California law in 200 I; and WHEREAS, Governor Schwarzenegger signed legislation October 7,2005 extending the Safely Surrendered Baby Law permanently beginning January 1,2006; and WHEREAS, the Safely Surrendered Baby Program allows parents to surrender unwanted infants who are 72 hours old or younger, as set forth in California Health and Safety Code section 1255.7, to employees at designated facilities safely, confidentially, and without fear of prosecution; and WHEREAS, by action on December 11, 2007, the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors authorized fire stations that are staffed full time to be designated as Safe Surrender sites; and WHEREAS, the Safely Surrendered Baby law provides a safe alternative to desperate mothers who are unwilling or unable to keep their babies; and WHEREAS, a local fire station may provide a less intimidating alternative than a hospital for a frightened and desperate parent and offers an endangered infant a chance for survival; and WHEREAS, signs will be posted outside all nine Chula Vista fire stations designating them as safe surrender sites pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 1255.7(B)(4); and WHEREAS, the total cost to implement this program is less than $500 per year to purchase the necessary program materials and will result in no impact to the City's General Fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve and designate, under the authority of the California Health and Safety Code and the action of the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors, the use of the nine City of Chula Vista fire stations as safe surrender sites, as defined by the Health and Safety Code section 1255.7. J:\Attomey\RESO\FIRE\Safe Surrender Baby Program_04-15-08.doc 4-9 Resolution No. 2008- Page 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby authorize the implementation of the Safely Surrendered Baby Program within the Chula Vista Fire Department. Presented by Approved as to form by James S. Geering Fire Chief (Interim) J:\Allamey\RESO\FIRE\Safe Surrcl1der Baby Program_04-15-08.doc 4-10 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~1~CI1YOf . - It ;_"'" (HULA VISTA 04/15/2008 Item ;: ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $45,000 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE TRANSIT FUND FOR UPGRADING THE SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM AT THE JOHN LIPPITT PUBLIC WORKS CENTER AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007/2008 TRANSIT CAPITAL BUDGET. REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER ASSIST ANT CITY SUBMITTED BY: 4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO D BACKGROUND The current security camera system, which dates to 2002, at the Public Works Center (PWC) needs to be enhanced and upgraded to increase security. The existing camera system does not use low light level cameras and fails to focus on critical areas of the PWC i.e. Natural Gas Fueling Station, Hydrogen Electrolizer, and Fuel Dispensers. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies for a Class I categorical exemption pursuant to Section 1530 I [Existing Facilities] of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. RECOMMENDATION That the Council appropriate $45,000 from the available balance of the Transit Fund for upgrading the security camera system at the John Lippitt Public Works Center and amending the FY 2007-2008 Transit Capital budget. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable 5-1 04/15/08, Item 5 Page 2 of 2 DISCUSSION The current security camera system has degraded to the point that it jeopardizes the security of the facilities, vehicles and personnel at the PWC. The manufacturer no longer supports the existing video hardware and deteriorating underground cables have rendered 12 out of25 cameras non-operational. The proposal is to incorporate as many of the existing cameras as possible into the new system by upgrading the connectivity. The proposed upgrade has the potential to increase the number of cameras to 40. This will improve view angles to better monitor operations. Currently, certain areas of the PWC need increased vigilance: Fueling Infrastructure, Revenue Collection Area, Transit Maintenance Shop and Service Gate. Additionally, the transit contractor, Veolia Transportation, Inc., operates approximately a 24-hour schedule at the PWC. This movement of buses and contractor personnel within the PWC needs to be monitored to increase the integrity of all operations. This system will also benefit all City Departments that operate from the PWC. Transit Division staff, with the assistance from General Services' Electronic Support Services Division, requested informal quotations from three providers. The following are the cost results: Companv Cost Advance Electronic Solutions $39,984.00 Chula Vista Alarm $41,042.75 Electo Specialty Systems $82,650.00 Advance Electronic Solutions had the lowest quote and is the only firm that addressed the issue oflimited available conduit space by utilizing twisted pair technology. Twisted pair cable has the following advantages: 1) PWC already utilizes twisted pair technology 2) Smaller than coax cable, which allows for more conduit space 3) Ability to send and receive video without degradation 4) Less expensive than coax cable DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Councilmembers and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property, which is the subject of this action. FISCAL IMPACT CVT operations and capital programming contains no General Fund contribution. This project will be funded with City Transportation Development Act Article 4.0 funds that are part of Transit Fund. There is no impact to the General Fund. ATTACHMENTS N/A Prepared by: Andy Trujillo - Transit Manager, Deparlment of Public Works, Transit Division 5-2 RESOLUTION NO. 2008- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $45,000 FROM THE A V AILABLE BALANCE OF THE TRANSIT FUND FOR UPGRADING THE SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM AT THE JOHN LIPPITT PUBLIC WORKS CENTER AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007/2008 TRANSIT CAPITAL BUDGET WHEREAS, the current security camera system, which dates back to 2002, at the John Lippitt Public Works Center (PWC) has degraded to the point that it jeopardizes the security of the facilities, vehicles and personnel at the PWC; and WHEREAS, the existing camera system does not use low light level cameras and fails to focus on critical areas of the PWC, i.e. Natural Gas Fueling Station, Hydrogen Electrolizer, and Fuel Dispensers; and WHEREAS, the manufacturer of the security camera system no longer supports the existing video hardware and deteriorating underground cables have rendered twelve out of twenty-five cameras non-operational; and WHEREAS, the proposal is to incorporate as many of the existing cameras as possible into the new system by upgrading the connectivity; and WHEREAS, the proposed upgrade has the potential to increase the number of cameras to forty, which will improve angles to better monitor operations; and WHEREAS, currently, certain areas need increased vigilance: Fueling Infrastructure, Revenue Collection Area, Transit Maintenance Ship and Service Gate; and WHEREAS, the transit contractor, Veolia Transportation, Inc., operates approximately a twenty-four-hour schedule at the PWC; and WHEREAS, this movement of buses and contractor personnel within the PWC needs to be monitored to increase the integrity of all operations; and WHEREAS, this system will also benefit all City departments that operate from the PWC; and WHEREAS, Transit Division staff, with the assistance from General Services' Electronic Support Services Division, requested informal quotations from three providers; and J:\AltomeyIRESOIF1NANCE\Approprialc funds - Transit Fund_1J4.I 5-08.doc 5-3 Resolution No. Page 2 WHEREAS, Advance Electronic Solutions had the lowest quote and is the only firm that addressed the issue of limited available conduit space by utilizing twisted pair technology, which has the following advantages: (I) PWC already utilizes twisted pair technology; (2) twisted pair technology is smaller than coax cable, which allows for more conduit space; (3) twisted pair technology has the ability to send and receive video without degradation; and, (4) twisted pair technology is less expensive than coax cable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista appropriates $45,000 from the available balance of the Transit Fund for upgrading the security camera system at the John Lippitt Public Works Center. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City ofChula Vista amends the fiscal year 2007/2008 Transit Capital budget. Presented by Approved as to form by ~(~~~ Ann Moore ' City Attorney Dave Byers Director of Public Works J:\Altomey\RESOIFINANCE\Appropriale funds - Transil Fund_04-IS-0B.doc 5-4 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~('f:. CITY OF "'& (HULA VISTA APRIL 15, 2008, 1tem~ SUBMITTED BY: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CHARGING FULL COST RECOVERY FEES FOR ANY NON-CITY SPONSORED EVENTS REQUIRING POLICE SERVICES OR OTHER CITY STAFF AS PART OF THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT P DIRECTOR OF COMMUN ICATIONS At CHIEF OF POLICE ~ )(/7 . CITY MANAGER )YfJU'-0 4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO [!J ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: SUMMARY A request has been made to replace the City's policy of charging full cost recovery for police services with a reduced rate for those services at two upcoming non city-sponsored events. Full cost recovery includes all expenses associated with hiring officers for an event (hourly rate, gas, uniform, vehicle and other city overhead). Due to severe budget constraints, staff does not recommend approving a reduced rate for either event. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it does not involve a physical change to the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060 (c) (3) of the State Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary. COMMENDATION Council accepts the report. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable 6-1 APRIL 15, 2008, Item~ Page 2 of2 DISCUSSION In October 2007, the City Council approved overtime budget reductions for the Police Department related to community events. The Council ultimately approved enough overtime funds to staff the Starlight Parade in December. But a consequence of adopting the overtime cuts is that there are no longer any discretionary funds for the City Manager to waive fees associated with special events. Staff from all departments have been instructed to charge full cost recovery for any staff time required for any special events. Full cost recovery rates were developed to capture all costs associated with staff time including salary, benefits, supervision, administration (both at the department level and at the City-wide level), capital costs, etc. The Office of Budget and Analysis developed these rates based upon an extensive study of the true costs of providing staff for various activities. FCR fees are routinely charged for development related activities. The Third Avenue Village Association (TA V A) is requesting a reduced rate for police services at two upcoming events: the Cinco de Mayo Celebration on May 4 and Lemon Festival on August 10. In prior years, the City Manager waived fees for police services at these events, but due to recent Council approved cuts to the Police Department's budget related to community events, there are no discretionary funds available to offset staff time for these events. Waiving fees for these events will require an appropriation of funds to the Police Department to ensure adequate funding of overtime for normal police operations. Currently, funds for police services for special events are limited to the Starlight Parade. DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property that is subject of this action. FISCAL IMPACT The estimated full cost recovery for police services at Cinco de Mayo and the Lemon Festival is $12,954. ATTACHMENTS None Prepared by: Edward Chew, Administrative Services Manager. Police Department Liz Pursell, Director a/Communications. Office of Communications 6-2 ITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~~ CITY OF ~...". CHULA VISTA Item No.: -::r Meeting Date: 4/15/08 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A LAND OFFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND OTAY LAND COMPANY FOR CONVEYANCE OF 210 ACRES TO THE CITY FOR UNIVERSITYIREGIONAL TECHNOLOGY PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION PURPOSES, ACKNOWLEDGING THE OFFERS OF DEDICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF 1 MILLION DOLLARS FOR UNIVERSITY RECRUITMENT AND PLANNING PURPOSES. DIRECTOR OF PL ND BUILDING~ CITY MANAGER ASSISTANT CIT MANAGER sr 4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO 0 One of the key goals of the Chula Vista General Plan is the development of a University/Regional Technology Park. Successful implementation of the Land Offer Agreement would further this goal through the receipt by the City of 210 acres of developable/mitigation land as well as 2-million dollars for University Recruitment/Planning. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 7-1 Page 2 of 4, Item No.: ;::;, Meeting Date: 4/15/08 15061 (b )(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Future entitlements associated with the land offer agreement will be subject to further environmental review at the time specific projects are proposed. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into the proposed land offer agreement between the City and Otay Land Company, LLC. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION Background: Since adoption of the 1993 Otay Ranch General Development Plan, the City of Chula Vista has maintained the vision of an institution (s) of higher education within our corporate limits. Progress was previously made through the acquisition of over 550 acres of land, for university development and as an open space buffer as part of the Otay Ranch Preserve. Recognizing the need for viable employment lands, the December 2005 General Plan Update called for a Regional Technology Park use in conjunction with a university(s). In January 2006 the former City manager requested the two key land owners (one was a land owner, the other had an option on their land) work together on a land plan to then be reviewed by City staff. The goal was a land plan that would work for both property owners and meet the goals and policies of the General Plan and General Development Plan. Other the course of a year, the two parties were not able to reach closure. In December 2007 the Planning and Building Director sent both land owners a letter requesting "an agreed-upon proposal" by January 12, 2007 or the City will initiate our own Land Planning process, which will respect the property rights of the land owners, but be solely based on the best interest of the community at large. Since Spring of 2007 the Planning and Building staff and the City Attorney have been working with the Otay Land Company in order to create a land plan that would facilitate the future development of a university(ies) and a Regional Technology Park while also providing equitable benefit to the land owners. These negotiations have been extremely complex since the only acceptable outcome would be a win/win for all parties. For the City this means; I) a land plan that on its own merits is beneficial to the City and carries out the goals of the General Plan and Otay Ranch General Development Plan, and 2) dedication of land necessary for the university/regional technology park complex and other benefits. In the case of the landowner, there needs to be significantly greater benefit than the development intensity they already enjoy through their existing development agreement. The draft 7-2 Page 3 of 4, Item No.: -:f Meeting Date: 4/15/08 development agreement provides the Otay Land Company, LLC the opportunity to achieve a maximum of 6,050 residential units and 1.8 million square feet of commercial development. Maior Terms of Agreement Under the terms of the proposed land offer agreement, upon approval of entitlements, the property owner would convey 50 acres, which has been designated as a portion of the proposed "UniversitylRegional Technology Park" to the City of Chula Vista for future conveyance to qualified higher education institution(s). The property owner would also convey an additional 160 acres of habitat land which will be used to mitigate the future Regional Technology Park and 2 million dollars (one million dollars up front), towards the recruitment of a university(ies) and the initiation of the University Land Planning efforts. The agreement required The Otay Land Company to provide the City of Chula Vista with Irrevocable Offers of Dedication (lOD's) for the 50 acres of University/Tech Park Land and the 160 acres of mitigation land within 5 days of execution of the land offer agreement. The City would take title to the property upon approval of the requested entitlements within the required timeframes. The Agreement sets forth the terms under which the City may accept this offer. Specifically, in order to accept the offer of dedication, the City would be required to provide the following considerations: Approval of all stated entitlements for proposed development of Villages 4, 8, and 9 and a portion of the Eastern Urban Center. It should be noted that the City and property owners are proposing to reconfigure portions of the City General Plan/Otay Ranch General Development Plan. Under the Land Offer Agreement, the entitlements include a General Plan Amendment, Otay Ranch GDP amendment, a SPA Plan, and tentative map. The maximum residential unit count is 6,050 with a maximum allowed commercial square footage of 1.8 million for property under Otay Land Company ownership. The City would also receive one million dollars for University Recruitment/Planning purposes upon execution of the Land Offer Agreement. A second one million dollars for the same purpose would be received after approval of the requested entitlements. The draft Land Offer Agreement provides the Otay Land Company with the option of repurchasing the dedicated University/Tech Park property if the City (or subsequent entity) should choose to use the property for non-university/tech park or related purposes. The repurchase agreement provision expires upon the earlier of either occupancy of 90% of the residential units within the project as evidenced by [mal inspection notices or upon expiration of the amended Pre-arrnexation Development Agreement. The Draft Agreement also provides for the transfer of up to 15% of the residential units between Villages within Otay Ranch. Any transfer greater than 15% requires approval by the Planning and Building Director based upon specific requirements. Both City staff and the Otay Land 7-3 Page 4 of 4, Item No.: -=; Meeting Date: 4/15/08 Company believe these provisions will provide the necessary flexibility to create better Village plans. The agreement includes a 30-day preliminary review of the conditions of approval for the SPA Plan, as well as the draft Public Facilities Financing Plan, following close of the public review period for the draft EIR. During this time, the applicant may review proposed conditions and requirements for the project, and may decide to stop processing the entitlements if the owners determine that the proposed conditions would render the project economically infeasible. Analvsis This offer agreement provides the City with an opportunity to obtain another significant portion of the proposed University/Regional Technology Park Site, through providing certain considerations in conjunction with future entitlements for the Otay Ranch Villages 4, 7, 8, 9 and a portion of the Eastern Urban Center. Acquisitions of the University Site and necessary mitigation acreage would be a major step forward in achieving the City's key General Plan goals. Attached is a preliminary Site Utilization Plan, which depicts locations of land uses, approximate densities and the location of major arterials. Although we are aware that there are always refmements to any land plan as we work with the applicant through the entitlement process, we have conducted a preliminary analysis and we believe the proposed land plan can be consistent with and accomplished within the overall policy framework established by the City's General Plan. This plan would also preserve the character already established within the Otay Ranch Master Planned Community. Further, the additional residential units as authorized by the entitlements subsequent to this agreement will be needed in order to provide adequate housing to support the university. It should be emphasized that both the City Council and Planning Commission will have full discretionary authority to consider the proposed plan changes at the time they are presented in a public hearing, with benefit of a final ErR and staff analysis. On this basis, staff is recommending that the City Council approve the attached agreement, and direct staff to move forward to complete a project staffing plan and processing schedule which will provide for completion of processing of entitlements in accordance with the overall schedule set forth in this agreement. FISCAL IMP ACT The applicant would pay for all costs associated with processing the terms of this agreement. Prepared by: James D. Sandoval, Director of Planning and Building Attachment: Draft Land Offer Agreement (including exhibits) J:\planning)jimICOUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Univ Land Offer 3-11.08.doc 7-4 THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL O--~ Ann Moore City Attorney Dated: y /3/0 r LAND OFFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OT A Y LAND COMPANY, LLC AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 7-5 RECORDmG REQUEST BY: City Clerk WHEN RECORDED MAlL TO: CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Above Space for Recorder's Use LAND OFFER AGREEMENT This Land Offer Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into to be effective as of;?",..., 1 1 L,'tf 2008, by and between Otay Land Company LLC, aDelaware limited liability company ("Owner") and the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ("City"). RECITALS A. Owner owns the undeveloped real property located in the City as more particularly described and shown on the attached Exhibit "A" (the "Property") B. The Property is part of a master planned co=unity co=only lmown as portions of Villages 4, 7, 8, 9 and the Eastern Urban Center of the Otay Ranch Project. C. City has requested Owner to convey to City fifty (50) acres within the Property designated for the development of a facility for higher education and other compatible land uses as described herein ("University Property") and one hundred sixty (160) acres of open space ("Open Space Property"). The University Property is shown and described on Exhibit "B" and the Open Space Property is shown and described on Exhibit "B-1". D. Owner desires certain development entitlements for the Property that require processing and discretionary review by the City. E. . Owner and City by entering into this Agreement shall set forth the terms and conditions precedent for Owner's conveyance and City's acceptance of the University Property and the Open Space Property, as well as the process for the City's consideration of certain development entitlements for the Property. NOW, TIIEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby aclmowledged, Owner and City agree as follows: wmd Offer Agreement Between Otay lnnd Company LLC and CIty ofChuln Vista 1 7-6 ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1 Definitions. This Agreement uses a number of terms having specific meanings, as defined below. These specially defined terms are distinguished by having the initial letter capitalized, when nsed in this Agreement. The defined terms inclnde the following: "Development Agreement" means the Restated and Amended Pre-Annexation Development Agreement between the City and Otay Ranch, L.P. recorded May 12, 1997. "Effective Date" means the date set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. "Entitlements" means: (i) amendments to the City's General Plan and the Olay Ranch General Development Plan which establish 6050 as the ma.-'{imum number of residential units and 1.8 million square feet of commercial uses to be permitted for development, and amendments to the Development Agreement to include only the provisions specifically set forth on Exhibit "C"; (ii) Sectional Planning Area Plans ("SPA Plans'') for the Property designating the permitted land uses, densities and intensities of development, which are in substantial compliance with the Land Use Plan depicted on Exhibit "D"; (iii) tentative subdivision maps to subdivide the Property in accordance with the SPA Plans and related entitlement documents, such as Public Facilities Financing Plans, necessary to implement the SPA Plans, as may be identified in the Processing Agreement; and (iv)appropriate California Enviromnental Quality Act compliance for the discretionary actions outlined in items (i) and (iii), above. "Growth Program" means the City policies and standards intended to regulate the timing and phasing or rate of growth within the City, as set fOlih in the City's Growth Management Element of the City's General Plan in effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. "Hazardous Materials" means any substance, material or waste which is or becomes (1) regulated by any local or regional governmental authority, the State of California or the United States Government as hazardous waste, (ii) defined as a "solid waste", "sludge", "hazardous waste", "extremely hazardous waste", "resmcted hazardous waste", "Non-RCRA hazardous waste," "ReRA hazardous waste", or "recyclable material", under any federal, state or local statue, regulation or ordinance, including without limitation Sections 25115, 25117, 25117.9, 25120.2, 25120.5, 251227, 25140,25141 of the Calitomia Health and Safety Code; (iii) deffied as "Hazardous Substance" under Section 25316 of the Ca1itornia Health and Safety Code; (iv) defined as a "Hazardous Material", "Hazardous Substance", or "Hazardous Waste" under Section 2550] of the California Health and Safety Code; (v) defined as a "Hazardous Substance" under Section 25281 of the California Health and Safety Code; (vi) asbestos; (vii) petroleum products, including without limitation, petroleum, gasoline, used oil, crude oil, waste oil and any fraction thereof, natural gas, natural gas liquefied, natural gas or synthetic fuels, (viii) materials defined as hazardous or extremely hazardous pursuant to the California Code of Regulations; (ix) polychloriuated biphenyls; Land OtTer ,AgreL'lTlent BctwL"en Otay Land Company LLC and City ofChula Vista 2 7-7 (x) defined as a "Hazardous Substance" pursuant to Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.c. Section 1251, et seq.); (xi) defined as a "Hazardous Waste" pursuant to Section 1004 of the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901, et seq., (xii) defined as a "Hazardous Substance" or "Mixed WaIJte" pursuant to Section I 0 I of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 9601, et seq. and regulations promulgated hereunder; (xiii) defined as a "Hazardous Substance" pursuant to Section 401.15 of the Clean Water Act, 40 C.F.R. 116; OR (xiv) defined as an "Extremely Hazardous Substance" pursuant to Section 302 ofthe Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizations Act of 1986, 42 U.S.c. Section 11002, et seq. "Irrevocable Offer of Dedicationl Offer of Dedication" means the document, substantially in the form attached as Exhibit "E," allowing for the trmlsfer of ownership of the University Propelty and Open Space Property to the City in accordance with Government Code Section 7050. "Open Space Property" means the real property described and shown on Exhibit "B-1" to 111is Agreement. "Processing Agreement" means the Project Staffing and Processing Agreement, to be entered into by the City and Owner, in which the timing and processing of the Entitlements win be set forth therein. "Project" meIDlS the development of the Property consistent witil the provisions of the Entitlements, applicable City policies and standards including the City Growth Program and Ordinance. "Property" means the real property described and shown in Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. "Telm" shall mean the period oftime from the Effective Date until the termination ofthis Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 4.3. "Third Party Litigation" means any claim, action, referendum or proceeding filed and served against the City and/or Owner by anyone not a party to this Agreement or their agents or successors in interest to challenge, set aside, void or annul the approval of this Agreement or the Entitlements, including without linlitation, attacks upon California Enviromnental Quality Act compliance. "University Property" means the real property described and shown on Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. Land Offer Agreement Between Otay Land Company LLC and City of Chula Vista 3 7-8 ARTICLE 2 OFF.ER OF DEDICATION 2.1 Offer of Dedication. Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, Owner shall submit to the City an Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication, for the following properties: (i) the University Property to allow for the use of the University Property for higher educational purposes and related compatible uses, active public recreation, quasi public, and all other uses, including residential, industrial and commercial; and (ii) the Open Space Property to allow for the use of said property for open space, mitigation, active recreation and any uses pem1itted in accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. The uses set forth for the University Property and the Open Space Property shall be referred to collectively as the ("Permitted Uses"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event the City determines that the University Property or a portion thereof, win be developed for any Permitted Uses other than (i) higher educational uses, including a university Can1PUS; (ii) university-related housing (student andlor faculty housing); (iii) a regional technology park or campus intended to attract and promote a university; or (iv) uses anciJlary to a university, such as a bookstore, coffee house or copy center, or other accessory land uses commonly associated with higher educational institutions (uses other than those described in subsections (i) through (iv) collectively shall be referred to as "Non-university Development"), Owner shall have the right to repurchase that portion of the University Property proposed for Non-university Development in accordancc with the terms and conditions set forth herein ("Repurchase Right"). The Repurchase Right shall take effect upon the City's acceptance of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for the University Property and expire upon the earlier to occur of: (i) the expiration of the Development Agreement; or (ii) the occupancy of ninety percent (90%) of the residential units within the Project, as evidenced by final inspection notices ("Repurchase Right Expiration"); unless tenninated earlier as to all or a pOltion ofthe University Property in accordance with Paragraph 2.3. The Repurchase Right shall be included in the Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication recorded concurrently with the recordation of this Agreement and shall be a covenant nmning with the University Property. City'S acceptance ofthe Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication shal1 be subject to the terms ofthis Agreement. 2.2 Offer to Purchase. In the event the Repurchase Right is triggered in accordance with Paragraph 2.1, the City shall promptly offer to sell that portion proposed for Non-university Development to Owner ("Offer to Purchase"). The Offer to Purchase shall include the following: (i) Purchase Price (fair market value, subject to Paragraph 2.2(iv) below), to be paid in cash. (ii) Closing Date, not sooner than 60 days from the date the Purchase Agreement is executed. (iii) The Purchase Agreement shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit F. Land Offer Agreement Between Otay Land Company lLC and City of Chum Vistu 4 7-9 (iv) If the parties do not agree on the fair market value of that portion of the University Property proposed for Non-university Development, then the fair market value of said property shall be determined by an appraiser acceptable to both parties. If the parties are unable to agree on an appraiser witllin ten (10) days after the City delivers the Offer to Purchase to Owner ("Delivery Date''), within twenty (20) days after the Delivery Date, each party shall each name an appraiser who is a member of MAr or an equivalent organization and has at least five (5) years experience appraising similar property in the Chula Vista area. If either party fails to appoint such an appraiser within such period, and such failure continues for more than five (5) days following written notice from the other party, the appraiser appointed by the party giving such notice shall proceed to make the appraisal as herein set forth, and the determination thereof shall be conclusive on both parties. TIle two (2) selected appraisers will each prepare an appraisal report within thirty (30) days after their appointment. lfthe two (2) appraisers' determination of the fair market value of said property is within ten percent ( I 0%) of each other, then the fair market value of the same will be the a1itlrmetic average of the two (2) appraisals. Otherwise, the two (2) selected appraisers will appoint a third appraiser within ten (10) days after issuance oftheir appraisal reports, ("Deciding Appraiser") meeting the same qualifications and who has no preexisting material financial or business relationship witlr eitlrer of tlre appraisers, City or Owner. Iftlre two (2) selected appraisers fail to appoint a Deciding Appraiser within such period, tlren either party may petition a COUl1 of competent jurisdiction to appoint a Deciding Appraiser meeting the qualifications set forth herein, in tlre same manner as provided for the appointment of an arbitrator pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6. The Deciding Appraiser may not receive or consider tlre appraisals prepared by tlre other two (2) appraisers. The Deciding Appraiser will deliver its report to tlre parties within thirty (30) days after its appointment and tlre fair market value of said property will be eitlrer: (i) ifthe fair market value determined by the Deciding Appraiser is between the values determined by the first two (2) appraisers, the a1itll1netic average of tlle two (2) appraisals iliat are closest to each other; or, (ii) ifthe fair market value determined by the Deciding Appraiser is higher or lower than both of tlre values determined by ilie frrst two (2) appraisers, tlle fair market value determined by the appraisal oftlre first two (2) appraisers iliat is closest to the value determined by the Deciding Appraiser. The parties shall share equally ilie fees and expenses of the appraisers jointly named, if any, but each party shall be responsible for the fees and expenses of any appraiser nallled solely by that party. Each party shall bear its owu expenses in presenting evidence to the appraisers. The determination of fair market value by the appraiser( s) shall be final and binding 011 tile parties. Land Offer Agreement Between Otay Land Company LLC and City of Chula Vista 5 7-10 NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE THE DETERMINATION OF THEFAlRMARKET VALUE OF THAT PORTION OF THE UNIVERSITY PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR NON-UNlVERSITY DEVELOPMENT AS PROVIDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH 2.2 (iv) DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA LA WAND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS REGARDING THE FAlRMARKET VALUE TO HAVE LmGATED IN A COURT OR JURY TRIAL. SUCH ARBITRATION WILL NOT APPLY TO ANY OTHER DISPUTES OR MATTERS UNDER TIllS AGREEMENT. BY INITIALIZING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGIDS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, UNLESS THESE RIGHTS ARE SPEClFlCALL Y INCLUDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH 2.2 (iv). IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBITRATION AS SET FORTH HEREIN AFTER AGREEING TO THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMl'ELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY. YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUB:MIT DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THIS PARAGRAPH 2.2(iv) TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION. OWNER'S INITIALS:.f!:IJj CITY'S INITIALS: 2.3 Reourchase Right. City and Owner agree to negotiate in good faith the Purchase Price contained in the Offer to Purchase, provided however, if City and Owner can not agree on the Purchase Price within twenty (20) days after the City delivers the Offer to Purchase to Owner, the Purchase Price shall be determined in accordance with Paragraph 2.2(iv). Owner shall have ten (10) days from the date Owner is notified of the final determination offair market value pursuant to Paragraph 2.2(iv) within which to notifY the City whether it intends to exercise its Repurchase Right. !fOwner declines to exercise the Repurchase Right or fails to timely notifY City of its determination, the Repurchase Right shall be terminated as to that portion of the University Property proposed for Non-university Development. In such event, the City shall have a right to proceed with the proposed development or sale at the same or higher price than that set forth in the Offer to Purchase, and equivalent terms. Thereafter, if the City decides to change the price of said property to be less than that set forth in the Offer to Purchase or to change other material terms of the same, City shall provide Owner with a new offer to purchase before offering the University Property to any other prospective purchasers ("Renewed Right to Purchase"). The Renewed Right to Purchase shall be governed by the terms of this Agreement. The Renewed Right to Purchase shall expire concurrently with the Repurchase Right Expiration. The Repurchase Right aod Renewed Land OtTer Agreement Between Ota)' Lolnd Cornpnny LLC and City of Chula Vista 6 7-11 Right to Purchase shall terminate prior to the Repurchase Right Expiration as to any portion of the University Property for which Owner declines to exercise such rights. Owner agrees to deliver to City within ten (10) business days of City's written request, a quitclaim deed releasing the University Property, or a portion thereof, from the provisions of the Repurchase Right and Renewed Right to Purchase upon the expiration or earlier termination of said rights as to all or a portion ofthe University Property. 2.3.1 Effect of Convevance on R~I)Urchase Right. At no time shall more than one legal entity possess the Repurchase Right. The Repurchase Right shall terminate as to any portion of the Property conveyed by Owner to a third party which conveyance comprises less than the total Property owned by Owner immediately prior to the conveyance. For example, if Owner conveys to a developer thirty percent (30%) of the Property, the Repurchase Right shall terminate as to the thirty percent (30%) conveyed. Under this example, the Repurchase Right would not tenninate as to the remaining seventy percent (70%) ofland retained by Owner. Ifthe Owner conveys the entirety of the Property at anyone time (a "bulk-sale"), the Repurchase Right shall not terminate and shall continue to run with the land conveyed in the bulk-sale. Using the example above, if Owner subsequently conveyed the remaining seventy percent (70%) of tlle Property in a bulk-sale to a developer, the Repurchase Right would not tenninate as a consequence of such conveyance. 2.3.2 No Vested Development Ri~ts. Owner acknowledges and agrees that neither this Agreement nor the Development Agreement confer vested development rights upon any portion ofthe University Property acquired by Owner pursuant to the Repurchase Right and Owner shall be subject to applicable City land use regulations with regard to any future applications to develop said property. 2.4. Execution of Offer. Ifthe Owner exercises the Repurchase Right for that portion of the University Property proposed for Non-university Development, Owner agrees to execute the purchase agreement, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "F" within forty five (45) days after the determination of fair market value pursuant to Paragraph 2.2 (iv). 2.5. Title Insurance. Within twenty (20) days o[the Effective Date, Owner shall have obtained, at its expense, title insurance naming the City as the insured and, guaranteeing fee title, subject to any exceptions or conditions approved by the City, for the University Property and Open Space Property from Chicago Title Insurance Company in an amOlmt reasonably agreed upon by the parties representing the estimated fair market value of the properties as of the Effective Date. Owner shall maintain said title insurance for the individual properties in full force and effect until the City has accepted the Irrevocable Offers of Dedications for the University Property and Open Space Property . 2.6. Encumbrances. The Owner or successors-in-interest to Owner, may place liens, encumbrances and other title exceptions on the University Property and Open Space Property up until the time frames set forth herein for the respective properties; provided, however such liens, encumbrances, and other except.ions to title are removed from the title to said properties in Land Offer Agreement Between Otay Land Company LLC and City ofChula Vista 7 7-12 accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Owners shall provide the City with written notice of any liens, encumbrances, or other exceptions placed on the respective properties within thirty (30) days of its placement on said properties. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, Owner agrees that prior to the City's acceptance of the Offers of Dedication for the University Property and Opens Space Property, it shall take any and all actions necessary to provide each of the respective properties to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than: (i) any easements and rights-of-way determined upon [mal approval of the Entitlements required for development of the Project which do not materially interfere with the intended use of the University Property or Open Space Property for the Permitted Uses; (ii) prorated non-delinquent real estate taxes, special taxes and assessments; and (iii) those exceptions to title that are approved by the City (collectively, (i) through (iii) are referred to as the "Permitted Exceptions"). In addition, Owner shall not pledge the rights to this Agreement as security for any of its other obligations. 2.7 Removal of Encumbrances. No later than five (5) calendar days prior to the first public hearing on the Entitlements, Owner shall remove all liens, encumbrances and any other exceptions, other than the Permitted Exceptions, and any other exception not approved by the City from the title to the University Property and Open Space Property. Owner shall provide the City with an updated Title Report for the University Property and Open Space Property five (5) calendar days prior to the Iast public hearing for the Entitlements as set fo.rth in this Paragraph. Owner understands and agrees that if Owner faiIs to remove alI Iiens, encumbranees and those exceptions, other than the Permitted Exceptions, not approved by the City, in the time frames set forth herein, this Agreement and the Procesaing Agreement shaH be terminated and any remaining hearings on the Entitlements shall be cancelled and the application for the Entitlements shall be considered withdrawn by the Owner. 2.8. JIazardous Waste Report Owner shall provide the City within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement with a Phase One Hazardous Waste Report on the University Propelty and Open Space Property by a professional firm acceptable to the City and again not less than thirty (30) days prior to the first public hearing for the Entitlements with an update ofthe Phase One Hazardous Waste Report for the respective propeliies by the same professional finn. Owner sh,11I be responsible for the costs of both reports. Owner understands that the City's acceptance of the Offers of Dedication is conditioned upon the City's approval of said report and that the City has entered into this Agreement contingent 011 the University Property and Open Space Property being free and clear of any environmental condition which would be a violation of any applicable federal, state or local law, ordinance or reguIation relating to Hazardous Materials. Owner fmiher understands and agrees that Owner, in addition to any obligations as the property owner, is fully responsible for the administration and oversight of the environmentaI condition of the University Property and Open Space Property until the City has accepted the Offer of Dedications for the respective properties. If after the City's review of the updated Phase One Hazardous Waste Report for said properties, the City determines the environmental condition of the University Property or Open Space Property is not acceptable to the City, Owner may, in its discretion, cure said condition within thirty (30) days of City's written notice to Owner that such property is not acceptable. If Owner decides not to cure the condition of the University Property or Open Space Property, this Land Offer Al.:,'Teernetlt Betwf..ocn Dl:ay Laud Company LLC and CityofCllUla Vista 8 7-13 Agreement and the Processing Agreement shall be tenninatedand any applications submitted for the Project shall be considercd withdra~n by the Owner and any and all hearings for the Entitlements shall be cancelled. 2.9 Transfer of Units. Owner may transfer, at its discretion, up to fifteen percent (15%) of the units allocated to a village within the Project to another village within the same Project. The Planning Director may approve, in his or her discretion, any transfer of units more than fifteen percent (15%) or any transfer of units to another village within Otay Ranch but not within the Project, if all of the following requirements are satisfied: (il the transfer of units between villages is consistent with the GDP's and Village Design policies on density transfers, (ii) the total number oftmits for the Project is not exceeded, (iii) public facilities and infrastructure including schools and parks are provided based on the final number of units within each village or Planning Area, (iv) the planned identity of the villages are preserved including the creation of pedestrian friendly and transit-oriented development; and (v) preserve conveyance obligations will continue to be based on the final map development area. ARTICLE 3 ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION 3.1. Entitlements Processing. Owner will file with City all applications and pay all applicable fees for the review, processing, and consideration of the Entitlements by the City. City will diligently process, in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Processing Agreement, the Entitlements tor final consideration by the City COllllcil. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City's acceptance of the Offer of Dedication is not contingent on the time frames associated with the processing ofthe Entitlements as set forth in the Processing Agreement, except tllat final approval of the Entitlements must be rcceived by the Owner within the time frame set forth in Paragraph 3.3 herein. In addition, Owner understands and agrees that the processing and/or approval of final maps, grading permits and other mini sterial permits are not subject to this Agreement and the acceptance of the Offer of Dedication to the City shall not be contingent on Owner receiving such ministerial approvals. 3.2. Review Period. Ov,ner shall have thirty (30) days after the final draft for the Entitlements (which include all of the conditions and mitigation measures associated with said docUt1lents) ("Final Draft Entitlements") have been completed by the City, to review such documents and decide whether to proceed with processing the Entitlements. During the Owner's thirty-day Land Offer Agreement Between Omy laml COI'npany LLC and City ofChula Vista 9 7-14 review period, City agrees to meet with Owner in good faith to discuss the draft documents and consider any changes Owner may request. Owner shall notifY the City in writing, at the conclusion of the thirty-day review period, as to whether Owner wishes to continue processing the Entitlements. Owner may decide to stop processing the Entitlements if Owner detemlines, in its sole discretion, that it is economically infeasible or undesirable to continue. If City is notified to stop processing Entitlements and the reasons thereof, this Agreement shall tenninate, and the application for the Entitlements shall be considered withdrawn by the Owner. 3.3. Approval of Entitlements. If the Entitlements are approved by the City Council in substantially the fonn of the Final Draft Entitlements on or before twenty four (24) montlls after Owner has suhmitted a completed application for the Project to the City, as such time may be extended as provided for in Paragraph 5.9 (Force Majeure), Owner agrees that the City may thereafter accept the Offers of Dedication for the University Property and the Open Space Property after the expiration of all applicable statutes of limitations to challenge the Entitlements and any additional time caused by Third Party Litigation, as described in Paragraph 3.4 herein. In the event of Third Party Litigation, City may accept the Offers of Dedication upon entry of a final, nonappealable judgment affirming the validity of the Entitlements or other resolution mutually acceptable to the parties ("Favorable Outcome"). In the event of any outcome to the Third Party Litigation other than a Favorable Outcome, the parlies agree to meet and confer regarding corrective action necessary to preserve the Entitlements. In the event Owner or City determines it is not in Owner's or City's interest to proceed with the corrective action necessary to preserve the Entitlements, this Agreement shall tenninate and any Entitlements that have been approved by the City shall be considered void ab initio and be of no effect. In the event Owner and City elect to proceed with the corrective aetion necessary to preserve the Entitlements, the City shall be entitled to accept the Offers of Dedication for tile University Property and Open Spaee Property upon entry ofa final, nonappealable judgment affinning the validity of the Entitlements. In the event the City does not approve the Entitlements in substantially the fonn of the Final Draft Entitlements or in such corrected fonn as necessary to preserve the Entitlements, on or before twenty tour (24) months after Owner has submitted a completed application for the Project to the City, as such time may be extended as provided for in Paragraph 5.9 (Force Majeure), any Entitlements received by Owner shall be considered to have been withdrawn by Owner and City's action on the Entitlement,; shall be void ab initio and be of no effect. 3.4 Third Partv Litigation. In tile event of the occurrence of'TIurd Party Litigation, the tenn of this Agreement shall be extended for the period of the pendency of tile Third Party Litigation or until such time as either the City or Owner (ilTespective of who is named in the Third Party Litigation) decides it is no longer desirable to defend against the Third Party Litigation, at which time written notice shall be provided to the other party reqtlesting tennination ofthis Agreement. In such event, the Entitlements received by Owner shall be considered withdrawn by Owners and be null and void. The City shall return the Irrevocable Offers of Dedication to the Owner. 3.5 Communitv Public Facilities Credit. Onee the City has accepted the Offer of Dedication to the University Property, Owner's obligations to provide Community Public Facilities umd Offer AgR.'elllenl Belween Otay land Company LtC and City ofC1mla Vista 10 7-15 land uses within the Property shall be deemed satisfied. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner shall provide (subject to the approval of the Planning Director) two (2) CPF sites within the Project of four (4) acres each. 3.6 Discretion ofCitv. Owner understands and agrees that the City reserves the right to exercise its discretion as to all matters which the City is by law entitled or required to exercise its discretion with respect to the Entitlements, including but not limited to California Environmental Quality Act and other similar laws. In addition the Entitlements shall be subject to and brought to City Council for consideration in accordance with applicable legal requirements, including laws related to notice, public hearings and due process. In addition, nothing herein shall be construed as to restrict fhe City's ability to exercise its discretion as provided by the City's Growfh Management Program or to condition the Project in the mmmer City determines appropriate in accordance with its general police powers. 3.7 [Intentionally omitted.] 3.8 [Intentionally omitted.] 3.9 Endowment. Upon execution ofthis Agreement, Owner shall provide the City with one million dollars for City to use in its sole discretion for the plmming and recruitment of a university or any other higher educational institution to be located within the Otay Ranch GDP area. Within five (5) days prior to the last public hearing for the Entitlements, Owner shall deliver to Chicago Title Company ("Escrow Agcnt") an addition~ one million dollars ("Escrow Amount") for the City to use in its sole discretion for the planning and recruittnent of a university or mlyother higher educational institution to be located within fhe Otay Ranch GDP area., subject to the terms and conditions of this Paragraph. vVhen all conditions to the City's acceptance of the Offers of Dedication for the University Property and the Open Space Property have been satisfied pursuant to Paragraph 3.3 of this Agreement, Escrow Agent will immediately and automatically release the Escrow Amount to the City. However, if the City does not approve the Entitlements, or if this Agreement terminates for any reason prior to the City's acceptance ofthe Offers of Dedication for theUniversity Property and the Open Space Property pursuant to Paragraph 3.3 ofthis Agrecment, Escrow Agent will immediately and automatically release the Escrow Amount to the Owner. Escrow Agent will deposit the Escrow Amount in one or more accounts designated by Owner. All interest on the Escrow Amount wi1l be paid to Owner. The parties will deliver such instructions as may be reasonably requested by the Escrow Agent so long as they are consistent with the terms of this Agreement. If the City does not approve the Entitlements pursuant to Paragraph 3.3, or in the event this Agreement terminates in accordance with Paragraph 5.19, City shall reimburse the Owner the amount of one million dollars previously paid to the City upon execution of this Agreement within thirty (30) days and Owner shall not be entitled to any interest on said money. In the event Owner fails to pay one million dollars to the City upon execution ofthis Agreement, or fails to place another one million dollars in escrow in accordance with the terms and time frame set forth herein, this Agreement and the Processing Agreement shall be terminated and any applications submitted for LamI Otfer Agreement Bet\Veel'1 Otay Land Company LLC and City of Chula Vista 11 7-16 the Project shall be considered withdrawn by the Owner and any and all hearings for the Entitlements shall be cancelled. 3.1 () Uni versitv Design. The parties acknowledge and agree that a university will benefit the citizens of the City and the reglon and could provide a unique opportunity to complement the development ofthc Property. The City aclmowJedges that the Owner may participate, by providing input and feedback to the City, in the design of any future university within Gtay Ranch including the design of the University Property. City agrees to solicit input from Owner, and the public, meet with Owner to discuss the design of a university, and provide to Owner all non-privileged documents, stndies and materials relevant to the design and development ofa university. It is the desire of the parties to work cooperatively, as allowed by law, in the design of the university to insure compatibility ofJand uses, design and architectnre with other adjacent properties, including the Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained herein shall be construed as to restrict the City's ability to exercise its legislative authority or its discretion as to all matters which the City is by law entitled or required to exercises its discretion with respect to any future decisions of the City with respectto any matter pertaining to the University Property or design of a university. ARTICLE 4 GENERAL PROVISIONS 4.1. Infrastructure To Serve University Propertv. Owner will not be required to fund, and the development ofthe Property shall not be conditioned upon the funding or construction of public infrastructnre required to serve the University Property including, without limitation, streets, sanitary, sewer, storm drain, water, park, open space, landscaping and dry utility facilities llnless City provides reasonable assurance of funding or reimbursement in accordance with State Law and/or the City's ordinances. 4.2. Universitv Propertv Assessments. City agrees not to impose on the University Property any special taxes, assessments, fees, charges or other exactions prior to City acceptance of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of the University Property. Owner shall be responsible for paying any taxes, liens and assessments currently being imposed on the University Property and Open Space Property tmtil the City has accepted the Offer of Dedication. 4.3. Term. The term of this Agreement and the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Agreement shall expire five (5) years from the Effective Date unless extended due to Third Party Litigation or Force Majeure as herein defined, except for such provisions herein which expressly survive beyond the expiration of this five-year term. 4.4. "As Is" Convevance. City is relying solely upon its own inspection, investigation, and analysis of the University Property and the Open Space Property in entering into this Agreement. The University Property and Open Space Property will be conveyed to City on an "as is" basis. The parties agree that Owner makes no representations or warranties regarding the L.and Otfer Agreement Betwt:en Ohty Land Company UC and City ofChulll Vista 12 7-17 . condition of the University Property or Open Space Property, or the fitness of said land for City's intended use or development thereof. ARTICLE 5 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 5.1. Entire Al2Ieement. This Agreement, the Processing Agreement and Entitlements set forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements which are not contained or expressly referred to as an Exhibit herein. No testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissiblc in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 5.2. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, then this Agreement shall terminate in its entirety, unless the parties otherwise agree in writing. 5.3. Interpretation and Governing Law. This Agreenlent and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties hereto, and the rule of constmction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement, all parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof. 5.4. Paragraoh Headings. All Paragraph heading and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any constl1.1ction or interpretation of this Agreement. 5.5. Singular and Plural. As used herein, the singular of any word includes the plural. 5.6. Time of Essence. Time is ofthe essence in the perf01mance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 5.7. Waiver. Failure of a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, or the failure by a party to exercise its rights upon the default of the other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to insist and demand strict compliance by the other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. 5.8. No Third Partv Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit for the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provisions of this Agreement. 5.9. Force Maieure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay Land Offer Agrcemenl Between Otay Land Company LLC and City ofChula Vista 13 7-18 in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the party's control (including the party's employment force), governmental reguJ.ations beyond the City's reasonable control, court actions (such as restraining orders or injunctions), or other causes beyond the party's reasonable control. If any such event shall occur or should delays be caused by Owner failing to submit plans or other documents in a timely manner that causes a delay in the City's processing of the Entitlements, or requests farther changes or amendments to the Project or Entitlements, the term of this Agreement and the time for performance shall be extended for the duration of each such event, provided that the te.rm of this Agreement shall not be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years. 5.10. Mutual Covenants. Unless expressly provided otherwise in this Agreement, the covenants contained herein are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the coucurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 5.11. Successors In Interest. Unless expressly provided otherwise in this Agreement, this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors, assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the Property until released by the mutual consent of the parties. The burden ofthe covenants contained in this Agreement benefit and burdens the Property, its successors and assigns and any successor in interest thereto as wen as benefit the City. City is deemed the beneficiary of such covenants for and in its own right and for the purposes of protecting the interest ofthe community and other parties public or private, in whose favor and for whose benefit of such covenants running with the land have been provided without regard to whether City has been, remained or are owners of any particular land or interest therein. 5.12. Counteroarts. The parties may execute this Agreement in counterpmts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the sam.e affect as if all the parties had executed tbe same instrument. 5.13 Jurisdiction and Venue. Any action Dr law or inequity arising under tbis Agreement or brought by an party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing or detennining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be med and tried in the Superior Court ofthe County of San Diego, State of California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions oflaw providing for the filing, removal or change of venue to any other court. 5.14. Further Actions and Instnnnents. Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performmlce of all obligations under this Agreement aud the satisfaction of the conditions oftbis Agreement. Upon tbe request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or afiidavit ifreasonably required., and file or record suchreqnired instruments and writings reasonably acceptable to such party and take any actions as may be reasonably neCeSSlliy under the terms of this Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions ofthis Agreement, including without Land OtTer Agrec.."menl Between Omy Lmd Company I.LC and City ofChuin Vista 14 7-19 limitation actions necessary to remove this Agreement from the chain of title as to al] or a portion of the Property when authorized by this Agreement, provided that neither party will be obligated to modify any rights or accept any additional obligations or liabilities in connection therewith. Following City's acceptance ofthe Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for the University Property and Open Space Property, upon the request of Owner, City will talee actions reasonably necessary to remove this Agreement from the chain of title of that portion of the Property being conveyed to a third party. 5.15. Amendments in Writin!!!CootJeration. This Agreement may be amended only by \"ritten consent of both parties specifically approving the amendment. 5.16. Notices. Any notice caned for in this Agreement shall be sent by hand delivery, overnight courier service, or by registered or certitied mail as follows: To City at: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue \ Chula Vista, CA 9]9]0 Altn: Ann Moore, City Attorney I . ...........-....-.-------.....-..--.. i Otay Land Company, LLC . 1903 Wright Place, Suite 220 i Carlsbad, CA 92008 . Attn: Mr. Curt R. Noland i To Owner at: \ With a copy to: 1 _..._..__.._._____.___..___......_._...___m .. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP i 600 West Broadway, Suite 2600 . San Diego, CA 9210] , Attn: Jeffrey A Chine, Esq. "_..m.________.._ Or such other address as a party may inform the others of from time to time. Any such notices sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, shall be deemed to have been duly given and received three (3) business days after the same is so addressed and mailed with postage prepaid. Notices delivered by overnight service shall be deemed to have been given upon delivery, charges prepaid to the U.S. Postal Service or private courier. Any notice or other document sent by any other matter shall be effective only upon actual receipt thereof. 5.17. Authoritv to Executc. Owner and the City each wamUlls and represents that the person or persons executing this Agreement and Irrevocable Offers of Dedication on their behalf have the authority to execute this Agreement and Irrevocable Offers of Dedication. 5.18 Exhibits and Attachments. All Exhibits referenced within the Agreement are incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement. L:l1'Id Ofter Agreement Between Omy Land Company LLC and City ofCl,ula Vista 15 7-20 5.19 Termination. In the event this Agreement terminates as provided in Paragraphs 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.9 herein, the Entitlements shall be withdrawn, the Offers of Dedication shall be null and void, and of no further force and effect (the parties shall promptly take all actions reasonably necessary to promptly remove the document from the chain of title) and the Processing Agreement also shall tenninate, Owner agrees to promptly pay any outstanding processing fees due the City in accordance with the Processing Agreement. 5.20 Proiect as A Private UndeJtakillg. It is specifically understood by City and Owner that (i) theProj ect is a private development; (ii) City has no interest andlor responsibilities for or duty to the Owner or third parties concerning any improvements to the Property; (iii) Owners shall have the full power and exclusive control ofthe Property subject to the obligations of Owner set forth in this Agreement, any otheJ. agreements with City and applicable law; and (iv) the Project is not a joint venture or partnership between the City and Owner. 5.21 No Attornev fees. No attorneys fees shall be recoverable in connection with this Agreement, except that in any action between the parties arising our of or related to the City's obligation to reimburse Owner funds paid City pursuant to Paragraph 3.9, entitled "Endowment", the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief; to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and all other costs reasonably incurred. (NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE) Land Offer Agreement Between Otay Lnnd Company LLC 2nd City ofChuJa Vista 16 7-21 APR-09-200a 03:12PM FROM-HomeFed Corporation 7609188200 T-442 P.002/002 F-012 SIGNATURE PAGE TO LAND OFFER AGREEMENT IN' WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first set forth above. CITY OF CHULA'V1STA, apolitical subdivision of the State of California OTAYLAND COMPANY, LLC, a Dela lia .. company By: Its: Donna Norris, Interim Cit Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM EXECUTED BY Ann Y. Moore, City Attorney Cheryl Cox, Mayor Land Offc:r Agreement Betw:cn ~y Land Compllny LLC and City of Chula Vista. 17 7-22 CALIFORNIA AI.L-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT County at ,-.. .' j/tr :,(:(:,.\ I before me, } State of California ,'.,',- ! '"" ' On ."!'. -,1'" ,J , )':,y'Y , : /. .' '-oala J/::. , / / ' ",.1., '/ }'t,'f/{ Here Insert Name and TilW at IhG Officer \, personally appeared /1,'. (/ , ,,/')"'<'i~~'/'; Name(S}oiSigner(s) - - - - - - - .. I<AIlEN st PIERRE "'1 ,;:mrniS!ion.. lS0S61S ary Public . Califomia " SO"....._~_ ! Mveo -""""""'UtIly mrn. &pr.... Aug a, 2000 who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(-s) whose name(,,) isia", subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me thai helsfle/lAey executed L'1e same in his/Me,ilheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by hisih€>J:/\~eir signature(s} on the instrument the person(s}, or the entity upon behalt of which the person(-s-) acted, executed the instrument. i certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. Place Notary Seal AOOvs WITNESS my h;lnd and oificial seal. . Signature ,I (~{{:,,/ "';, t~>l ( Signature 01 NCll!l'Y P;.lblic ._--~"----_.__. OPTlOflfAl.. Though the information below is not required by taw, It may prove valuable to persons (!3{ying 0/7 the docwTJent and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to anoihl3r document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of DOGument: __..___.________.___._ Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: -_.~--_._.._._--_..._------------_.- Capacily(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: u Individual jJ Corporate Officer - Titie(s): CJ Partner - 0 Limited [J General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee o Guardian or Conservator [] Other:_____________ . . Top ollhumb hare SigFle~-'s Name: = lndjvfduq,l Corporate Ofiteer - TitJe(s): L.:: Partner - 0 Limi1~d U General C Attorney in Fact o Trustee [J Guardian or. Conservator _, I U Other:".! -----.--..-------.- 't". " - Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: '" 6l1313-2402' W'M'I.Na~onaINclary:o;'Q Item #5SQ7 Reorder: Gall Toll-Flee :-t1lJO..'376-6!J2.7 7-23 List of Exhibits Exhibit A........ Property Description for Undeveloped real property within Villages 4,7,8,9 and the EUC Exhibit B........ Property Description for 50 acres Exhibit B-1.... Open Space Description for 160 acres EJ0ibit c....... Development Agreement Provisions Exhibit D....... Design Plan Exhibit E....... Form rOD Exhibit F. . . . . . .Purchase Agreement Land Offer Agreement Between Qtay Land Company LLC and City ofChLlln Vista ]8 7-24 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 16, 17 18,27 AND 28 OF OTAY RANCHO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF, NO. 862 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; FEBRUARY 7,1900 AND AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY 16504 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 9, 2000, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: OTAY LAND COMPANY PARCEL "B" LOTS 27 AND 28 OF OTAY RANCHO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 862, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 7,1900. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CORNER WHICH IS COMMON TO LOTS 23, 24, 27, AND 28 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO; THENCE SOUTH 71016'00" WEST (RECORD: SOUTH 72013;00" WEST), A DISTANCE OF 544.20 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 1r31'00" WEST (RECORD: NORTH W34'00" WEST), A DISTANCE OF 97.14 FEET; THENCE NORTH 61008'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1,225.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28059'39" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 449.11 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 38046'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 980.94 FEET; THENCE 74004'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 810.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 15056'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 195.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 1r31'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 66.13 FEET, RETURNING TO SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS OF SAID LOTS 27 AND 28 CONVEYED BY SAN DIEGO LAND COMPANY TO THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN WATER COMPANY, BY DEED DATED APRIL 11, 1912, AND RECORDED JUNE 24,1912 IN BOOK 570, PAGE 113 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, THE PARCELS OF LAND SO CONVEYED TO SAID WATER COMPANY BEING THE SOUTH 492.5 FEET OF THE EAST 506 FEET OF LOT 4 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO AND STRIP OF LAND VARYING IN WIDTH FROM 100 FEET TO 50 FEET FOllOWING THE LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE OTAY-SAN DIEGO PIPE LINE AND THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE OTAY-CORONADO PIPE LINE, AS DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED AND SHOWN ON THE MAPS WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO AND MADE A PART OF SAID INSTRUMENT, REFERENCE BEING HEREBY MADE TO THE RECORD OF SAID INSTRUMENT FOR A MORE PARTICULAR DESCRIPTION OF SAID PARCELS. 0:\ 160 136.00IExhibits\LEGAL\leg-163-ex-a.doc 7-25 Page 1 of4 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED AS PARCEL 3 IN AMENDED COMPLAINT IN CONDEMNATION CIVIL NO. 79-0907-N, RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JANUARY 15,1980 AS DOCUMENT NO. 80-137651. CONTAINING 278.72 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. OTAY LAND COMPANY PARCEL "C" LOTS 16, 17 AND 18 OF OTAY RANCHO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 862, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 7,1900. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 17, CONVEYED BY SAN DIEGO LAND COMPANY TO THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN WATER COMPANY, BY DEED DATED APRIL 11, 1912, AND RECORDED JUNE 24, 1912 IN BOOK 570, PAGE 113 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, THE PARCELS OF LAND SO CONVEYED TO SAID WATER COMPANY BEING THE SOUTH 492.5 FEET OF THE EAST, 506 FEET OF LOT 4 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO AND STRIPS OF LAND VARYING IN WIDTH FROM 100 FEET TO 50 FEET FOLLOWING THE LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE OTAY-SAN DIEGO PIPE LINE AND THE LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE OTAY-CORONADO PIPE LINE, AS DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED AND SHOWN ON THE MAPS WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO AND MADE A PART OF SAID INSTRUMENT, REFERENCE BEING HEREBY MADE TO THE RECORD OF SAID INSTRUMENT FOR A MORE PARTICULAR DESCRIPTION OF SAID PARCELS. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF LOTS 17 AND 18 CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2005-0759298 LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: 0:\ 160 136. OOlExhibitslLEGAL \leg-163-ex -a. doc 7-26 Page 2 of4 EXHIBIT" A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEGINNING AT A 2" IRON PIPE WITH DISC STAMPED "R.C.E. 22606" PER RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 16504, RECORDED MARCH 9TH, 2000 IN THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER, SAID PIPE MARKING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2 3 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO, AND BEARING NORTH 71057'57" EAST 804.798 METERS FROM A 2" IRON PIPE WITH DISC STAMPED "L.S. 5284" MARKING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 10 OF MAP NO. 14432, RECORDED AUGUST 30TH, 2 0 02 IN THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER; THENCE SOUTH 18040'36" EAST 324.223 METERS TO A POINT HEREIN REFERRED TO AS POINT "A"; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 18040'36" EAST 178.898 METERS TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1629.700 METER RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 62020'18" EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03046'15" A DISTANCE OF 107.257 METERS; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 66004'27" WEST 2.000 METERS TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1627.700 METER RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 66006'33" EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07"22'45" A DISTANCE OF 209.633 METERS; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 46012'45" EAST 7.041 METERS TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 1631.200 METER RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 73042'11" EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01037'25" A DISTANCE OF 46.228 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 75019'37" WEST 3.500 METERS TO THE BEGINNING OF A 1627.700 METER RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04031'29" A DISTANCE OF 128.541 METERS; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 18040'36" EAST 87.291 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 08000'06" EAST 19.092 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 11041'19" EAST 24.481 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 16027'43" EAST 24.874 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 20032'09" EAST 26.118 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 20053'50" EAST 30.314 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 04019'10" WEST 29.530 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 06003'38" 0:\160136.00IExhibitsILEGAL lleg-163-ex -a. doc 7-27 Page 3 of4 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION WEST 77.800 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 05049'22" WEST 22.546 METERS; THENCE NORTH 79053'42" EAST 32.402 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 01031 '37" WEST 25.439 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 06034'53" WEST 11.008 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 45000'54" WEST 30.733 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 01 24'21" WEST 77.485 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 11 22'20" WEST 30.117 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 13045'02" WEST 28.527 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 31010'10" WEST 28.222 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 16 38'48" WEST 22.806 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 08 41'59" WEST 25.640 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 17028'45" WEST 27.925 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 250 54'42" WEST 26.053 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 01051'20" WEST 90.226 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 12017'55" EAST 34.960 METERS; THENCE SOUTH 03015'57" WEST 31.934 METERS TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON- TANGENT 63.657 METER RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 77041'34" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 76000'21" A DISTANCE OF 84.444 METERS; THENCE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 16012'00" WEST 157.318 METERS TO THE BEGINNING OF A 1561.900 METER RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE SOUTHERLY 634.612 METERS THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23016'47" TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 25 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO, SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF TERMINUS AND BEARING NORTH 71022'55" EAST 2555.510 METERS FROM A 2" IRON PIPE WITH DISC STAMPED "R.C.E. 22606" PER SAID RECORD OF SURVEY, SAID PIPE MARKING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3 6 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF LOT 16 CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN DOCUMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 2006 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2006-0139662. CONTAINING 373.00 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIBED PARCELS CONTAINING A TOTAL OF 651.72 ACRES MORE OR LESS, AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. L . KOEPKE, 1.:.8. 7841 SE EXPIRES 12/31/2008 PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF: 0;\ 160] 36.00lExhibitslLEGAL \leg-163-ex -a. doc 7-28 Page4of4 ~ EXHIBIT "A" f}(; aC;;Y~ Q,<1;'.:,.~~ LEGEND 1.........4 SUBJECT PROPERTY EAST H ST. OL YMP/C PKwY s.. 7.... ~~ ^~ ~ ~q;-R OTAY RES. OLC OTAYLAND COMPANY DESIGNA TED NOTES o TA Y VALLE ROAD 1. ALL BEARINGS SHO""" ARE PER R.O.S. 16504, RECORDED 3/9/2000, AS FILE NO. 2000-120683, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STA TE OF CAliFORNIA. 8 AREA TOTALS NO T TO SCALE OLC PARCEL "B" OLC PARCEL "C" TOTAL TOTAL FEE AREA = 278.72 ACRES:J: TOTAL FEE AREA = 373.00 ACRES:J: 651. 72 A CRES:J: DESCRIPTION EXCEPTIONS OLC PARCEL "B" ITEMS.' 1 SAN DIEGO-OTA Y PIPEliNE RIGHT OF WA Y, AS SHO""" IN DEED BOOK 937, PAGE 463, RECORDED 7/14/1923 &: DEED BOOK 598, PAGE 54, RECORDED 12/20/1912. 2 SOUTH SAN DIEGO RESERVOIR, PORTION OF LOT 28 &: 27 GRANTED TO THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO IN DEED RECORDED 8/22/1972 UNDER FlLE/pAGE NO. 2222672, ornCIAL RECORDS. 3 SAN DIEGO-CORONADO PIPELINE RIGHT OF WA Y, AS SHO""" IN DEED BOOl< 570. PAGE 113, RECORDED 6/24/1912. 4 PARCEL 3 IN AMENDED COMPLAINT IN CONDEMNA TlON CIVIL NO. 79-0907-N, RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. JANUARY 15. 1980 AS DOCUMENT NO. 80-137651 OLC PARCEL "C" ITEMS 5 PORTION OF LOT 17, CONVE:'lFD TO THE SOUTHERN CAliFORNIA MOUNTAIN WAm? COMPANY, BY DEED DATED APRIL 11, 1912, AND RECORDED JUNE 24, 1912 IN BOOl< 570, PAGE 113 OF DEEDS, OmClAL RECORDS. 6 PARCEL 32018-1, A PORTION OF LOTS 17 &: 18 OF OTA Y RANCHO IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, GRANTED TO THE STA TE OF CAliFORNIA IN DEED RECORDED 9/1/2005 UNDER Doc. NO. 2005-0759298. 7 PORTION OF LOT 16 CONVE:'lFD TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN DEED RECORDED 2/28/2006 AS DOC. NO. 2006-0139662. _ C/C. . KOEPKE, L.s. 7841 EXP. DA TE: 12/31/2008 ~ <:> -: 1 r::: ~ L..i :l ~ - - ~ <:> - 8 <<S "\ - " '" - - ~ PREPARED BY: STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 stantec 760.891.3200 stantec.com OWNERSHIP EXHIBIT OTAY RANCH, LLC COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DA TE: 04 0 '2008 DlIG' 163V EXOTl 1 JOB 160163.00 R Yo' SHEET: 1 OF 3 . EXHIBIT "A" J I J~' 29 N71'57'56"E ........', ". ..... ........... . :.::.~::~::~:::.::::~:~~::~:::~::::::::~:::~. ........:....::........ ...................:::.....:........::..: OTAY '. . ............ " " ..... :....... . . ,,', .:........................:........:.......\::..:\:...:..\\'" '. . . . ..::.........,...:.:::.:......:..:.....:.: 2.3 .3.3 2, . . . :..:...:...:.....\\... .:...... . '. .......... RANCHO .34 ',.....:...:..............:..... ............ ....:........< :>.<....:.. ..:.......\... .:....~. '.:' '.:" :....:..:: '. :.\::..\:..:..:.... ~ ......~..::.........:..:..;.:..6tC:.P~.RCEL' i3": :..~..:.:\.....:.::. ~ r\::..::~::;<:..;...:...\.\<:\..:~\;:\<.....:.\\.::.\.\:<<.\..\......:.\:.. ",: ''':':::'..\'' ~ - '. . '. . '. . '27 .... .... ~ . . . ,,',', . " " ,,', ............ " . ,,', " . . ,,', . " ,,', .... -', . -', .'. .:.' .... .... . .:".:..::......\:.:.\.......:...\\.. . . .... ~ ....... ....:...... '..":.' ..\': :'. ~'" . . ;....:..::.\\\ :\; ..:.:.:.......;..:.-\\::.::\\..\..::..;:..\\:...:...:......:\.\.. ,,', ',....', ',- . .................." . ,,', 24 2.L, ~ <::l '" I 1::: ~ l"j :!.. ~ - " " RAI' 5 71'58'JI" W 2641.40' 26 Stantec .;s STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 2n RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 760.891.3200 """'""'"'" OWNERSHIP EXHIBIT LOTS 27 & 28, RANCHO OTAY COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DA Tc: 04 10 '2008 Dft{;: 16JV-EXOn-1 JOB . 16016J.00 R SHEET: 2 OF J ~ c::. ..: I 1:: ~ l.o.i :!.. ~ - - ~ c::. - :s '" '" ~ - - c;:s 23 24 EXHIBIT "A" N71"57'SrE 2640.38' ......:........::.:......:.:..........:.......:......:..:.:..... . " . ,,', ,,'. . . . " ',' ...:....... .... ....................::..........:...... ..:.... .:..................:..::... .... .................... ....... .....: .............:. ,', '. . . '. .... ....................:...... .', ............. ........................:.......:.........:..................:.. .....:..:: ',: :..........:..:........:..:. ...:.......:..:. .:................ . ..............:..:....... '.':..; :\:.....\'......:....\..............:. :..:......:.:...\......:\:\.:\\:.\\ :......\..:.:...:...:......::....:...:..:. " . " . " . . . . '. . . . . : . . . ." . ...:........::......:...:.....:................:.....:.:......... '. . . . '. .... '. . '. . . .... .:...........:.......... .::......:.......:...:.:....... \: \\~\::...\.~.:::.\.\.\\.1./..3....:................\.\\:.\;.\.\\::\\\.\\ . ....... . .~ ,~.,~:,'::" ~::~::~\:~\ . :......::..:...:..:.:.\......\"......:.:.::.::.:.......\.........:.:...:.....:..:........::.... : ::~~.~~ :\..'\~:~~:~~\~:\:~~:~~~:.:: . . :'. .............. '" ...::......:....... ............ .... ..... .... ". ..:............. .... .: ..::.:::.:....:\......\.:.:.:.:.:.:......:.:..........:.:.:..:.i........:..::....:..:....... b :..:..:::.:.OLC..PAR.CE'L.i..Ci;..........:...:. ~ .::..:.:\:\\::..\....\.;...\...).... ". ".\:. ". :'.\". \:.;...~.\:.::.:\\....:....\:~:...\.\~ ~ ......\...\\...::..\.\...\\...\.\:{.0.\:.;..:~\:..::::\\'\:",\'\'\'..\: .':: ....:. .....................:....... . ;.........~..:.~...............~:.......:....:.....:..::..~....\..~:...:.:..:...\:..... . ....::...::: ..... . .... :'. ... '. ~ .... . . '.' .' .'. . . . '. . '. . ::::~~~\~\~~~~~~\~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~\: RANCHO R.0.5, Stantec .... . . . . '" . 13 14 DrAY ;:. ~ b :0- "" ~ l'-' "- ,... ;: ~ ====== = II) ~= ="","'" ~ 25 . ". .'. . '. . .... ...... ". .......... ..... ............... ....::..:................................ . ..:...:..............:....................... .... '. . . . . . .... . '. . '. :....:....:............. ...:...........:..................... '.:. . .... :.' .'. '.:.' .......... ....: ". . '.. ". .....:........ . . '. .... . .... .... ". ..........:.........:.....::......:....:......:....:.....:'.:'.' . . . .... .... . . . ...:........:......:............... .... ................... .' ............::.........:......:........... ......: ..... I\.~: M"~' ~ 16504 15 STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS. CA 92069 760,891.3200 sI3ntel;.ron OWNERSHIP EXHIBIT LOTS 16, 17, 18, RANCHO OTAY COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO OA TE: 04 0 "2008 01+1>: 163V-EXOn 1 JOB . 160163. 00 1? IW . SHEET: 3 OF 3 EXHIBIT "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION UNIVERSITY SITE THAT PORTION OF LOT 18 OF OTAY RANCHO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 862, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 7, 1900, AND AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 16504 AS RECORDED IN SAID COUNTY, CONTAINING 50 ACRES, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 18 OF OTAY RANCHO, THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 18 AND THE EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 17 OF SAID OTAY RANCHO SOUTH 18'41'16" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 129.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID LINE, SOUTH 18"41'16" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 3952.36 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE SOUTH 72'22'53" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 291.33 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2063.95 FEET SOUTH 18'41'16" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 3952.36 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 208.02 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5046'29"; THENCE NORTH 68'32'44" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 13.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 24'54'50" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 41.94 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 568.49 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 64.89 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6032'24"; THENCE NORTH 18'22'26" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2661.09 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 331.49 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 137.85 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23049'36",; THENCE NORTH 42'12'02" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 875.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 08'27'06" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 29.29 FEET; THENCE NORTH 54'25'57" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 149.29 FEET; THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1435.96 FEET; O:1160136.00lExhibitsILEGALlleg-163-ex-b.doc Page 1 ~ ~3 2 EXHIBIT "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION UNIVERSITY SITE THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 37.92 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1030'47"; THENCE NORTH 55056'44" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 682.53 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73020'04" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 35.34 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINING: 50.00 ACRES AND AS SHOWN ON ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B". PREPARED BY: -r: /,0 oS D TE O:\160136.00lExhibits\LEGAL\leg_163_ex_b.doc Page 2 of 2 7-33 EXHIBIT "B" o AY VALLE ~I'\l ;Ie ,<GI'r2 "\~v- VICINITY MAP: NOT TO SCALE NOTES: LEGEND: ( ) INDlCAT<S RfC()RD LlA7iI PER ROS 16504 P,O.C. INDlCAT<S POINT OF COMMENCD/ENT T.P.O.B. INDlCAT<S TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOTAL AR60I OF UNIVERSITY SITE PARCEL = 50.00 ACRES INDICAT<S EASEMENT UNE. INDlCAT<S PARCEL UHf. 1) ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE COMPIlED F1/OI.t RECORD LlATA. 2) EXlSTING PROPEl?TY AREAS SHOWN HEREON ARE CALCULATED F1/OI.t RECORD LlATA EA~ NOTFS : @ AN EASDlENT TO THE car OF CHUIA lofSTA FOR SLOPE AND DI1AINAGE PURPOSES. RECORDED DECElIBER 28, 2005 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2005-1108994. @ AN EASDlENT FOR GENEI1AL UTII.ITY AND ACCESS PURPOSES TO TIlE car OF CHUIA lofSTA, RECORDED DECElIBER 28, 2005 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2005-1108995- @ AN EASDlENT FOR STORM ORNN PURPOSES TO THE car OF CHUIA 1oISTA, RECORDED DECD/HER 28, 2005 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2005-1108996. DA TE: 04 10 '2008 DHG: 163V-EXOT3 1 JOB 160163.00 STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 760.891.3200 stantse.com UNIVERSITY SITE, OTAY RANCHO CITY OF CHULA VISTA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 5tantec EXHIBIT "B" LOT 19 P.O.C. t.lOST NORTHERLY I CORNER LOT l' \,~ t\r;fi'!IJ. r;'S 6B'2- , '- ....-r', \ \ I T.P.O.B. ---I "J 0~ ~ C'f"") \\J DY) ...... l- I-.. \ g I-.. () '" () z -J :J -J ~ '" ~. "'" I!! "! en 1ii < '" O. ~ LOT 18 ~~ LU N'" q... OTA Y RANCHO .,,"" I- ~:;t= ., '" 00 Z "! Ul u; ~5 '" '" --- -30 -<( . 000 '" '" 0::0 .. LUci f' ., > III Z Z ~ "'i- \\J I-.. ,.... () LOT 17 b -J OTA Y RANCHO "'i- -' '" ...... z :J I-.. ~ () '" -J I!! UNE TABLE CURVE TABLE j L2 en < NO. BEARING DIST. NO. DELTA RADIUS LENGTH L1 N7 "22'53" 291.33' C1 5'46'29" 2063.95' 08.02' L2 N88"32' 44"W 1 .57' C2 6'32'24" 568.49' 64.89' L3 N24'54'50"W 41.94' C3 23'49'36" 331.49' 137.85' L4 N08"27'06"E 29.9' C4 1"30'47" 1435.96' 37.92' L5 N54"25'57"E 149.29' SCALE: 1" = 600' L6 N73"20'04"W 35.34' UNIVERSITY SITE, OTAY RANCHO DA TE: 04 10 '2008 STANTEC CONSULTING INC. DI+G: 163V-EXDTJ 1 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUITE 300 JOB 160163. 00 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO yo. 5tamec 760.891.3200 -.con SHEET.' 2 OF 3 EXHIBIT "B" LOT 19 c)' Q' q... \ \ 66'2-!iS\ ,~t A"tI!i!i"':J6 r;J ~ \ \'"oY) ;0 . ., - , 15ltZ '" on ~ LOT 18 OTA Y RANCHO UNIVERSITY SITE 50.00 ACRES t ., .... 9 '" z :J ~ 0: j!:! ~ '" c<J -. I-- <:) -J j SCALE: 1" = 100' DETAIL 'A' UNE TABLE NO. BEARING DIST. l6 N73'20'04"W 35.34' Stantec STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 760.891.3200 UNIVERSITY SITE, OTAY RANCHO CITY OF CHULA VISTA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ""'"'-='" DA TE: 04 0 '2008 D~: 16.JV-EXOT.J-l JOB 160163. 00 SHEET: .J OF .J EXHIBIT "B-1" LEGAL DESCRIPTION THOSE PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 29 AND 30, TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, S.B.M., ALL IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30; TOGETHER WITH THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30; AND TOGETHER WITH THE WESTERLY 598.81 FEET AS MEASURED PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29 OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29. AND TOGETHER WITH LOTS 16 OF OTAY RANCHO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 862, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, FEBRUARY 7, 1900, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF LOT 16 CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN DOCUMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 2006 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2006-0139662. ALL CONTAINING 160.00 ACRES, AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B-1", ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF: ~~ L,~j :;- JO " . KOEPKE, L.S. 7841 LI SE EXPIRES 12/31/2008 --f/?CJ <'~ DATE 0:\ 160136.00\Exhibils\LEGAL\leg-163-ex-b1.doc 7-37 Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT "B-1" 8 ~ f}c rf;j{l q;:,,"~ SUBJECT PR.OP. ERTYj ~.'.. .-" ' s... .- "-<. ~ ~~ ~~ '" LEGEND .. . .1 SUBJE:CTPROPERTY, CONTAiNiNG 160.00 AC.:J: EAST H ST. NOTES o TA Y VALLEY ROAD 1. ALL DiSTANCES SHOftN HEREON ARE GROUND DiSTANCES. THE SCALE FACTOR is 0.999999861 AND is BASED ON THE P.O.B. SHOWN. 2. ALL BEARiNGS SHOftN ARE PER R.O.S. 16315. RECORDED 8/27/1999. AS ALE NO. 1999-594396 iN THE COUNTY OF SAN DiEGO. STA 7E OF CALIFORNiA. VICINITY MAP NO T TO SCALE /JI~ t-. ffIf- JOItf.!- KOEPKE, L.s. '841 LIe. EXP. DA TE: 12/31/2008 ~%& VA TE: PREPARED BY: STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 760.891.3200 """"'""'" PORTIONS OF SEC. 29 & 30, TWP. 17S, R. 1E, S.B.M. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DA TE: 04 10 '2008 DlK;: 163'1 "X0T2-1 JOB 160163.00 stantec EXHIBIT "B-1" 19 20 30 29 ! -~- CENTeR OF SEC770N 30 30 P.O.B. 'J' O. 'f.' 6 ... " <:>. !Ii' .. ~ ..... - . ft........ ..... . . ~ . n. 'll.... N' <:> ..... ~ ". <t . .' ..' ~ ~ ~ - ~...... - ,!<). !lJ'. -' ~: N88V4'59"W 1J4J.71' .' ." ,., ... '.,- " . ..... 5e1/4. .. '.': NeJ/4 .'. . .. . NS775Y.rW'" 1371.04' '. ... ". ~ . .. . ,. ..... \ . (~'j ..:' . \\J .. .. Ne1/4 5e1/4. N87~7'12"W o.AJ 1348.90' 7 RANCHO JANAL STANTEC CONSULTING INC. 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 760.891.3200 Stantec ~ F"RAC. SEC. 31 ~ oi ~ - ... ft. "- ~ ~ ." . - .. '" "- .'" ". - ."-' ". .... tl . .;"; ..... ~ .. .' <t N89"J9'12"E 598.81' .200.00' . " - '" "- ~ ~. ._.. .~ ..... .... - ~ tl ;"; ~ ." 30 29 598.81' N89"J912 E 32 PORTIONS OF SEC. 29 & 30, TWP 17S, R.1E, S.B.M. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 29 ." .- '" "- ... ... ~ tl ;"; . !'>I ~ OA TC: 04 10 '2008 01+(;: 163'1 EXOT2 1 JOB 160163.00 SHEET.' 2 OF 3 EXHIBIT "B-1" (N71 '58'31 "E 2641.42' CALC'O) ~- - '" ~ '" o. ., '" ... a. N71 '27'S1"E ~ NS8"SS'2S"E N64'54'33"E 233.61' N77'28'33"E 199.06" 86.68' ~ 243.13' NSS"36'~-::::::=-::::::==-- -:::::::::::::::::::-29--1' ' ' ' ' _ . I .1 .6 , '.',',' ',' -' > ' , N66'03'1S"E , N69'59'34~ ' ' ' , :163:57' ' 121:32':', ' ' , ';'6Q'36~3~~E,' ,," , ':179,61, 16 ~ ~ '" .,: o '" '" ~' " ' , , N4D"S4'31'"E. " : ' '9~;96':'" " " " , ' ", ~5:i1'22"E,'" 63;e1.', " , , . N69'OS'2.0"E , ' ,14S.05', . N59~49'02'E q1,:29' () , . ' ,..' g '> ;;l o ~ , ' , ' , ' , . . . , ,,", 'N74'26'47"E,' " 124.04' ' N81:4Q'39"E ' " 234.88" .' , 79'00'1 e~ . 175.72"'" .:. ' " .L3.L4 N79"20'53"E' . : 64.SS" .' .' . L1 N70'2'3e"E 03.94' N76'2e'23"E 148.11' N8S'46'S7"W ~_ 9- 149.41' ~ \\ S!. \\ \\ \\ \\ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ " (N71 '22'SS"E 2641.81') N60"37' 4D"E 269.6S' v PORTION OF LOT 16, RANCHO OTAY COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO STANTEC CONSULTING INC, 277 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE 300 SAN MARCOS. CA 92069 760.891.3200 Stantec """""""" 15 h' V ===::;::::;- c;; . . . ~Ol ~ ~'g;. N, . .'~ Sl . . ~ "! L5 .() . g '> 8 ~ o .... '" l!:. ~ DA TF: 04 10 '2008 0lM:;: 16JV-FX0T2 1 JOB ' 16016J.00 Yo' SHUT: J OF J EXHIBIT C DEVELOP1'v1ENT AGREE1'v1ENT PROVISIONS 1. Term. The following language shall be added to the end of the last sentence of the fIrst full paragraph of Section 3 of the existing Development Agreement: "from , 20_, the date upon which the City may accept the Offers of Dedication in Sections 3.3 of that certain "Land Offer Agreement" by and between the City and Otay Land Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, approved by the City Council on ,2008." 2. Tentative Mao/Permit Duration. Section 6.2 of the existing Development Agreement, entitled "Length of Validity of Tentative Subdivision Maps," is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "6.2 Tentative Mao/Permit Duration. Pursuant to California Government Code section 66452.6, any tentative subdivision map, parcel map or other map authorized by the State Subdivision Map Act that is approved for the Project shall remain valid for a period of time equal to a term of this Agreement. In addition, notwithstanding any condition or provision to the contrary, every permit and approval for the Project other than ministerial approvals shall remain valid for a period of time equal to the term of this Agreement." 3. Growth Management. The second full paragraph of Section 5.2 appearing at page 8 of the existing Development Agreement, entitled "Development of Property," which begins "Notwithstanding the foregoing," shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the City's Growth Management program, as set forth in the Growth Management Element of the City's General Plan, applicable to the Project shall be those in effect on the date the City approves the Land Offer Agreement referenced in Section 3 hereof." 4. ModifIcations to Existing Proiect Aoorovals. The following sentence shall be added to the end of Section 5.2.3 of the existing Development Agreement: "The parties agree that they accept the modifications to the Existing Project Approvals approved by the City Council on ,20_." 5. Reimbursement. At the end of the fIrst sentence of Section 7.5 of the existing Development Agreement, entitled "Facilities Which are the Obligations of Another Party, or are of Excessive Size, Capacity, Length or Number," a new sentence shall be inserted as follows: 101071974.2 7-41 101071974.2 "City shall not require such monies or improvements unless City provides reasonable assurance of funding or reimbursement in accordance with State law and/or the City's ordinances." 7-42 / / ! I \ \ 1 ) EXHIBIT "0" OTA Y LAND COMPANY I PARCEL "B" LAND USE PLAN '00 G~APHI~ SCALE: (DHUT) i ~ i. ! I, ~ ~. ----- 4 6 I PARK SCHOOL . COMMUNITr' USE TRANSIT STOP ~ i j I " j~ ii ~i n Ii " " i@ PARCEL B LAND GROSS ACRES DU USE/DISTRICT TC 27,78 306 MUlTO n91 487 M 37,61 380 lM 135.96 627 RE5ERVD1R 21,26 0 DS 25.40 0 319.92 1800 AREA 1i'i1~.~ 3 4 6 TOTALS GROS5 DU/AC 11.0 6.8 10.1 4.6 0.0 0.0 . Stantet 2nRanchamDr.,Suit&300 Sill Marcas.CA1l2069 P: (760l 8S,':I2lJO F: (7110) 891-3201 www.Sl8<1leC.<;Om DATE: 04107/08 ; ; ~ .----- / } ~ I (r~ '\ .~ EXHIBIT "0" OTAY LAND COMPANY PARCEL "C" LAND USE PLAN fa ..._' c:- ',' <~,_. .". . .. '."- fi GRAPHIC SCALE . ... - ... L-.......I --- 3 ( IN m:r l 4 5 - -- __-J / , / I / L/~ ----/// "'""'- "------ - - -- -- -- , i !. ,. ,; :j ~'E o. .^ 11 I. H I' ;;, ~ ii :a h " ,. .1 t! l' -=... n PARCEL C 1- PARK SCHOOL : COMMUN/TY USE ,,- TRANSIT STOP LAND USE/DISTRICT GROSS ACRES DU GROSS DUlAC AR54 23.2 19.8 14.4 11.0 S.4 0.0 EUC 59.30 1375 TC 94.82 1874 MH 31.13 449 M 24.42 269 LM 52.21 283 UNIV 54.70 (1) 0 TOTALS 316.58 4250 (1) SONET ACRES (EXCLUDING ADJACENy!..R!7{ RIGHTS-OF-WA Y) '- 8.Ed ~~ S'<1.~ Z17 RancherosOr.,Sllilll 300 San Mal'COi,CA920ag P: I7GO) S91.3200 (<-(7601691.3201 """,:S18nlec.cam DATE: 04107108 EXHIBIT "E" Ion TO BE PROVIDED AT THE MEETING PER CITY ATTORNEY MOORE 7-45 EXHIBIT E TO AGENDA ITEM #7 (LAND OFFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OTAY LAND COMPANY AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA) 7-Lt....:- -/ 1-' EXHIBIT E Recording Requested by and Please Return to: City Clerk City of Chula Vista P.O. Box 1087 Chub Vista, California 91912 This Instrument Benefits City OnlY No Fee Required This Space for Recorder's Use OnlY APN(s) c.v. File No. IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION OF FEE INTEREST FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, THE OTA Y LAND COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Owner"), represent that, as the owner of the herein-described real property, hereby makes an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of fee interest to THE CITY OP CHULA VISTA, A MUNICIP AL CORPORATION ("City"), the hereinafter described real property for the following public purpose: FOR HIGHER EDUCATION AND RELATED COMPATIBLE USES, ACTIVE PUBLIC RECREATION, QUASI PUBLIC AND ALL OTHER USES INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL USES, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL. The property referred to above is situated in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California and is more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference the ("Property"). This Offer of Dedication is made pursuant to Section 7050 of the Government Code of the State of California and the terms and conditions of that certain Land Offer Agreement by and between Owner and City dated April 7, 2008, which Land Offer Agreement is incorporated herein by reference. This Offer of Dedication may be accepted by the City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista only in accordance with the Land Offer Agreement. This Offer of Dedication of fee interest shall be irrevocable and shall be binding on the Owner, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. - 1 - 7-1/::::;-' ) I' - --.. EXHIBIT E Pursuant to Article 2 of the Land Offer Agreement, following the City's acceptance of this Offer of Dedication, Owner shall retain certain rights to repurchase all or a portion of the Property ("Repurchase Rights") for the term specified in Section 2.1 of the Land Offer Agreement. It is the intention of the parties that the Repurchase Rights shall be covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law, including, but not limited to Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. The City and Owner agree that each of the limitations, covenants, conditions, and restrictions contained herein, and as incorporated by reference from the Land Offer Agreement (i) is for the benefit of certain real property described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Benefited Property") and is a burden upon the Property, (ii) attaches to and runs with the Property and the Benefited Property, (iii) benefits each successor owner during its ownership of the Benefited Property or any portion thereof, and (iv) is binding upon each successor owner during its ownership of the Property or any portion thereof, and each owner having any interest therein derived in any manner through any owner of the Property or any portion thereof, whether by operation of law or any manner whatsoever. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner may elect from time to time, in accordance with the terms of the Land Offer Agreement, by a duly recorded document to remove any portion of the Benefited Property from the benefit of the covenants set forth herein. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] - 2- ~7~ 1,/S:3 I ,< - EXHIBIT E SIGNATURE PAGE TO IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION OF FEE INTEREST IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of Fee Interest on the day and year first set forth above. CI1Y OF CHULA VISTA, a political subdivision of the State of California OTA Y LAND COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Its: By: Curt Noland, Vice President Donna Norris, Interim City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM EXECUTED BY Ann Y. Moore, City Attorney Cheryl Cox, Mayor 101086936.1 - 3- 7~'-I5''i EXHIBIT E Recording Requested by and Please Return to: City Clerk City of Chula Vista P.O. Box 1087 Chub Vista, California 91912 This Instrument Benefits City OnlY No Fee Required This Space fOr Recorder's Use OnlY APN(s) C.V. File No. IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION OF FEE INTEREST FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, THE OT A Y LAND COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Owner"), represent that, as the owner of the herein-described real property, Owner hereby makes an Irrevocable Offer ofDedication offee interest to THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, the hereinafter described real property for the folJowing public purpose: OPEN SPACE, MITIGATION, ACTIVE RECREATION AND ANY USES PERMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OTAY RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN The real property referred to above is situated in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California and is more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ("Property"). This Offer of Dedication is made pursuant to Section 7050 of the Government Code of the State of California and the terms and conditions of that certain Land Offer Agreement dated April 7, 2008, by and between City and Owner ("Land Offer Agreement"). This Offer of Dedication be accepted by the City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista only in accordance with the Land Offer Agreement. This Offer of Dedication of fee interest shall be irrevocable and shall be binding on the Owner, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] - 1 - 7-~./6- 5" ----- Signed this 101087018.1 EXHIBIT E SIGNATURE PAGE day of ,2008. OTAY LAND COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability compll!lY By: By: -2- 7~t./S-(P EXHIBIT F AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS TO: THIS AGREEMENT OF and entered into between "SELLER"), and "Buyer") . PURCHASE AND SALE AND ESCROW this day of INSTRUCTIONS is made by 'and (hereinafter (hereinafter RECITALS SELLER is the owner of certain real property located in the County of San Diego, State of California, containing approximately 45 acres, as legally described on Exhibit "1" attached hereto ("Property") . AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. PURCHASE OF PROPERTY SELLER agrees to sell the Property to Buyer and Buyer agrees to purchase the Property, upon the terms and conditions herein contained. 2. PURCHASE PRICE The purchase price for the Property to be paid by Buyer SHALL BE Dollars ($ ) . 3. TERMS OF PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE The purchase price shall be paid as follows: 4. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO CLOSING 7-46 EXHIBIT F 5. ESCROW This Agreement constitutes joint escrow instructions to ___ ("Escrow Holder") instructing it to consummate this sale upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. Escrow Holder shall be concerned with the provisions of this paragraph and the paragraphs and sUbparagraphs below. (a) Opening. Escrow shall open within three (3) days after execution of this Agreement by the parties. (b) Deposit. Upon opening escrow, Buyer shall deposit: (c) Effective Date. The effective date for all time requirements under this Agreement shall be the opening of escrow. (d) Closing Date. This escrow shall close on or before (e) Prorations. All ordinary real property taxes levied or assessed against the Property shall be prorated between Buyer and SELLER on the basis of the latest bills and thirty (30) day month (360 day year) as of the close of escrow. (f) Payment of Costs. The expenses of escrow described herein shall be paid in the following manner: 1. Seller shall pay the full cost of preparing, executing and acknowledging any deeds or other instruments required to convey title to the Property to Buyer, any tax that may be imposed on the conveyance of title to the Property to Buyer under the Documentary Transfer Tax Act of California, and one-half of the escrow fees. 2. Buyer shall pay the cost of recording the Grant Deed or other instrument executed by SELLER conveying title to the Property to Buyer and one-half of the escrow fees. (g) Possession. Possession of the Property shall be delivered to Buyer on close of escrow. 2 7-47 EXHIBIT F 6. NOTICES All notes under this Agreement shall be effective upon personal deliver to SELLER, Buyer, or Escrow Holder, as the case may be, or forth-eight (48) hours after deposit in the United States mail, registered or certified mail, postage fully prepaid, and addressed to the respective parties as follows: To SELLER: To BUYER: To Escrow Holder: or to such other address as the parties may from time to time designate in writing. 7. ACCESS Buyer shall be entitled to reasonable access to the Property at any time prior to the close of escrow for the purpose of making such engineering, surveying, soils, geology and environmental studies as Buyer may reasonably deem necessary, all of which will be completed at no expense to SELLER. Buyer agrees to indemnify and hold SELLER and the Property free and harmless from any and all liens, costs, liabilities or expenses incurred in connection with such engineering, surveying, soils, geology and environmental studies. 8. ATTORNEYS' FEES In any action between Buyer and SELLER seeking enforcement or interpretation of any of the terms or provisions of this Agreement, or in connection with any of the Property described herein, the prevailing party in such action shall be awarded, in addition to damages, injunctive or other relief, its reasonable cost and expenses, not limited to taxable costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees. 1-48 EXHIBIT F 9. ASSIGNMENT Buyer shall have the right to assign this Agreement and the rights and responsibilities under it with the consent of SELLER, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 10. TIME OF ESSENCE Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 11. PERFORMANCE OF ACTS The parties hereto agree to perform documents as may be required to purposes of this Agreement. such acts and execute such carry out the terms and 12. PROPERTY "AS IS" Buyer is relying solely upon its own inspections, investigations and analyses of the Property in entering into this Agreement and is not relying in any way upon any representations, statements, agreements, warranties, studies, reports, descriptions, guidelines or other information or material furnished by Seller or its representatives, whether oral or written, express or implies of any nature whatsoever regarding any such matters. Buyer acknowledges that it has become familiar with the Property and made such independent investigations and analysis as Buyer deems necessary or appropriate concerning Buyer's proposed use, sale and development of the Property. 13. MISCELLANEOUS This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of all the parties hereto, their beneficiaries, successors and assigns. Headings at the beginning of each numbered section of the Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties and are not a part of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the agreements of the parties hereto with respect to the matters contained herein and no prlor agreement or understanding pertaining to any such matter shall be effective for any purpose. No provision of this Agreement may be amended or added to except by an agreement in writing signed by the parties hereto or their respective successors in interest. (NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE) 4 7-49 EXHIBIT F SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Buyer and SELLER have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. "BUYER" By "SELLER" By Receipt of executed copy of this Agreement is hereby acknowledged this day of By 7-50 EXHIBIT F Legal Description H; \Home\Attomey\OfferPur.l 6 7-51 4-~1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORlZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A LAND OFFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND OTAY LAND COMPANY FOR CONVEYANCE OF 210 ACRES TO THE CITY FOR UNIVERSITY/REGIONAL TECHNOLOGY PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION PURPOSES, ACKNOWLEDGING THE OFFERS OF DEDICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF 1 MILLION DOLLARS FOR UNIVERSITY RECRUITMENT AND PLANNING PURPOSES. WHEREAS, in adopting the Otay Ranch General Development Plan in 1993 the City of Chula Vista formally declared its intent to plan for and pursue an institution(s) of higher learning within it's municipal boundaries; and WHEREAS, the updated City of Chula Vista General Plan in December 2005 recognized the many benefits of a Regional Technology Park, which would be associated with the University(ies); and WHEREAS, under the terms of the proposed Land Offer Agreement, The Otay Land Company would agree to convey 210 acres, 50 of which will be utilized as a portion of the proposed "University / Regional Technology Park Site"; and WHEREAS, under terms of the Land Offer Agreement, the Otay Land Company will provide the City of Chula Vista with 2 million dollars to be utilized for University Recruitment and Land Planning purposes, one million upon execution of this Agreement and one million upon approval of the entitlements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Land Offer Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Otay Land Company for conveyance of 210 acres to the City for University/Regional Technology Park and associated mitigation purposes, a copy of which shall be kept 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 Agreement on behalf of the City of Chula for staff to acknowledge the offer to dedicate 210 acres, and accept one million dollars for university recruitment and planning purposes. Presented by Approved as to form by James D. Sandoval, AICP Director of Planning and Building ~~ Annoore City Attorney C\Documents and Settings\dianav\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK29\UNIVERSITY LAND OFFER AGRMNT OT A Y LAND CO.doc 7-52 April3rd Budget Workshop - Additional Information Requested by Council 1. Outstanding Receivables 2. Listing of City Owned Properties 3. Auto Allowances and Use of City Vehicles 4. Chula Vista Police Department Holding Facility Cost Comparison ~V?- =~c._~ ~~~~ CIlY OF CHULA VISTA FINANCE DEPARTMENT DATE: April 10, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Council Members VIA: David Garcia, City Manager FROM: Maria Kachadoorian, Director of FinancefTreasurer ~ f'-~/L- , SUBJECT: Outstanding Receivables In response to your request at the City's April 3rd Budget Workshop, I am providing information on the City's outstanding receivables as of February 29, 2008. The table below lists the various types of funds owed to the City. A description of staff's collection efforts is summarized below. $64,240 143 1 or 2 $50,225 31 10r2 $183,539 2,011 1 $563,787 3,008 1,2 or 3 $231,898 50 4 $199,589 42 4 $427,982 TBD 5 Police $105,953 1,321 6 $237,804 1,232 7 $41,008 345 10r2 Librar $136,277 9,293 8 Human Resources $270,616 187 9 RDA $959,582 1 10 TOTAL $3,472,500 17,664 1 Reflects four years statute of limitations. 2 Includes charges for DIF, storm drain violations, lease payments, and reimbursement for city selVices. 3 Reflects tenant occupied charges that are ineligible for property liens. 4 Reflects accounts that are over 60 days past due. S Reflects amount to be liened. Over $935,000 has already been liened. Number of accounts To Be Determined 6 Reflects amount ineligible for DMV hold. Over $300,000 has DMV holds in place. 7 Police Dept. currently working with the courts to include the booking fees as part of restitution. 8 Reflects amount to be collected. Over $179,000 is being handled through promissory notes/judgments. The City's collection methods are in accordance to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Each method of collection varies depending on the type of debt and the amount owed. The steps for the various collection methods utilized by City staff are as follows: . Collection Method #1 - Invoice, past due notice, collection letter, phone call, small claims court, promissory note, judgment, property lien or state income tax intercept program . Collection Method #2 - Invoice, past due notice, collection letter, outside collection agency . Collection Method #3 - Invoice, past due notice, public hearing notice, property lien, property tax bill . Collection Method #4 - Invoice, past due notices, stop work order . Collection Method #5 - Demand notice, notice of intent, property lien, property tax bill . Collection Method #6 - Parking citation, notice due, DMV hold, state income tax intercept program, outside collection agency . Collection Method #7 - Invoice, past due notice, outside collection agency . Collection Method #8 - Multiple overdue notices via phone, mail or email, blocked access, outside collection agency . Collection Method #9 - Invoice, past due notice, insurance company claim, collection letter, phone call, driver's license suspension, small claims court, promissory note, judgment, property lien . Collection Method #10 - Remedies are provided for in the Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) Once staff has exhausted all available means of .collection, the unpaid accounts are forwarded to an outside collection agency for further pursuit. Depending on the type of debt, collection agencies have a modest success rate ranging from 10% to 35%. Their fees range from 30% to 50% of the funds they recover. In addition to the outstanding receivables mentioned above, the City has outstanding loans to the Redevelopment Agency in the amount of $30.3 million. The loans were primarily for the Chula Vista Shopping Center Parking Structure COP debt service ($25.3 million) and approximately $5.0 million for operating purposes during the RDA's early years of operation. If you have any further questions, please contact me at extension 4040. Page 2 of 2 COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEM April 9, 2008 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Counci SUBJECT: David R. Garcia, City Manager Scott Tulloch, Assistant City M Jack Griffin, Director of Engineering and General Services ~ Listing of City Owned Properties VIA: FROM: Per the City Council's direction at the April 3, 2008 Budget Workshop meeting, please find attached a list of City owned properties. The list is not exhaustive, as we have not included parcels that are used for core municipal functions such as the police headquarters, fire stations, parks, civic center, public works center, etc. We have broken the list into a number of categories: I) "Surplus" City parcels; 2) parking lots and garages in the urban core; 3) parcels or buildings that we currently lease out to various groups; 4) parcels owned by the redevelopment agency. Please note that we have not attempted to determine or update the current value of these various properties. That can be done, but would require a significant effort by staff and/or outside real estate consultants. Additionally, we have not researched all of the deeds for these parcels or all agreements that the City may have entered into when acquiring the property. We did research the Womens Club since that property was specifically discussed at the Budget Workshop meeting and it appears that the City could dispose of the property. The agreement that the City entered into when accepting that property could be interpreted to require that the City provide meeting space for the Womens Club should we dispose of the property. Lastly, some parcels may have unique circumstances that could affect their future viability in terms of non-municipal use purposes. For example, architectural issues related to the age, style or need for upgrades of a specific building can have impacts on the value of a property. Cc: Eric Crockett, Assistant Director of Redevelopment and Housing Rick Ryals, Real Property Manager Home on Citywide2000\General Services\GS Administration\City Council Infonnation Items\Property Listing - Budget Workshop.doc Possible Developable Surplus City Owned Parcels Assesso~s Parcel Address Status/Use Sa. Ft. Acres Comments 619-211-01 (por) Fourth & Oxford Vacant 7,265 0.17 (+/-) Vacant lot that is adjacent to Fire 619-211-02 (oor) Station No.5. Unknown if needed 574-030-08 H Street at 1-805 Vacant-used by Public works 331,927 7.62 (+/-) Has been discussed by CAL TRANS as for excess soils from PW Proj. a park and ride site. Has significant access and oossible fill issues. 644-171-04 Brandywine and Olympic Vacant-contains significant 10,600 0.24 (+/-) About 5400 SF usable area outside northeast corner landscaping and hardscape for of hardscape. Due to landscaping and Olvmoic Parkwav oroximitv to Olymoic, mav not work. 593-140-27 Otay Lakes Road at Vacant 22,650 0.52 (+/-) Has access but may not have Reznv enouoh area to pad due to slooe. 624-021-03 194 Orange Vacant 30,500 0.70(+/-) Inherited by annexation. Has a park reversion clause that would need to be released bv the County. nice orooertv 624-385-18 Loma Court Vacant/Drainage 10,250 0.24 (+/-) Approximately 7000 Sf usable Remainder is drainaae channel 595-070-53 SR-125 S/Eastlake Parkway 416,000 9.55 (+/-) Remants of eastlake property set aside 595-070-52 SR-125 N/Eastlake Parkway Vacant Parcels 225,641 5.18 (+/-) but not needed for SR-125. Both have available uses or can be sold. City has not acceoted title vet 644-020-12 (por) NW corner County Landfill Vacant 2,178,000 50.00 To be deeded to City per landfill agreement can be accepted anytime. No restrict. 568-300-42 NW corner Garrett and G Womens Club 13,970 0.32 (+/-) Acquired by the City in 1991. After 15 yrs. can now be sold. Alternative facility use mav need to be orovided to the Club 567-031-27 707 F Street Old Public Works Yard 260,489 5.98 (+/-) May be under a current ENA with the Redevelopment Agency. May also be an exchange parcel (see next sheet) Note: There are several parcels in the southwest that were bought with funds that restrict their use. Some of these may be able to be cleared as they may not be suitable habitat or are already disturbed. They could not be readily disposed of but may be worth investigating. City Owned Parcels for Possible Exchange Assessor's Parcel Address Status/Use So. Ft. Acres Comments 568-044-09 Landis Avenue Parking Lot NO.2 5,208 0.12 568-044-10 12,748 0.29 568-044-11 11,009 0.25 568-161-25 Church Avenue Parking Lot NO.9 11,388 0.26 568-071-19 248 Church Avenue Parking Lot No. 10 7,423 0.17 568-071-18 6,351 0.15 568-152-23 to 27 Landis Avenue Parking No. Lot 3 26,948 0.62 568-152-01 between F and Davidson 568-270-29 Third and F Third Street Parkina Garaae 143,095 3.29 568-350-02 Madrona Street Parking Lot NO.5 7,872 0.18 568-350-03 8,413 0.19 568-162-17 282 Del Mar Avenue Parkina Lot NO.8 12,733 0.29 568-161-25 SW cor. Davidson & Church Parkinq Lot No.9 11,388 0.26 568-071-19 Church N/ol Davidson Parking Lot NO.1 0 7,423 0.17 568-071-18 6,351 0.15 Redevelopment Agency Parcels Assesso~s Parcel Address Status/Use So. Ft. Acres Comments 563-350-13 400,316 9.19 These are the parcels west of 1-805 and 566-131-01 2nd Avenue Vacant 220,414 5.06 south of SR-54 565-310-09 147,668 3.39 Parcels are between the SD&AE RR and 565-310-25 Bav Blvd. n/of E Street Vacant 167,706 3.85 the 1-5 E street offramo 567-010-18 87,556 2.01 Shangra La parcels 567-010-19 West end of Laaoon Drive Vacant 118,919 2.73 567-011-04 West end of Lanoon Drive Vacant 43,560 1.00 Oooosite side of Laaoon Drive from above 568-071-01 201 Third Avenue Vacant 10,018 0.23 Old aas station site 568-071-21 Church, between 5,563 0.13 568-071-22 Davidson and E Parkina Lot 5,563 0.13 Downtown Lot 568-152-02 Landis between Davidson 6,265 568-152-03 and E 6,265 568-152-29 Parkina lot 6,265 0.43 Downtown Lot 568-162-08 Church Avenue, between 6,775 568-162-09 Davidson and F Parkino lot 6,775 0.31 Downtown Lot 568-334-05 6,250 568-334-06 Church Avenue at 6,250 568-334-07 Center Street 6,250 568-334-08 Parkina lot 6,250 0.57 Downtown Lot 568-351-04 Church Avenue at Unkwn. 358-351-05 Madrona Street Parkina lot 3,125 Unkwn. Downtown Lot 568-450-64 Third Avenue at H Street Gateway Parking Garage (por) 1,800 Unknown why we own City Leased Parcels Assessor's Parcel Add ress User/Lessee So. Ft. Acres Comments 565-120-03-00 (por) 50 Fourth Avenue South Bay Family YMCA 30,000 0.69 Current lease of 1.00/year expired Utilities are tenant responsibilitv 565-120-03-00 (por) 47 Fifth Avenue American Leaion Post No. 434 $1.00/yr. expires 10/31/12 (pre-paid) 593-240-24 4475 Bonita Road American Golf with extensions, expires 7/16; percent of sale lease 593-240-22 Rohr Park Sunnyside Saddle Club Lease currentlv beina neootiated 593-240-05 4548 Sweetwater Road Bonita Optimist Foundation Rohr Manor; $1.00/vr. month to month 620-060-19 1301 Oleander Bovs and Girls Club at GreQ ROQers Park; $1.00Ivr. expo 8/18 619-211-37 333 Oxford Bovs and Girls Club at Lauderbach CC; $1.00/vr. expo 6/18 568-333-11 270 F Street Co. of S.D. Age/lnd.services at Norman Park Senior Center $296.22/yr. expo 06/08 568-333-11 270 F Street Lutheran Social Services at Norman Park Senior Center $1,460.76/yr. expo 07/08 568-333-11 270 F Street Meals on Wheels at Norman Park Senior Center $1,875.67/yr. expo 07/08 568-333-11 270 F Street Sr. Citizens Legal Services at Norman Park Senior Center $1, 133.42/yr. exo. 07/08 643-070-10? University Site High Tech High Terms pending Muti-year w/options ~V~ ~~~~ ~~~~ - - -- - - -- CllY OF CHUlA VISTA FINANCE DEPARTMENT DATE: April 8, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Council Members VIA: David Garcia, City Manager FROM: SUBJECT: Auto Allowances and Use of City Vehicles In response to your request at the City's April 3rd budget Workshop I am providing information on auto allowances and city owned vehicles that employees take home. Resolution 16904 approved the City Council Policy regarding the use of City vehicles and auto allowances. Auto Allowances The 2008-09 preliminary budget currently includes auto allowances for 44 employees that include the Mayor and Council Members. The allowances are paid primarily to department heads and assistant department heads. The total fiscal year 2008-09 budget is $263,400. Use of City Vehicles Attached are three separate reports for use of City vehicles. The reports cover all departments and are divided by non-public safety, Police and Fire Department personnel. If you have any questions please contact me at extension 4040. Attachments Listing of Auto Allowances by Position Report Non-Public Safety Employer Provided Vehicle Report Police Department City Vehicles Fire Department City Vehicles 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista California 91910 (619) 691-5051 FAX (619) 585-5685 Listing of Auto Allowances by Position 1 ADVANCED PLANING MANAGER $ 2 ASST CITY CLERK $ 3 ASST CITY MANAGER $ 4 ASST CITY MANAGER $ 5 ASST DIR BUILDING & HOUSING $ 6 ASST DIR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $ 7 ASST DIR HUMAN RESOURCES $ 8 ASST DIR OF BUDGET & ANALYSIS $ 9 ASST DIR OF FINANCE $ 10 ASST DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS $ 11 ASST DIR PLANNING $ 12 ASST DIRECTOR OF RECREATION $ 13 ASST LIBRARY DIRECTOR $ 14 CHIEF OF STAFF $ 15 CITY ATTORNEY $ 16 CITY CLERK $ 17 CITY MANAGER $ 18 COUNCILPERSON $ 19 COUNCILPERSON $ 20 COUNCILPERSON $ 21 COUNCILPERSON $ 22 DEPUTY DIR OF GENERAL SERVICES $ 23 DEPUTY DIR OF GENERAL SERVICES $ 24 DEPUTY DIR OF ENGINEERING $ 25 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING MANAGER $ 26 DIR BUDGET AND ANALYSIS $ 27 DIR OF COMMUNICATIONS $ 28 DIR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $ 29 DIR OF CONSERVATION & ENVIRONMENTAL S $ 30 DIR OF GENERAL SERVICES $ 31 DIR OF HUMAN RESOURCES $ 32 DIR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SVCS $ 33 DIR OF PLANNING & BUILDING $ 34 DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS $ 35 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE $ 36 DIRECTOR OF RECREATION $ 37 DIRECTOR OF THE NATURE CENTER $ 38 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICER $ 39 GOVERNMENT RELATIONS LIAISON $ 40 HOUSING MANAGER $ 41 LIBRARY DIRECTOR $ 42 MAYOR $ 43 SR ASST CITY ATTORNEY $ 44 SR ASST CITY ATTORNEY $ Total 400 $ 400 $ 550 $ 550 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 550 $ 550 $ 1,000 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 550 $ 400 $ 400 $ 400 $ 550 $ 1,000 $ 400 $ 400 $ $ 4,800 4,800 6,600 6,600 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 6,600 6,600 12,000 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 4,800 4,800 4,800 6,600 12,000 4,800 4,800 263,400 EMPLOYER PROVIDED VEHICLES Mileage for November 01,2006 thorugh October 31,2007 Date Date of Usage Total Personal Employee's Name Title Department Vehicle# Vehicle Description In-Service From To Mileage Mileage Bernardo, Agnes Parks Manager Public Works 2230 05 Ford F150 8/15/2005 11/01/06 10/31/07 11,238 2,400 Chau, Cecil Signal System Engineer II Engineering 2118 02 Chev S-10 5/3/2003 11/01/06 10/31/07 10,619 414 Dorsey, Steve Equip Maint Manager Garage 1110 99 Ford Taurus 9/29/1999 11/01/06 02/12/07 5,426 5,084 Dorsey, Steve Equip Maint Manager Garage 1137 03 Ford Taurus 1/2/2003 02/13/07 10/31/07 14,960 12,382 Edwards, Barry Cust & Facilities Manager General Services 2231 05 Chevy C-1500 8/31/2005 11/01/06 10/31/07 8,090 2,230 Gonzales, Bernard Police Information Officer PD 1105 99 Ford Taurus 5/12/1999 11/01/06 10/31/07 7,932 1,617 Gonzales, Steven Public Works Manager Public Works 2225 07 Chevrolet C1500 8/24/2006 11/01/06 10/31/07 5,270 1,521 Larson, Ted MID Manager Public Works 2140 01 Cherolet S-10 extend 5/11/2001 11101/06 02/01/07 2,746 1,148 Larson, Ted MID Manager Public Works 2022 05 Ford Ranger 6/24/2005 02/02/07 10/31/07 8,976 3,441 McRoberts, Dave MID Manager Public Works 2253 01 Chevrolet Silverado 3/12/2001 11/01/06 10/31/07 12,435 2,884 Sirois, Paul MID Manager Public Works 1919 02 Ford Explorer Sport Trac 4/8/2002 06/08/07 10/31/07 8,709 2,560 White, Robert MID Manager General Services 1930 07 Ford Escape Hybrid SUV 8/24/2006 11/01106 10/31/07 8,096 923 Notes: 1. The value of Employee personal miles are reported on IRS Form W2 in accordance with IRS regulations. 2. Employees listed twice had a change in vehicle during the year. 3. As of end of February 2008, Steve Dorsey no longer takes a vehicle home. 4. In addition to the above there are two animal control officers that take an animal control vehicle home on a rotating basis. Non Safety Employee Vehicle Use 4/9/2008 Chula Vista Police Department Vehicles Not Returned to City Garages 2007 Mileage COUNT DRIVER MAKE 2007 MILEAGE 1 12869 2 1939 3 12478 4 8842 '" u 5 14786 ~ 0 6 15072 u.. -'" 7 7785 '" '" 8 16148 t '" 9 9864 > 0 10 16001 u ~ 11 7559 '" -a c: 12 21371 ::) en 13 29944 c: 19434 0 14 "" '" 15 0 0> "" 16 13286 '" '" 6887 > 17 E 18 7805 19 8236 20 8386 21 3267 c: 22 Chief Emerson Ford 1427 14456 0 23 Capt.Miranda Ford 1429 20509 "" ~ 24 Capt. Wed e Ford 1430 20102 ~ c: 25 Ca t. Hunter Ford 1428 10464 E 26 Lt. Kenned Ford 1129 8807 -a <( 27 Lt. Coulson Ford 1422 2720 0> 28 Officer Ford 1214 14834 , 29 Officer Ford 1216 14080 ~ e 30 Officer Ford 1297 23454 10 31 Officer Ford 1295 19378 0.. 32 Officer Ford 8519 1293 COUNT RIDER MAKE EQUIP # 2007 MILEAGE 1 Ser ean! Honda 1038 9432 2 A en! Kawasaki 1022 2207 3 A ent Kawasaki 1036 6680 - 4 Officer Kawasaki 1037 6802 c: ::) 5 Officer Kawasaki 1035 16798 u IE 6 Officer Kawasaki 1030 4393 '" ~ 7 Officer Kawasaki 1031 10097 f- 8 Officer Kawasaki 1034 8891 9 Officer Kawasaki 1028 5987 10 Officer Kawasaki 1032 9134 11 Officer Kawasaki 1029 5654 Note: The vehicle indicating no mileage was acquired February 2008, replacing another vehicle that had 13,044 miles in 2007 FIRE DEPARTMENT CITY VEHICLES Name ... iL Title ........ .... Dept ...... TvpeofVehicle. .. Milea!te James Geering Interim Fire Chief Fire Fire emergency vehicle - Average Chevv Tahoe 200/month Michael Reeves Interim Deputy Fire Fire emergency vehicle - Average Chief Chevv Tahoe 200/month Robert Hill Fire Captain Fire Staff vehicle - Chevy Truck Average 200/month Justin Gipson Fire Marshal Fire Staff vehicle - Chevy Average Silverado 1500 Truck 200/month James Garcia Fire Captain Fire Staff vehicle - Chevy Truck 80-1 00 per day On-Call Fire Fire Investigators - Fire See attached listing of Fire Investigator - Karen Foster, Investigators for detail Rotate Richard Gari, Darin approximately Golden, Gary I every 7 days Edmonds, Sam Escalante, Gary I Breton, Rudy Diaz, I Justin Gipson Fire Prevention Personnel taking home city vehicles during required Fire Investigation Standby 24/7 coverage: (All mileage is approx.for each investigator over 6 months) Samuel Escalante; Fire Prevention Engineer/Investigator; 4dr. Chev. Colorado PU; approx. 552 miles Gary O. Edmonds; Sr. Fire Inspector/Sr. Investigator; 4dr. Chev. Colorado PU; approx. 552 miles Amy Swift; Fire Inspector II/Investigator; 2dr. Dodge Dakota PU; approx. 552 miles Karen Foster; Fire Inspector lI/lnvestigator; 2dr. Chev. Colorado PU; approx. 552 miles Richard Gari; Fire Inspector I/Investigator; 4dr. Dodge Dakota PU; approx. 552 miles Fernando Felix; Fire Inspector I/Investigator; 2 dr. Chev. Colorado PU; approx. 552 miles Darin Golden; Fire Inspector I/Investigator; 4 dr. Chev. Colorado PU; approx. 552 miles ~ DATE: February 22, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: SUBJECT: Richard P. Emerson, Chief of Police VIA: David Garcia, City Manager Chula Vista Police Deoartment Holdina Facilitv Cost Comoarison The City of Chula Vista Police Department has always prided itself on doing more, with less. Although Chula Vista is the second largest city in San Diego County, the Police Department is the lowest staffed municipal law enforcement agency in San Diego County at 1.07 officers per thousand citizens. This has given the Police Department the opportunity to become innovative in the way police work is done in Chula Vista. From the innovative Problem Oriented Policing strategies, to the construction of the only local jail facility in San Diego County, the Chula Vista Police Department has been able to maintain low crime rates and effectively respond to citizens concerns. Additionally, the department has brought in over $30 million in grant funds over the last 15 years. These grant funds allowed the Department to bridge the costs of adding new staff and offset a significant amount of general fund costs. The Department civilianized several positions throughout the organization in order to put more Peace Officers on the street rather than handling the more mundane operations. This allowed the Police Department to expand to meet the tremendous growth that Chula Vista experienced over the years with limited resources. When the old facility was constructed in 1971, the holding facility that was constructed was designed to hold a total of 12 prisoners. This equated to .18 beds per 1,000 population. When the new facility was constructed in 2004, it was designed to meet the future population of 275,000 (later increased to over 300,000), which equated to .17 beds per 1,000 population. While it is the only local jail facility of its kind in San Diego County, local jails with capacities under 100 beds such as this are very common throughout California. The jail provides the citizens of Chula Vista an enhanced public safety tool which ultimately provides a much more efficient and cost effective operation than had ever been provided prior to moving into the new Police facility in 2004. The table below compares Richard P. Emerson Chula Vista Police Department Holdina Facilitv Cost Comparison April 10, 2008 Paqe 2 of 4 the total costs of operating the new facility in comparison to the way the old facility was operated1. State Subvention $0 $0 $269,000 CVPD Bookin Fees $81,000 $81,000 $0 Count Bookin Fees $15,000 $15,000 $0 ICDTP $650,000 $809,424 $0 TOTAL $746,000 $905,424 $269,000 NET OPERA TlNG COST $970,787 $811,363 $1,356,174 With the increase in the number of inmates processed as part of the In-Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICDTP) from 24 inmates to 32 inmates, the net cost of the new facility falls to $811,363 (shown in table above). Based upon the figures above, the net operating cost of the new facility is less than the net operating costs of the old facility. The new facility has the ability to generate far more revenues than the old facility ever did as well as keep officers out in the community serving the citizens. There are also several costs which are actually avoided by having a jail facility. The primary cost which is avoided is the need for four additional Peace Officers to compensate for the travel time and booking process to book inmates into County Jail. In fact, since the opening of the new jail facility, the time associated with booking and transportation of prisoners to the County Jail has been removed as a component of the Patrol Staffing Model6. Additionally, should the State of California reinstate booking fees, the Department will be in a position to significantly reduce costs paid from previous years in the old facility. The tables below detail the net costs based upon either the 24 bed ICDTP or 32 bed ICDTP configurations. 1 Old Facility Costs are in FY2008 dollars for comparison. 2 The Department has received confirmation from the State to increase the number of beds allocated for the ICDTP from 24 beds to 32 beds. 3 State Booking Fee Subvention is included, although if the old jail was still in operation today, there would be no revenues available from the State. 4 Includes 14 PSO, 1 Secretary, 1 Jail Lieutenant, supplies and services 5 Includes 5 PSO, .25 FTE Lieutenant, 4 Peace Officers (transportation), booking fees, and supplies and services 5 The nationally recognized Patrol Staffing Model is a workload based formula which determines adequate patrol staffing levels to meet call for service demands throughout the City. The last time the model was run was in 2005, which recommended a total of 10 Peace Officers (three for call for service, seven for a new beat in the eastern territories) and two Community Service Officers. Due to budget concerns, these recommendations have not been implemented. This model was developed in 1987 by the Office of Budget and Analysis. Richard P. Emerson Chula Vista Police Department Holding Facility Cost Comparison April 10, 2008 PaQe 3 of 4 Table II illustrates the effective cost if the State of California does not reinstitute booking fees on City's. Table III illustrates the effective cost assuming the State reinstitutes booking fees. NET COST 24 Beds $970,787 32 Beds $811,363 COSTS AVOIDED Officer Bookin Associated E ui ment TOTAL COST AVOIDED EFFECTIVE COST $431,787 $272,363 NET COST from Above 24 Beds $970,787 32 Beds $811,363 COSTS AVOIDED Officer Bookin Associated E ui ment Bookin Fee's TOTAL COST AVOIDED EFFECTIVE COST $156,787 Staff has compared the actual net operating costs of the new facility in relation to the estimated net operating costs of the old jail facility over the last four fiscal years (since the new jail has been in operation). The table on the next page details not only the year by year comparison, but also includes the cost avoidance figures for accurate comparison. 7 The Department still books some prisoners into County jail and this figure represents the estimated number of booking that would be avoided due to being able to book prisoners at CVPD. Richard P. Emerson Chula Vista Police Department Holding Facility Cost Comparison April 1 0, 2008 PaQe 4 of 4 $814,748 $1,200,135 $1,122,863 $931,402 $191,461 $705,620 $897,081 Old Jail NOC New Jail NOC Savin sl Cost New v. Old Cumulative Savin s Add Cost Avoidance Overall Savin s wi New Jail Cumulative Savin s $1,356,174 $970,787 $385,387 Just comparing net operating costs between the new jail versus the old jail, the new jail has saved the City a total of $211 ,395 over the last four fiscal years. If cost avoidance figures are added, the cumulated savings over the four fiscal years is $2,682,855. In any of the scenarios presented above, the total net cost of the current jail is sianificantlv lower than had the department decided to operate the jail facility as had been done in the old facility. 8 NOC = Net Operating Cost estimate based upon old jail configuration and applying salaries/benefits appropriate for that fiscal year 9 NOC = Net Operating Cost based upon actual revenues and expenditures for each fiscal year. City Of Chula Vista City Manager's Office 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, Ca 91910 619.409.5282 - 619.585.5612 Fax MEMO C1lY OF CHUlA VISfA DATE: April 1 0, 2008 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: David Garcia, City Manager SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Balancing Plan At the April 3rd Budget Workshop, staff identified structural budget deficits in the City's General Fund, Development Services Fund, and Redevelopment Agency totaling $10.6 million. Staff presented Council with a plan to balance the budget comprised of 119 budget reductions that offset the identified deficit. During the workshop, Council indicated support for 115 of the proposals totaling $9.0 million in savings and directed staff to remove the following four proposals: . Proposal 56 - Eliminate Mobile Home Inspection Program, Reassign one Code Enforcement Officer to Residential Abandoned Property Program, estimated revenue $80,000 . Proposal 87 - Convert Engine Company 57 to a reserve company (reduce overtime expenditures), estimated savings $740,000 . Proposal 88 - Elimination of Battalion 52 (second battalion), estimated savings $583,000 . Proposal 90 - Reduce energy costs by turning off 1,058 streetlights on non- residential streets, estimated savings $150,000 The elimination of the above proposals creates a General Fund budget gap of $1.6 million for fiscal year 2008-09. The Council supported all of the net cost reduction proposals in the Development Services Fund and Redevelopment Agency, thereby bringing these two funds into balance. Implementation of the 115 proposals supported by Council will result in the elimination of 36.5 positions, including eight potential layoffs. The following table summarizes the Council supported reductions by department. 8 - 1 Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Update 4/10/2008 , NET COST - _ TOTAL FIE TOTAL FIE" DEPARTMENT REDUCTJON 0/", _ REDUCTION LAYOFFS_- GENERAL FUND Administration Human Resources City Attorney Finance City Clerk ITS Nature Center Eng & GS Planning & Building Library Recreation Police Fire Public Works Other Reductions City Council Total General Fund $ (495,394) $ (507,518) $ (246,000) $ (306,353) $ (108,429) $ (417,558) $ (100,000) $ (1,062,744) $ (175,519) $ (585,424) $ (289,405) $ (1,572,486) $ (571,359) $ (212,542) $ (567,828) $ $ (7,218,559) $ (642,407) $ (733,496) $ (1,375,903) $ (394,311) $ (394,311) DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FUND DSF - Public Works DSF - Planning & Building DSF - Eng & GS Total Development Services Fund REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RDA (Merged Project Area) Total RDA 11% 1.00 10% 10% 10% 2.00 10% 10% 3.00 8% 1.00 8% 7.00 7% 2.00 7% 2.50 5% 1.00 3% 5.50 2% 1.00 1% 3.00 0% 0% 29.00 28% 4.00 19% 2.50 6.50 6% 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 Attached for your review is a summary of the proposals that were submitted by the departments but not recommended by the City Manager in the budget-balancing plan presented on April 3"'. As requested by Council, this list has been combined with the proposals that were included as part of the December budget reduction process but not adopted by Council at that time. Combined these reductions represent 58 proposals totaling $10.1 million in potential savings. Detailed descriptions of each of the proposed budget reductions are also attached and they include information on service impacts, performance data (where available), and any special implementation issues. 8-2 Page 2 Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Update 4/10/2008 As previously discussed, departments were directed to focus their proposed budget reductions on: . Reducing the number of management and support staff, . Reducing or eliminating non-essential hourly, overtime, and service and supply budgets, . Reducing costs in the development services functions to reflect reduced development activity and revenues, and . Minimizing direct service impacts to the community. The majority of remaining proposals would result in serious service reductions to the community, increase the number of layoffs, and decrease funding in maintenance services and public safety. Given the magnitude of these service impacts I am recommending two alternatives for balancing the budget: implementation of a second early retirement incentive program and continuation of a hiring freeze citywide (with an exception for sworn public safety positions.) Early Retirement Incentive Program As discussed at the April 3rd Council Budget Workshop, staff is recommending an early retirement program that would be available from May 5, 2008 to August 5, 2008. The implementation of this program would result in reduced personnel costs; staff is estimating that the implementation of this program could save $1.05 million. The estimated savings also reflect the costs associated with the medical incentive program. The savings associated with the early retirement incentive program were not previously included in the proposed budget for two reasons. First, the City Council has not yet taken action to approve a second early retirement program. This item is scheduled to come back to Council for adoption on April 22, 2008. However, since there appeared to be significant support for the program among the Council at the budget workshop it is now prudent to incorporate a conservative estimate of the anticipated savings from this program into the budget plan. Second, it was originally intended that the implementation of the early retirement program would allow the City some cushion should the economic condition worsen and would provide a jumpstart on addressing further budget shortfalls projected for fiscal year 2009-2010. I am now recommending that the anticipated Page 3 8-3 Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Update 4/10/2008 savings resulting from the early retirement program be used to help close the remaining budget gap and thereby eliminate the need to implement further service reductions and employee layoffs. Extension of Hiring Freeze Since July of 2007, a hiring freeze has been in effect citywide with the exception of sworn public safety positions. Exceptions to the hiring freeze have been made where the position is revenue offset or critical to City operations. The proposed extension of the hiring freeze would follow the same general guidelines. It is anticipated that the City will experience a certain amount of turnover as is typical every year. As positions are vacated throughout the year, they will be evaluated to determine whether they can remain vacant for all or part of the year. The extension of the hiring freeze will result in the reassignment or elimination of the workload associated with the vacant positions. While the extension of the hiring freeze is not ideal, it is preferable to implementing some of the departmental proposals. It is conservatively estimated that continuation of the hiring freeze will generate approximately $500,000 in savings citywide. In total, the two new proposals total $1.55 million, which is sufficient to close the remaining budget gap in the General Fund. The table below reflects the new proposals and the impact the General Fund budget gap. Projected General Fund Budget Gap Less Proposals Supported by Council Less Early Retirement Program Less Extension of Hiring Freeze Updated General Fund Budget Gap ($8.80 million) $7.25 million $1.05 million $0.50 million $ 0 Elimination of Management and Unclassified Hourly Employee Salary Increases In addition to the four proposals that were eliminated from the budget-balancing plan discussed above, Council also continued the resolution eliminating the salary increases for all management and unclassified hourly employees scheduled for fiscal year 2008- 2009. The proposed budget reflects the elimination of the January 1, 2009 salary increase for all management employees and the July 1, 2008 and January 1, 2009 salary increases for all unclassified hourly employees. These proposals would result in Page 4 8-4 Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Update 4/1012008 savings of approximately $406,000 and $99,000 respectively. At this time, I am recommending that the Council approve the resolution eliminating these salary increases but allowing for them to be reinstated if the savings realized through the early retirement incentive program and hiring freeze are larger than anticipated or if revenues exceed projections. It is important to note that the proposed elimination of the salary increases would only apply to management employees and unclassified hourly employees - the July 2008 and January 2009 salary increases scheduled for the Chula Vista Employees Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, Chula Vista Police Officers Association, Western Council of Engineers, and the Confidential employee group will not be impacted by this action. Conclusion I am recommending that the Council accept the proposals for the early retirement incentive program and the extension of the hiring freeze, which will generate sufficient savings to balance the General Fund while avoiding further employee layoffs. No additional reductions are recommended. Attachments: . Budget reduction proposal summary . Budget reduction proposal forms Page 5 8-5 .$.lft.- --- -r~ CHID~ISTA FY 2008-09 Budget Reduction Plan Budget Reduction Proposal Summary PROPOSAL TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE NET COST NUMBER PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION REDUCTION LAYOFFS REDUCTION 121 Other Reductions ($1,050,000) Implement retirement incentive program available from May 5,2008 to August 5, 2008. 122 Other Reductions ($500,000) Extend hiring freeze until June 30, 2009 - excluding sworn public safety positions. 123 Eng & GS 0.50 ($12,161) Reduce one full-time Animal Care Assistant to part- time; backfill with hourly Custodian. 124 Recreation ($21,583) Reduce hours of operation ot Veterans Center, Parkway Center, Otay Center, Montevalle Center, and Parkway Gym by closing Sundays. 125 Nature Center ($33,180) Downgrade Senior Administrative Secretary to Secretary. II Administration 1.00 1.00 ($112,000) Eliminate Special Events Planner. 127 Police 1.00 1.00 ($83,619) Eliminate one Civilian Background Investigator. 128 Police 1.00 1.00 ($83,618) Eliminate one Police Community Relations Specialist. 129 Police 1.00 1.00 ($111,297) Eliminate Public Safety Analyst Position. 130 Library ($250,000) Further reduce materials and book budget. 131 Eng & GS ($37,991) Reclassify 6 Lead Custodians to 6 Custodian I. 132 Recreation ($52,938) Close Parkway swimming pool six months. . Designates proposals from December 2007 Budget Reduction Process. 8-6 ~lft- ~~- ~. - ~ CrIY9f CHUIA viSTA FY 2008-09 Budget Reduction Plan Budget Reduction Proposal Summary PROPOSAL TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE NET COST NUMBER PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION REDUCTION LAYOFFS REDUCTION 133 Recreation ($154,304) Reduction of port-time hours at recreation facilities. 134 Police 1.00 1.00 ($83,618) Eliminate the second Police Community Relations Specialist. 135 Police 1.00 1.00 ($117,541) Eliminate the Police Training & Development Supervisor position. III Police 1.00 1.00 ($127,179) Eliminate the Public Information Officer. 137 Public Works 1.00 1.00 ($74,405) Eliminate one Tree Trimmer. 138 Public Works 2.00 1.00 ($229,137) Eliminate one Equipment Operator, one Senior Maintenance Worker, ond two 5-yard dump trucks. 139 Public Works 3.00 3.00 ($234,776) Eliminate two Gardener 1/11, one Park Supervisor, and associated equipment. 140 Eng & GS 1.00 1.00 ($83,228) Eliminate one Painter. 141 Eng & GS 1.50 1.50 ($94,987) Eliminate 1.5 permanent part time Custodians (3 persons). 142 Public Works 1.00 1.00 ($124,762) Eliminate one Traffic Devices Technicion. 143 Public Works 2.00 2.00 ($221,931) Eliminate two-person tree trimming crew and associated equipment. 144 Eng & GS 1.00 ($91,550) Eliminate one Electrician. . Designates proposals from December 2007 Budget Reduction Process. 8-7 ~\(?- &I"fI- ,...~ CITYOJ' CHULA VISTA FY 2008-09 Budget Reduction Plan Budget Reduction Proposal Summary PROPOSAL TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE NET COST NUMBER PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION REDUCTION LAYOFFS REDUCTION 145 Public Works 2.00 ($179,831) Eliminate two-person Legend Crew and transfer staff to vacant NPDES positions. 146 Public Works 1.00 1.00 ($85,910) Eliminate Stormwater Compliance Inspector in NPDES. III Eng & GS 1.00 1.00 ($77,710) Eliminate one Painter. 148 Police 0.10 0.10 ($11,751) Reduce Senior Public Safety Analyst from 1.00 to 0.90 FTE. III Public Works ($20,000) Illuminated Street Name Signs. ED Public Works 2.00 ($153,687) Eliminate two-person Graffiti Crew and transfer stoff to vacant NPDES positions. 151 Police 1.00 1.00 ($71,232) Reduction of one Community Service Officer position - One of Four. 152 Pol ice 1.00 1.00 ($71,232) Reduction of one Community Service Officer position - Two of Four. 153 Police 1.00 1.00 ($71,232) Reduction of one Community Service Officer position - Three of Four. 154 Police 1.00 1.00 ($71,232) Reduction of one Community Service Officer position - Four of Four. 155 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Eliminate two Street Team Officers - One of Three. _ Designates proposals from December 2007 Budget Reduction Process. 8-8 ~\ft.. -.- ~.....,;;~ = FY 2008-09 Budget Reduction Plan Budget Reduction Proposal Summary em OF CHULA VISTA PROPOSAL TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE NET COST NUMBER PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION REDUCTION LAYOFFS REDUCTION 156 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Reduction of two Peoce Officers from Patrol - One af Seven. 157 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Reductian af twa Peace Officers from Patrol- Twa of Seven. 158 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol- Three of Seven. 159 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol- Four of Seven. 160 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol - Five of Seven. 161 Police 2.00 2.00 ($258,488) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol- Six of Seven. 162 Police 1.00 1.00 ($129,244) Reduction of one Peace Officer from Patrol - Seven of Seve n. 163 Police 1.00 1.00 ($129,244) Eliminate one Narcotics Task Force Officer. 164 Police 1.00 1.00 ($129,244) Eliminate one Narcotics Enforcement Team Officer. 165 Police 1.00 1.00 ($131,683) Reduction of one Peace Officer (K-9 Unit) from Patrol. a Police 1.00 1.00 ($134,823) Eliminate one Police Agent from the Property Crimes Unit. . Designates proposals from December 2007 Budget Reduction Process. 8-9 ..sUt- -11- ~----- -- CHOU~STA FY 2008-09 Budget Reduction Plan Budget Reduction Proposal Summary PROPOSAL TOTAL FTE TOTAL FTE NET COST NUMBER PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION REDUCTION LAYOFFS REDUCTION III II III III III III III III 1m III III III Police Eliminate ane Police Agent (Auto Theft Detective) from the Property Crimes Unit. 1.00 Police Eliminate SWA T Program (reduce overtime and supplies & services expenditures). Police Eliminate two Street Team Officers - Two af Three. 2.00 Police Eliminate twa Street Team Officers - Three of Three. 2.00 Police Eliminate one Street Team Officer. 1.00 Police Eliminate one Street Team Agent. 1.00 Police Eliminate ane Street Team Sergeant. 1.00 Police Eiiminate ane School Resource Officer. 1.00 Police Eliminate four School Resource Officers. 4.00 Police Eliminate one SRO Agent. 1.00 Police Eliminate one SRO Sergeont. 1.00 Fire 9.00 Reduce USAR Staffing; Close Fire Station. CITYWIDE TOTAL 73.10 . Designates proposals from December 2007 Budget Reduction Process. 8 -10 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 9.00 66.60 ($134,823) ($88,326) ($244,874) ($244,874) ($122,437) ($134,823) ($155,086) ($61,219) ($244,874) ($67,412) ($155,086) ($1,219,743) ($10,136,853) ~Ir?- -jJ- -- ~ CIT\'Of CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form Other Reductions PROPOSAL: 121 LINE OF BUSINESS: Citywide PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Implement retirement incentive program available from May 5, 2008 to August 5, 2008. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a briefjustificatian far the selected service area designation) implementation of a retirement incentive program would allow the City to reduce personnnel costs. There are 233 employees eligible to retire under this program. Because it is unknown at this time what positions would actually be vacated, staff is estimating that personnel costs would be reduced by $1.05 million in fiscal year 2008-09. This takes into account the costs associated with the medical incentive program. The actual savings resulting from this program would not be known until the close of the retirement window. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non:core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $1,050,000 $0 ($1,050,000) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $1,050,000 $0 ($1,050,000) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) As employees take advantage of the early retirement, the positions that they vacate will be evaluated to see if they can be eliminated on a permanent basis, frozen, or filled. SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) As this time, it is unknown which positions will actually be eliminated, however a reduction in the 8 -11 ~\f?. -........-.- - ~ CHOI:X.'\iISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 121 number of authorized staff will require workload to be reassigned or eliminated. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 05/05/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief descriptian af any speciai circumstances reiated ta implementing this proposal) 8 - 12 ~\{?- ---.- -,~~'"""" ~ .(mo' (HuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form Other Reductions PROPOSAL: 122 LINE OF BUSINESS: Citywide PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Extend hiring freeze until June 30, 2009 - excluding sworn pubiic safety positions. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) A hiring freeze has been in effect since July 2007. The majority of the positions that are currently vacant are proposed to be eiiminated as part of the budget balancing plan. There is a smali number of positions that are authorized and funded but currently vacant - these positions wili be evaluated to determine if the hiring dates can be staggered throughout fiscal year 2009 in order to generate savings. In addition, a very modest amount of regular turnover is still anticipated for fiscal year 2009. The extension of the hiring freeze would exclude sworn pubiic safety employees. Service Area Designations: Services essentiai to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not ali other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $500,000 $0 ($500,000) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $500,000 $0 ($500,000) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) As positions become vacant throughout the year they will be frozen; exceptions will be made on an as- needed basis. SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 - 13 ~!f? -,.- -~ ~ "~I1YOf CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 122 At this time it is unknown which positions will become vacant as part of normal turnover, the workload for these positions may need to be reassigned or eliminated. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to Implementing this proposal) 8 -14 ~v?- --- -~ -= CHOl'X~ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 123 Eng & GS LINE OF BUSINESS: Animal Care Facility PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduce 1 FTE Animal Care Assistant to .s FTE, backfill .5 Animal Care Assistant with hourly Custodian (not to exceed 999 hours). SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core 0 Semi-Core 0 Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Animal Care Facility is responsible for the Animal Placement and Animal Control and Safety of all animals within the City of Chula Vista, contract services also provided to Imperial Beach, National City and Lemon Grove. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $31,392 $19,231 ($12,161) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $31,392 $19,231 ($12,161) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) Variance between ACA $31,392 and hourly Custodian $19,231 8 - 15 ~v?- ~II- -.. :;:- _~[IYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 123 SERVICE IMPACTS: % of satisfactory Kennel Care and Assistance % of kennel sanitized / cleaned Maintenance of Building and Grounds OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Maintenance of kennels and facility is necessitated in order to provide a safe and clean environmental for animals, potential pet owners and employees. Will be maintained by Hourly Custodian. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 01/31/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) Ongoing since 01/31/08 8 -16 ~Ift.. --- -.... . ~ Cln' Of CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 124 Recreation LINE OF BUSINESS: Recreation Facilities PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Sunday closure of Veterans Center, Parkway Center, Otay Center, Montevalle Center, and Parkway Gym. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Customer Satisfaction: Provision of community facilities in neighborhoods is a core service. No classes or formal programs are conducted on Sundays. Sunday attendance figures are lower than other days. Rentals will still occur, with 100% cost offset. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fuifill basic expectation of the community. Most if not ail other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the departmentls mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $21,583 $0 ($21,583) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $21,583 $0 ($21,583) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) Impacts are to part-time staff. Personnel Services savings generated are hourly wages. SERVICE IMPACTS: Attendance (12 month/all Recreation Centers) OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 -17 -..'}Jf?. --- ~ ~ cmop CHULA VISfA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 124 IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 18 ~Vt- -,- =- ~ .<;IlYO' CHuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 125 Nature Center LINE OF BUSINESS: Administration PROPOSED REDUCTiON: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Downgrade Senior Administrative Secretary to Secretary. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) o Core ~ Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide 0 brief justification for the selected service area designation) Related to key revenue support Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL -1 1 o -1 1 o Secretary Administrative Secretary Personnel Services $33,180 $0 ($33,180) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $33,180 $0 ($33,180) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation af this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 -19 ~(ft.. ---- --~:~ CIlYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl.: 125 Loss of major investment in training and integration into staff; loss of relationship with donors, volunteers, and members. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) Wouid require some time for turn-over training. 8 -20 ~v?- --'- -::::-- ~ ... CHOn ~lsrA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 126 Administration LINE OF BUSINESS: Office of Communications PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Elimination ofthe Special Events Planner position. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) o Core C!J Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The city is reducing its participation in special events, as a resuit of the budget shortfall. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfili basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but notessential to the department1s mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $112,000 $0 ($112,000) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $112,000 $0 ($112,000) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other Information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 21 ~!f?. -...,;-- - -~ ~ .Q:I1'Of CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista BudRet Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 126 SERVICE IMPACTS: Special events planning/coordination between city departments (Le. Public Works, Police) and external organizations. Management / coordination of internal special events. Management / coordination of block party permits. Management / coordination of filming permits. 50 50+ o 12 12+ o 25 25+ o 10 10+ o OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 1. No management or coordination/permitting for special events among City departments (Public Works, Police, Risk Management, Parks, Transit, Mayor's Office, Fire, Attorney's Office, General Services, City Clerk, Library) and externai organizations (Le. Third Avenue Village Association, Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, Otay Ranch Company, EastLake Educational Foundation, local high schools, non-profit organizations, churches). This would negatively impact the departments listed above and the public. This includes: Managing and overseeing permitting process for event organizers/residents who wish to hold an event on City owned / controlled property in which attendance is more than 100 persons. Serving as liaison to the public. Answering any questions event organizers/residents may have when filling out the special event permits (most frequent are those questions regarding liability insurance and property questions). Reviewing permits for venue scheduling conflicts or questionable information that could be a risk or liability to the City. Organizing meetings with event organizers and City staff. Facilitating meetings and reviewing event logistics with both parties to ensure event complies with City regulations. Facilitating communication between staff and event organizers throughout permitting process. Monitoring and supervising permit throughout the approval process and serving as point person for City staff. Be final signing authority, approving events and maintaining all event files and records. Drafting and writing agenda statements to City Council regarding street closures for festivals, parades and events. 8 - 22 ~\f?- --- _~ T~ CllYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 126 Writing and sending letters to Alcohol Beverage Control board for event coordinators, where applicable. Assisting residents in securing astra jumps permits and park reservations Creating and managing special event calendar for the City. Overseeing event calendar to ensure no double booking at various City venues. Attending larger events (Starlight Parade, Cinco de Mayo, Lemon Festival, Celebrate Chula Vista, etc.) and serving as City contact should probiems/issues arise during the event. 2. No management or coordination of internal special events for the City such as State of the City address, Boards and Commission Dinner, Beautification Awards Dinner, dedications and grand openings. This would negatively impact General Services, Public Works, Police, Mayor's Office, Fire, and Risk Management. This includes: Deveioping and administering event budget. Planning internal event and implementing time lines . Coordinating and securing dates with elected officials calendars. Researching event venues. Researching and contracting vendors such as food, beverage, audio/visual, equipment rentals, entertainment, decoration, venue, floral. Securing and reviewing bids, negotiating contracts/pri'ing and meeting with selected vendors to review event logistics. Maintaining and managing invoicing and contracts. Serving as point person for City staff - General Services, Public Works, Poiice, Mayor's Office, Fire, Risk Management - and resolving any issues/ answer questions that arise. Coordinating meetings with City staff. Facilitating meetings and reviewing event logistics and timeiines. Creating invitation lists, monitoring invitation creation and design, stuffing and mailing invitations, managing RSVPs, resolving any questions guests may have. Overseeing publication of printed program. Organizing and monitoring program order - securing guest speakers, reserving VIP parking, drafting and writing talking points. Creating time line/flow of the day and ensuring vendors and City staff meet deadlines, set arrivals/departures, etc. 8 -23 ~!f? -.,;.....-.- ~ ~ C1TYQF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 126 Supervising on-site event. Creating schematic of event, scheduling and managing site reviews, a/v walk thrus and program rehearsals. Managing installation and dismantling of event. Creating and managing seating chart, as needed. Assisting and overseeing any creation of awards, giveaways, certificates, T-shirts, plaques, etc. as needed. 3. No management or coordination/permitting of block party permits. This would negatively impact Police, Fire, Public Works, Risk Management and the public. This includes: Serving as primary contact to the public who wish to hold a block party permit. Answering any questions, resolve any issues particularly those concerning liability and sound ordinances. Reviewing permits for questionable information that couid be a risk or liability to the City. Reviewing permit to ensure the party complies with City regulations. Supervising and monitoring permit through the routing process through City departments. Serving as primary contact for City staff. Notifying Public Works where to deliver and drop off street equipment to safety close down the street. Be final signing authority, approving party and maintaining ali block party files and records. 4. No management or coordination/permitting of filming permits. This would negatively impact Police, Fire, Risk Management, Public Works, the San Diego Filming Commission and production companies. This includes: Serving as primary contact to production companies and the San Diego Filming Commission. Answering any questions, resolving any issues particularly concerning property, risk management, City fees. Reviewing permits for questionable information that could be a risk or liability to the City. Supervising and monitoring permit through the routing process through City departments. Facilitating communication between staff and production companies Coordinating meetings with production companies and City staff. Facilitating meetings, review filming logistics and addressing any concerns with both parties. Be final signing authority, approving film shoot and maintaining all filming files and records. Attending larger film shoots and serving as City contact should problems arise during filming. Other Service Impacts: Stephanie Kingston plays a key role in the City's Emergency Operations Center serving as a backup Public Information Officer. She has been trained and certified in three incident command courses sponsored by FEMA's Emergency Management Institute as well as participated in a multitude of EOC 8 - 24 .s, 1ft-- --'- ~..~ ~ ."lYO' CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 126 drills and classes coordinated by the City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego for the past five years. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 25 ~\f?- --'- ,.,;;;'" ~-.. ~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 127 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Administrative Services/Professional Standards Unit PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate one Civilian Background Investigator. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) Gl Co re o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide 0 brlefjustiflcation for the selected service area designation) The Professional Standards Unit is tasked with department wide training, sworn and civilian employment backgrounds, internal investigations, disciplinary functions, complaint tracking and processing of DMV records for the department. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $83,619 $0 ($83,619) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $83,619 $0 {$83,6191 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (PrOVide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from Implementation of this proposal) 8 -26 ~!~ --"----- -'.. ::=- CllYQF (HULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 127 SERVICE IMPACTS: Number of Backgrounds completed - Civilian OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Elimination of the Civilian Background Investigator will require all civilian/volunteer backgrounds to be processed by the Police Agent who processes the sworn backgrounds. This will result in a 58% increase to the sworn background investigators workload. Despite a general hiring freeze, there are still many critical civilian and volunteer backgrounds that need to be completed. throughout the year. This will significantly delay the processing of backgrounds which will ultimately result in reduction of service to the community due to critical positions being left vacant while backgrounds are being processed. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 27 ~v?- --- - City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 128 CHOl'A '\1STA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Administrative Services/Community Relations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate one Poiice Community Relations Specialist SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: {Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation} Maintaining positive relationships with the community and various demographic groups is critical. This position has direct oversight of the Community Relations Unit, which is responsible for a number of tasks that enhance relationships with our stakeholders, including oversight of the Senior Volunteer Patrol, coordination of the various community volunteer activities that the department participates in (Shop-with-a-Cop, PAL Toy and Food Drive), interacting with citizens on a myriad of subjects through neighborhood meetings, and conducting the highly popular Citizen Academy. This position also oversees the departments' crime reduction programs including Crime Free Multi-Housing, plan reviews, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) assessments, Crime Prevention Programs, etc. The Community Relations Unit provides a vital link between the citizens of Chula Vista and the Police Department. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher leveis than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $83,618 $0 ($83,618) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $83,618 $0 {$83,618} 8 - 28 ~(f?- ~1!- ~~~~ CfIYQF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 128 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide ony other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: Unit-wide hours of participation in community events/crime prevention, outreach meetings, presentations, public contacts 1155 1155 1155 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare 0 brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performonce data) Elimination of one of the two Police Community Relations Specialist will critically limit the departments abiiity to respond to the over 625 questions from the community and the over 106 community outreach meetings that the Community Relations Unit participates in. Further, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design assessments offered to citizens will be Significantly reduced. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related ta implementing this proposal) 8 -29 ~v?- --- ..;;.,:! .. CHOrx~ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 129 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Fiscal Operations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate Public Safety Analyst Position SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Fiscal Operations provides fiscal, budget, payroll and resource management oversight to the Police Department. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $111,297 $0 ($111,297) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $111,297 $0 ($111,297) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant ta the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 - 30 ~!f? ---- ...;;;- ~ CITY OF (HULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 129 This would eliminate one of the two permanent Public Safety Analysts that work on the strategic crime analysis for the department. Strategic crime analysis differs from tactical analysis in that strategic anaiysis looks at long term, city-wide crime and disorder issues. Public Safety Analysts have been instrumental in developing many of the succesfui projects for the Police Department such as the Motel/Hotel Ordinance, Alcohol in Parks ordinance, residential burglary project, the Heien Putnam Award winning Anti-Bullying project, loud Party and Noise Ordinance as well as securing grants ranging from traffic safety grants to targeted enforcement grants. A reduction of one of these positions will have a significant negative impact on the Department's ability to efficiently respond to crime and disorder issues within the City. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief descriptian of any special circumstances related to implementing this propasal) 8 - 31 ~v?- :;;:- ~ (11'19, CHULA viSTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 130 Library LINE OF BUSINESS: Library Resources and Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduce materials book budget SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) An additional reduction of $250,000 to the materials books budget will bring the combined reduction to $343,000. The Library strongly recommends against this reduction. Although the Library will seek community support to assist with funding book purchase as well as implementing a periodical sponsorship program, a reduction of this amount could be devastating to the Library's ability to meet public demand for databases, books, audio and video materials and periodicals. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services thatare nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 Supplies & Services $250,000 $0 ($250,000) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $250,000 $0 ($250,000) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposol) The Library is already in the lower median (3.09 compared to an average 3.51) for holdings per capita compared to other public libraries in our population group. This additional reduction would drop us into the lower quartile of 1.68 per capita and put us in a position where making up ground might be impossible. 8 - 32 ~!~ -.,;----- -, .~.;:; City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 130 CITY OF CHULA VISTA SERVICE IMPACTS: Annual Materials Expenditures Per Capita OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) The Library anticipates that the number of materials ordered will be reduced by an additional 35% (total combined reduction 50%) and currently available databases will be reduced by up to 33%. We anticipate that this would result in a significant number of customer complaint and high levels of customer dissatisfaction. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare 0 brief description of any speciai circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 33 ~\rt- -.,;....-.- ;;:;t'-; ~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 131 .<;ITYOf (HuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Eng & GS LINE OF BUSINESS: Facility Maintenance (Custodiai Services) PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reclassify 6 Lead Custodians to 6 Custodian I SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Facility Maintenance is responsible for providing custodial (including supplies) and maintenance services to city staff, the public and outside entities so they can enjoy safe, clean, efficient and well-maintained facilities and special events. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL 6 -6 o 6 -6 o Lead Custodian Custodian Personnel Services $37,991 $0 ($37,991) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $37,991 $0 {$37,9911 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather information relevant ta the savings that will result from implementation of this propasal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 - 34 ~Ift... -.,..;-- -- ... .... ~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 131 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief descriptian af any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Flattens the Organization and limits promotional opportunity for Custodians. Will require direct supervision of custodians and lead duties by Supervisors. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepore a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 35 ~Yc.. -~- =:E___ ~ CHOD.~lsrA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 132 Recreation LINE OF BUSINESS: Recreation Facilities & Programs PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Closure of Parkway Swimming Pool for six (6) months SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification far the selected service area designation) Operation of swimming pools and associated programs and activities is a basic community expectation. The City has operated two swimming pools on a year-round basis for a number of years. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities proVide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $33,138 $0 ($33,138) Supplies & Services $40,800 $0 ($40,800) Other Expenses $0 $21,000 $21,000 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $73,938 $21,000 ($52,938) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this praposal) Part-time staffing costs will be reduced at Parkway Pool as a result of program reductions. Part-time staffing costs will be reduced at Loma Verde Pool, where part-time hours will be offset by full-time staff from Parkway Pool. Other savings will be realized through reductions in supply & service lines, notably utilities and chemicals. The pool water will be maintained at minimal levels to maximize cost savings while protecting valuable circulation equipment and the plaster surface of the pool. Impacts are to part-time staff. Personnel Services savings generated are hourly wages. 8 - 36 ~!f?- -.c -~ ~ .~1TY0f CHulA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 132 SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Some programs & participants displaced by this closure may be accommodated at Loma Verde Pool. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 10/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances reloted to implementing this proposal) A six month closure is being recommended, which will still allow the City to operate revenue generating programs during the late spring, summer, and early fall such as swimming lessons, aquatic camps, recreational swimming and pool rentals. A partial year closure also allows for the retention of highly qualified full-time staff; recruiting new full time staff to work less than full schedules would be very difficult if not impossible. 8 - 37 ~u?- --- ~...~~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 133 CHliX. '<J'ISTA DEPARTMENT: Recreation LINE OF BUSINESS: Recreation Facilities PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of part-time hours at recreation facilitiies SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Staffing and supervision at recreation facilities is critical to safe and efficient operations, to provide adequate customer service, and to conduct both fee-free as well as revenue producing activities. These staff reductions will have severe impacts on customer service levels, may require reduction of operating hours at selected facilities (such as opening later, closing earlier, or closing for mid-day periods when insufficient revenue- producing activities are being conducted), and will essentially eliminate programs and activities that are conducted free of charge at most facilities. It may also have a negative affect on community use of facilities. Loss of staffing could also result in increase of liability exposure, as supervision of participants and facilities is diminished. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-Core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $154,304 $0 ($154,304) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $154,304 $0 ($154,304) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal} Impacts are to part-time staff. Personnel Services savings generated are hourly wages. 8 - 38 ~(ft- 7i'.- =- ~ .c;llYOF CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 133 SERVICE IMPACTS: Attendance (12 month/all Recreation Centers) Customer Satisfaction (from user surveys) 1,045,000 95% 1,045,000 95% 1,000,000 80% OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impocts not captured by the above performance data) Customer service levels will be reduced as a result of decreased staffing, and operational hours may be adjusted to maximize remaining funding. Supervised activities that are fee-free will be eliminated or significantly reduced. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 39 ~\f?- ~!?'"- -;;...::.; :;;~ ~ CHOrA ~lsrA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 134 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Administrative Services/Community Relations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate the second Police Community Relations Specialist SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!J Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Maintaining positive relationships with the community and various demographic groups is critical. This position has direct oversight of the Community Relations Unit, which is responsible for a number of tasks that enhance relationships with our stakeholders, including oversight of the Senior Volunteer Patrol, coordination of the various community volunteer activities that the department participates in (Shop-with-a-Cop, PAL Toy and Food Drive), interacting with citizens on a myriad of subjects through neighborhood meetings, and conducting the highly popular Citizen Academy. This position also oversees the departments' crime reduction programs including Crime Free Multi-Housing, plan reviews, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) assessments, Crime Prevention Programs, etc. The Community Relations Unit provides a vital link between the citizens of Chula Vista and the Police Department. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service, Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations, Between the extremes of cbre and non-core, Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission, Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions, BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $83,618 $0 ($83,618) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $83,618 $0 ($83,618) 8 -40 ~w?- -~- -. ~ CIlYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 134 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather infarmatian relevant ta the savings that will result from implementatian af this propasal) SERVICE IMPACTS: Unit-wide hours of participation in community events/crime prevention, outreach meetings, presentations, public contacts 1,155 1,155 1,155 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief descriptian af any service impacts nat captured by the abave performance data) Elimination of one of the two Police Community Relations Specialist will critically limit the departments ability to respond to the over 625 questions from the community and the over 106 community outreach meetings that the Community Relations Unit participates in. Further, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design assessments offered to citizens will be significantly reduced. This represents the second Police Community Relations Specialist and would essentially close down the Community Relations Unit. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description af any special circumstances related ta implementing this propasal) 8 - 41 ~lft-- ~ ..~ ""'-- Cm'OF CHUlA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 135 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Administrative Services / Professional Training PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate the Police Training & Development Supervisor position. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!J Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The PTDS supervises the departments overall training program and develops the department-wide training plan, obtains course certification from POST, succession planning, and auditing of training records and reimbursements to ensure the department is compliant with State law and receiving maximum reimbursement from POST. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $117,541 $0 ($117,541) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $117,541 $0 ($117,541) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will resultfrom implementation of this proposal} SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -42 ~y?- -...:---- -==::- ... ~ CllYOF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 135 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief descriptian af any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Eliminating this position will significantly hamper the ability for the department to maintain accurate training records and apply for course certifications (which allows the department to host in-house training rather than pay an outside consultant), and apply for course reimbursement from POST. It would also mean audits of training records would not occur. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any speciai circumstances reiated to implementing this proposal) 8 - 43 ~N?- ~- ..;;.-~ ~ Cm'OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 136 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Administrative Services/ Public Information PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Public Information Officer position. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTI FICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The PIO provides critical media coordination for the department including media relations, press releases, on- camera appearance, internal communications and responds to public records requests. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $127,179 $0 ($127,179) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $127,179 $0 ($127,1791 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 -44 ~v?- -p- -. ~:;r CITY OF (HULA VISTA City of Chula Vista BudRet Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 136 Elimination of this position will result in delays in responding to public records requests, significant reduction in the positive public relations material to the media, eliminate the single point of contact for the media, and will eliminate the professional tie to media outlets which in the past have protected the department's, and City's reputation. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -45 ~!rt- T~ ""t~~~ CHLJi'A ~ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 137 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Parks and Open Space PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Tree Trimmer SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Because of their unique altered environment, urban trees are more prone to structural failure than trees that grow in the wild. However, trees that are properly trained while young need less attention and become much more sound structurally, which minimizes the probability of property damage and human injury due to limbs falling. This position is used primarily to trim small trees in newly developed areas and other locations where trees have been replanted in conjunction with tree removals. In addition, this position also helps supplement two 2- person crews by filling in when a trimmer is out; thereby allowing two Tree Crews to deploy on a more regular basis. With this cut, the service ievel impacts will be as indicated below. The numbers in parenthesis represent the workload for FY2006/07. - Impact on the section's ability to deploy two crews regularly (increased response times for complaints). - Reduction in trimming of young trees (650). - Reduction in planting trees (300). - Reduction in root pruning of trees (122). - May impact staff's ability to meet a grant obligation to plant 275 trees annually for next two years. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essentiai to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL 1 1 o o Tree Trimmer 8 - 46 ~{f?- --"--- .~..c~: City of Chula Vista BudRet Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 137 CHOV- '\iISTA Personnel Services $74,405 $0 ($74,405) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $74,405 $0 ($74,405) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: Trimming requests (non-emergency) resolved within 30 days 33% 100% 25% OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES; (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -47 ~\(?- ---'f1- -..... - CJl'/Of CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 138 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Infrastructure Maintenance PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the praposed budget reduction) Equipment Operator, Sr. Maintenance Worker & two S-yard dump trucks (Street Maintenance) SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) Gl Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide 0 brief justifiection for the selected service area designation) In December of 2007, the Street Maintenance Section had a Public Works Supervisor and Sr. Maintenance Worker (2 FTE's) eliminated due to budget constraints. In FY2000/01, six staff (6 FTE's) were added to the Street Maintenance Section to catch up with providing street maintenance services citywide. Since that time, the city's infrastructure has grown. Provided below is a breakdown of street miles added to the city since FY2000/01: o Streets (centerline) - 45.28 miles or 13% increase. o Streets (lane) - 113.06 miles or 13% increase. With this cut, four (4) of the six (6) staff added in FY2000/01 will be eliminated. Street Maintenance crews perform street repairs undertaken as a matter of urgency for safety reasons, or as part of the City's daily operations. These repairs are too small to outsource and are considered reactive street maintenance work. An exampie of these activities, include pothole repair, minor street reconstruction, major street reconstruction (less than 1,200 square feet), curb line asphalt repairs, lateral cut resurfacing, and skin patching/capping. Currently, the section has a 6-week backlog for pothole repair. With this cut, the service level impacts will be as indicated below. The numbers in parenthesis represent the workload for FY2006/07. - Major street reconstruction (37,796 sf) will be reduced by 55%. - Minor street reconstruction (25,002 sf) will be reduced by 55%repairs (874 sf) will be reduced by 55%. - Machine capping (35,262 sf) will be reduced by 55%. - Skin patching/hand overlay (42,679 sf) will be reduced by 55%. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. 8 -48 ~!f? --- ~,-." ~ CHOrA '\l'ISfA BUDGET IMPACT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL; 138 Equipment Operator Senior Maintenance Worker TOTAL 1 1 2 o 1 1 Personnel Services $165,620 $0 ($165,620) Supplies & Services $63,517 $0 ($63,517) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $229,137 $0 ($229,137) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant ta the savings thot will result from implementatian af this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: Pavement repaired annually (150,000 SF) Potholes repaired within 20 working days 100% 10% 80% 15% 50% 8% OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description af any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 49 ~v?- -~- -~ Cm'OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 139 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Parks and Open Space PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Two Gardener I/II's, Parks Supervisor & pickup SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) For FY2007/08, seven (7) gardeners were eliminated due to budget constraints with the following service level impacts: - Sports fields renovations reduced from 20% to 10% annually. - Turf mowed frequency reduced from weekly to biweekly. - Turf weeded, edged, & sprayed reduced from weekly to biweekly - Litter/trash pickup reduced from 7 to 6 days a week (by excluding Wednesdays) - Scarifying (smoothing out the surface) of infields is completed quarterly instead of monthly. - Aeration of turf on sports fields has been reduced from quarterly to semi-annually. - Repairs to playgrounds are done on a reactive basis, instead of proactively. - Repairs to park amenities are done on a reactive basis, instead of proactively. With this cut, the services levels impacts are as follows: - Turf fields renovations reduced from 10% to 0% (eliminated). - Turf mowed biweekly (no change) - Turf weeded, edged, & sprayed reduced from biweekly to triweekly - Park restroom cleaning frequency reduced from 2x to 1x daily (all parks). - Litter trash pickup reduced from 6 days to 4 days a week. - Irrigation control systems installations, retrofits, & repairs done on a reactive basis, instead of proactively. Due to reduction of nine staff, supervisor no longer needed. With this proposal, the total number of personnel cuts for Park Maintenance are 10. This means that all the additional positions that were added since FY2000/01 to maintain all the new parks have been cut. Serllice Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided athigher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department1s mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. 8 - 50 ~!ft.. --- --- ~ . <;IlY Of CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 139 BUDGET IMPACT: Gardener 1/11 Park Supervisor TOTAL 2 1 3 o o o Personnel Services $221,216 $0 ($221,216) Supplies & Services $13,560 $0 ($13,560) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $234,776 $0 ($234,776) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: Renovate between 15 & 25 % of turf on sports 19% 10% 0% fields (annually) Parks restrooms cleaned "2x" daily (7 days a 100% 100% 0% week) Parks restrooms cleaned "lx" daily (7 days a N/A N/A 100% week) Turf mowed (weekly) 100% 50% 50% Turf weeded, edged, & sprayed (weekly) 100% 50% 33% Litter/trash pick (7 days a week) 100% 86% 57% OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 - 51 ~\{?- -.- -~~...... ""'-- CITY Of CHUIA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 139 IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIALISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) Total personnel cuts, including the previous 7, now total 10 positions; thereby eliminating all positions added since FY2000/01 to maintain all the new parks. 13 parks (125.4 acres) added since FY2000/01- 26% increase in acres. 8 - 52 ..$:.If? -.- -- ~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 140 ClTYOf CHUIA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Eng & GS LINE OF BUSINESS: Facility Management & Maintenance (Construction and Repair) PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reductian) Eliminate 1 FTE Painter SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) o Core ~ Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification far the selected service area designation) Construction & Repair is responsible for all maintenance and repair activities to City facilities. Based on trade classification within the division, loss of position iess of an impact for critical service than others. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essentiai to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $83,228 $0 ($83,228) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $83,228 $0 ($83,228) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 53 ~v?- ----- ...;;:;::- ~ C"'Of (HUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 140 SERVICE IMPACTS: # of work orders completed % of response time to services requested Reduced Reduced OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Elimination af this existing position will shift all citywide painting service activities from two Painters to one. Individuals in the painting position paint, patch, texture, epoxy, tile, and repair / replace ceiling tiles and flooring. Future services provided by this position would be reduced, as performance of these work tasks would be the responsibility. of the one remaining Painter. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare 0 brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 54 ~\(?- --- ~~.;: CHO\J. ~ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista BudRet Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 141 Eng & GS LINE OF BUSINESS: Facility Maintenance (Custodial Services) PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate 1.5 HE Permanent Part Time Custodians (3 persons) SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Facility Maintenance is responsible for providing custodial and maintenance (including supplies) services to city staff, the public and outside entities so they can enjoy safe, clean, efficient and well-maintained facilities and special events. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $94,987 $0 ($94,987) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $94,987 $0 ($94,987) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 55 ~H?- -..,.~ ~.:::........~ .<;nYOF CHulA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 141 SERVICE IMPACTS: # of square feet of facilities cleaned/maintained # of non-routine, non-scheduled tasks (dynamic tasks) completed # of employees available for special events Reduced Reduced o OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prep ore a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 56 ~\{?- ------ ~- ~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 142 CHOrA'\iISTA DEPARTMENT: Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Infrastructure Maintenance PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Traffic Devices Technician (Traffic Signai & Street Light Maintenance) SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Traffic Signal & Street Light Maintenance Section currently consists of four (4) technicians. In 2005, due to the growth of the city, a fourth technician was added and a Traffic Signal preventative maintenance (PM) program was implemented. PM benefits the City in the long-term by reducing maintenance costs. However, with this cut, the PM program will cease as only three technicians will be available to perform all other maintenance requests and tasks. With this cut, the service levei impacts will be as indicated below. The numbers in parenthesis represent the workload for FY2006/07. - Streetlight relamp/repairs (1,205) will be reduced by 25%. - Dig alert/markouts (2,525). - Traffic signal field investigations/repairs (2,108) will be reduced by 25% - Traffic signals PM's (654) will be eliminated. - Streetlight and traffic signal emergencies (250). - Response time for service requests will increase from 3-5 days to 7-10 days. The impacts indicated above would result in increased malfunctions of traffic signals, thereby causing traffic congestion and delays. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fuifill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher ieveis than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL 1 1 o o Traffic Devices Technician 8 - 57 ~Vt-- -~- =:t, >= CITY OF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 142 Personnel Services $102,682 $0 ($102,682) Supplies & Services $22,080 $0 ($22,080) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $124,762 $0 ($124,762) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 58 ~\ft- -11- ~-- ~ CllYOF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 143 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Parks and Open Space PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Two-Person Tree Trimming Crew, lift truck & chipper SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Currently, the Urban Forestry section has two 2-person tree-trimming crews. In 1993, this section had three 2- person crews and will only have "one" crew remaining with this cut. Due to the city's growth, since FYOO/Ol, over 5,200 new trees have been planted citywide. This represents a 23% increase in young trees requiring maintenance. Trees that are properly trained while young need less attention and become much more sound structurally, which minimizes the probability of property damage and human injury due to limbs falling. With the proposed reduction, trimming of young trees will be "eliminated", With this cut, the service level impacts will be as indicated below. The numbers in parenthesis represent the workload for FY2006/07. - City's liability could increase due to delays in clearing right-of-way obstructions or trip hazards. - Roadway clearance requests for line of sight will be delayed from 30-45 days to 60-120 days. - Trimming of young trees will be eliminated (only complaint trims will be addressed). - Response to other complaints will be delayed from 3-6 weeks to 10-12 weeks. - Reduce planting (300) & watering of new trees (6,743) will be reduced by 50%. - Reduce root pruning (122) of trees will be reduced by 50%. - Default on grant obligation to plant 275 trees annually for next two years ($31,625). Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL 1 1 2 o o o Tree Trimmer Senior Tree Trimmer 8 - 59 ~!f?. ~ CffYOF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Bud~et Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 143 Personnel Services $171,875 $0 ($171,875) Supplies & Services $50,056 $0 ($50,056) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $221,931 $0 ($221,931) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the sovings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) In 1993, this section had three 2-person crews and will only have "one" crew remaining with this cut. 8 - 60 ~v?- ------ .~ ...4: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 144 CHtSl'A ~ISTA DEPARTMENT: Eng & GS LINE OF BUSINESS: Facility Management & Maintenance (Construction & Repair) PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminated 1 FTE Electrician SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) o Core @ Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Facility management & maintenance is responsible maintenance, construction and repair services to city staff, the public and outside entities so they can enjoy safe, clean, efficient and well-maintained facilities and special events. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $91,550 $0 ($91,550) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $91,550 $0 ($91,550) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 -61 ~!ft.. -15fr- ~, -..- ~ (ITYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 144 SERVICE IMPACTS: # of unplanned minor Capital Improvement Program (C1P) projects completed Red uced - Emergency Only o # of employees available for special events OTH ER SERVICE I M PACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above perfarmance data) Current authorized positian is vacant. This position was authorized to address the increased electrical workload initiated by the construction of new parks and building facilities. Elimination ofthis position will continue to impede the services provided by C&R's Electrical Division. Without this additional position, the Division will continue to limit the number of electrical maintenance activities performed versus those necessary to implement an effective Preventative Maintenance Program. The Division's primary response will continue to be Emergencies and Priority #1 service requests. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any speciai circumstances reiated to implementing this proposal) 8 - 62 ~\(c.. -.-- ~ ~ ~ DIYOJ' CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 145 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Infrastructure Maintenance PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Two-person Legend Crew SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation] The Street Striping Section has two 2-person Legend crews that maintain traffic markings throughout the City to promote: 1) safe traffic flow, 2) ensure that City residents and visitors have safe, clear, and continued access throughout the City, 3) reduce the liability of the City, and 4) allow enforcement of the traffic laws by the Police Department. The major work tasks include: a. striping and installing raised and temporary pavement markers for lane demarcation; b. painting pavement legends, curbs, crosswalks, and parking spaces; and c. layout, spot and place temporary pavement markers in preparation for striping new or resurfaced streets. With this cut, one of two 2-person crews will be cut; thereby reducing safety, increasing City liability, and reducing effectiveness of parking and traffic controls throughout the City. With this proposal, the service ievel impacts will be as indicated below. The numbers in parenthesis represent the workload for FY2006/07. - Painting crosswalks (616 In ft) will be reduced by SO%. - Painting curbs (4,893 In ft) will be reduced by 50%. - Painting pavement legends (6,479) will be reduced by 50%. - Pavement marker installations (18,785) will be reduced by 50%. - Thermoplastic installations (17,851 sf) will be reduced by 50%. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL 1 1 2 1 1 2 Maintenance Worker 1/11 Senior Maintenance Worker 8 - 63 ~!ft.. --- ~~ ~ Cm'QF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 145 Personnel Services $152,869 $0 {$152,869} Supplies & Services $26,962 $0 ($26,962) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $179,831 $0 {$179,8311 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the sovings that will result from implementation of this proposal) There are currently no vacant Senior Maintenance Worker or Maintenance Worker 1/11 positions in this workgroup, and any reductions in staffing will generate service impacts. The vacancies listed above are in a different workgroup in the Public Works Department. The vacancies allow the City to transfer the incumbents to other positions, avoiding potential iayoffs. This transfer does not reduce the service impacts associated with eliminating the Senior Maintenance Worker and Maintenance Worker 1/11 positions. SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the obove performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 64 ~w?- -'f!- _.~ - CllYOf CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 146 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Inspection Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Stormwater Compliance Inspector (NPDES) SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Currently, Public Works Inspector's are providing the services that were anticipated to be performed by the vacant storm water compliance inspector position. The decision has been made that this service can no longer be provided because storm water compliance inspections are currently non-funded and Impact the general fund, whereas public works inspectors are supposed to generate revenue. Pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Permit, the City is required to conduct regular inspections of construction sites as well as annual inspections of existing industrial, commercial, and municipal facilities. The City is also required to minimize illegal discharges by responding to observed or reported illegal discharges and taking enforcement action when necessary. The above tasks are conducted by two Storm Water Compliance Inspectors. Permit Requirements -Inspect all municipal facilities annually. - Inspect 20% of all inventoried industrialj commercial facilities annually (including 100% of high priority facilities). - Inspect construction sites as follows: Rainy Season: -High priority sites biweekly -Other sites, If one acre or more monthly, if less than one acre as needed. Dry Season: -As needed Responding to Vioiations Based on past experience, the City receives an average of 120 reported violations per year. An Inspector spends between 1 to 3 hours per violation, which includes education, writing citations and reports, etc. A Storm Water Compliance Inspector's time spent on this task is, therefore, about 240 hours. Consideration of the above demonstrates that about 3,900 hours inspector staff time is required per year, which is equivalent to two full time Storm Water Compliance Inspector positions. Non-compliance with Municipal Permit requirements is a violation of the above referenced laws and may subject the City to enforcement action by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board or third party lawsuit. Enforcement by the Regional Board may vary from a Notice of Violation to monetary fines up to $25,000 per day. Eliminating this position could result in the City not remaining in compliance with the new NPDES permit. 8 - 65 ~!f?. -...- ~ci~ .9TYOf CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 146 At the April 3rd Budget Workshop, Council supported elimination of a Public Works Inspector from the Development Services Fund. Staff proposed to transfer the incumbent Public Works Inspector into this vacant position, avoiding a layoff. Eliminating this Storm Water Compliance Inspector pOSition will result in the layoff of a Public Works Inspector. Service Area Designations: Core Services: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the departmentls mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $85,910 $0 ($85,910) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $85,910 $0 ($85,910) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information reievont to the savings that wiil result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 - 66 ~\rc- -,.- - -' ~ .l;.lT'(OF CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 146 IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -67 ~Jr?- -~- ~,,~~ CHOrx~lsrA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 147 Eng & GS LINE OF BUSINESS: Construction and Repair Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Elimination of FIT benefited Painter. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Loss of second Painter would be an impact to core service provided by this trade, however, based on trade classification in the overall division, this trade is ranked lowest. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $77,710 $0 ($77,710) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $77,710 $0 ($77,710) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal} 8 - 68 ~Ift.. ---- -- ~- ~ CITY OF CHUIA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 147 SERVICE IMPACTS: # of work orders completed % of response time to service requested OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts nat captured by the above performance dato) Acceptance of this cut along with Number 11 will leave zero painters in the department. Obviously, necessary painting work will be significantly deferred and/or ignored. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 69 ~\ft-- 7..-- ~ CHOI'A ~ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 148 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Fiscal Operations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduce Sr. Public Safety Analyst to .90 FTE SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Fiscal Operations provides fiscal, budget, payroll and resource management oversight to the Police Department. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $11,751 $0 ($11,751) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $11.751 $0 ($11.751) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other Information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 -70 ~!f?. -..:--r- ~:= ~ CIlYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 148 This would reduce the Sr. Public Safety Analyst from a full-time employee to .90 FTE. This would mean this position would work a total of 72 hours per pay period. This position supervises a very busy Research and Analysis unit which responds to informational requests from the press, residents, departments, other agencies as well as provide' detailed crime analysis for the officers of the department. As it is now, there are several projects on the "back burner" due to low staffing in the unit. A reduction in the number of hours this position works will further delay important projects from being started. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -71 ~\ft.. --- ~~7~ CHt5r.x.~ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 149 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Infrastructure Maintenance PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the propased budget reductian) Turn-off 800 illuminated street name signs citywide (100%). SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) o Core ~ Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTI FICA TION: (PrOVide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $0 $0 $0 Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $20,000 $0 ($20,000) Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $20,000 $0 ($20,000) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) These signs provide bright illumination of the street names signs at various intersections throughout the city. Under this proposal, these signs would be permanently deactivated and replaced with retro- 8 -72 ~Jf~ ~1.:: ""-- City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL.: 149 .<;mo' (HuLA VISTA reflective street name signs as they age (7-10 years). Turning off these signs will cause reduced night time recognition of street names signs. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/0l/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -73 ~v?- ----- -~--- -~ ---- .9TYOf CHuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 150 Public Works LINE OF BUSINESS: Infrastructure Maintenance PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Two Person Graffiti Crew. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) o Core @ Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a briefjustification for the selected service area designation) The positive image and environment created by the swift removal of graffiti throughout the city is beneficial to residents, businesses, and visitors: - Creating a positive visual image of the city, - Increasing interest in residing and investing in the city, and - Increasing community pride and livability. Research consistently demonstrates that prompt graffiti removal plays a key role in reducing graffiti levels. in order to accommodate the change in the City's ordinance requiring that graffiti on private property be removed by City crews and along the rights of way within "two days" of notification, this graffiti crew was approved in FY2004-05. Graffiti removed in FY2006/07 as follows: - Commercial (102,826 sf). - Private (178,577 sf). - Public (218,460 sf). - Cox/SDG&E/SBC boxes (1,269). - Traffic Control boxes (305). When graffiti is allowed to remain on a property and it is not promptly removed, it invites even more markings; thereby taking longer to remove. With the removal of this graffiti crew, the City's ordinance will need to be revised to reflect a 120-hour or five-day removal requirement. The majority of those individuais who paint graffiti seek notoriety and recognition of their graffiti as they attach status to having their work seen. Thus, prolonged visibility due to the sheer volume, scale and complexity of the graffiti, and placement of the graffiti in hard-to-reach places, enhance the person's satisfaction. This proposal eliminates one of two 2-person Graffiti Crews. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not ali other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations; Between the extremes of core and non-core~ Core Services: Non-Core Services Servicesthatare nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. .Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. 8 -74 ~Yt- ::--'ot.= ,... .... CITY OF CHUIA VISTA BUDGET IMPACT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 150 Senior Maintenance Worker Maintenance Worker I TOTAL 1 1 2 1 1 2 Personnel Services $142,487 $0 ($142,487) Supplies & Services $11,200 $0 ($11,200) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $153,687 $0 ($153,687) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation af this proposal) There are currently no vacant Senior Maintenance Worker or Maintenance Worker 1/11 positions in this workgroup, and any reductions in staffing will generate service impacts. The vacancies listed above are in a different workgroup in the Public Works Department. These vacancies allow the City to transfer the incumbents to other positions, avoiding potential layoffs. This transfer does not reduce the service impacts associated with eliminating the Senior Maintenance Worker and Maintenance Worker 1/11 positions. SERVICE IMPACTS: Graffiti abated within 48 hours of notification OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) The City's ordinance will need to be revised to reflect a 120-hour or five-day graffiti removal requirement (instead of within 48 hours from notification). 8 -75 ~\r?- --- = ~ "qlYOf CHuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 151 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the praposed budget reduction) One Community Service Officer position - One of Four SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide 0 briefjustification for the selected service area designation) CSO's are the civilian auxiliary of Patrol. They take low level crime reports, handle vehicle abatement, traffic control and other duties that would otherwise be directed to a Peace Officer. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the departmentls mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $71,232 $0 ($71,232) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $71,232 $0 ($71,2321 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other informatian relevant to the savings that wili result from implementation of this proposal} 8 -76 ~\ft... -11- -;::- .... ~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 151 SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) CSO's handle low level calls-far-service which allows Peace Officers to focus on responding to more serious calis-for-service. By reducing the number of CSO's in the Community Patrol Division, calls-for- service which would have been handled by CSO's will now be handled by patrol officers, further eroding the departments ability to meet GMOC thresholds, and causing further delays for routine reports to the public. Having already suffered the loss of three CSO's to the Community Patrol Division, the elimination of any more CSO's wili exponentially affect the Departments ability to meet GMOC threshold standards, as well as the expectations of the community for service. The Department is currently analyzing the effects of transferring other CSO's from Investigations to handle calls-for- service. This in turn would impact sex crimes registration and or financial crimes investigations. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -77 ~\~ --'- ~ - CIlYOf (HULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 152 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) One Community Service Officer position - Two of Four SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!l Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) CSO's are the civilian auxiliary of Patrol. They take low level crime reports, handle vehicle abatement, traffic control and other duties that would otherwise be directed to a Peace Officer. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfiil basic expectation of the community. Most if not ail other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher ievels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $71,232 $0 ($71,232) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $71,232 $0 ($71,232) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 -78 ~!f?- "iti "-. -~ ~ "~mOF CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 152 SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impocts not captured by the obove performance data) CSO's handle low level calls-for-service which allows Peace Officers to focus on responding to more serious calls-for-service. By reducing the number of CSO's in the Community Patrol Division, calls-for- service which would have been handled by CSO's will now be handled by patrol officers, further eroding the departments ability to meet GMOC thresholds, and causing further delays for routine reports to the public Having already suffered the loss of three CSO's to the Community Patrol Division, the elimination of any more CSO's will exponentially affect the Departments ability to meet GMOC threshold standards, as well as the expectations of the community for service. The Department is currently analyzing the effects of transferring other CSO's from Investigations to handle calls-for- service. This in turn would impact sex crimes registration and or financial crimes investigations. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any speciai circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -79 .:::}.\{c.. -....- ~ -.... ~ CllYOF CHUIA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 153 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) One Community Service Officer position - Three of Four SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (PrOVide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) CSO's are the civilian auxiliary of Patrol. They take low level crime reports, handle vehicle abatement, traffic control and other duties that would otherwise be directed to a Peace Officer. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $71,232 $0 ($71,232) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $71,232 $0 ($71,232) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 80 ~v~ -.- ...o;.,"",:-~ -~ CHOE!. ~lsrA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 153 SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) CSO's handle low level calls-for-service which allows Peace Officers to focus on responding to more serious calls-for-service. By reducing the number of CSO's in the Community Patrol Division, calls-for- service which would have been handled by CSO's will now be handled by patrol officers, further eroding the departments ability to meet GMOC thresholds, and causing further delays for routine reports to the public. Having already suffered the loss of three (SO's to the Community Patrol Division, the elimination of any more CSO's will exponentially affect the Departments ability to meet GMOC threshold standards, as well as the expectations of the community for service. The Department is currently analyzing the effects of transferring other CSO's from Investigations to handle calls-for- service. This in turn would impact sex crimes registration and or financial crimes investigations. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 81 ~\f?- -r- ~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 154 CITY OF CHUIA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) One Community Service Officer position - Four of Four SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions beiow) C!J Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) CSO's are the civilian auxiliary of Patrol. They take low level crime reports, handle vehicle abatement, traffic control and other duties that would otherwise be directed to a Peace Officer. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services ServiCes provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Serv;ces: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $71,232 $0 ($71,232) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $71,232 $0 {$71,2321 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other infarmation relevant to the savings that wili resuit from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 82 ~Yc.-. --- n~~ CfTYOF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 154 SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts nat captured by the above performance data) eso's handle low level calls-for-service which allows Peace Officers to focus on responding to more serious calls-far-service. By reducing the number of eso's in the Community Patrol Division, calls-for- service which would have been handled by eso's will now be handled by patrol officers, further eroding the departments ability to meet GMOe thresholds, and causing further delays for routine reports to the public. Having already suffered the loss of three eso's to the Community Patrol Division, the elimination of any more eso's will exponentially affect the Departments ability to meet GMOe threshold standards, as well as the expectations of the community for service. The Department is currently analyzing the effects of transferring other eso's from Investigations to handle calls-for- service. This in turn would impact sex crimes registration and or financial crimes investigations. IMPLEMENTATION: EARliEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this praposal) 8 - 83 ~\ft- ~"'- ~ ~ City of Chula Vista BudRet Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 155 CHO\'A~ISTA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol/Street Crime & Gang Suppression PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate Two Street Team Officers - One of Three. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Street Team is a proactive patrol unit which is able to quickly respond to targeted crime problems throughout Chula Vista. This unit is the departments primary tool in addressing serious crime events, especially in western Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 - 84 ~!~ --- ..;;:.--~ C[TYOF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl.; 155 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not coptured by the above performance data) Without the Street Team, the department will be unable to send targeted enforcement to areas of the City experiencing increased violent crime activity. In 2005, the department initiated Operation Safe Neighborhood (OSN) in response to significant amounts of violent crime and was conducted primarily through the use of the Street Team. OSN was successful in reducing violent crime by 42% in targeted areas during the project. Without a proactive unit like the Street Team, the department would only be able to reactively respond to crime problems. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 85 ~If?- -~- ~~~.. CIn'OF CHUlA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 156 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol - One of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide 0 brief justification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Services essentiai to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher leveis than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services; Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from Implementation of this proposal) 8 - 86 ~\{?- -..,;q-- -- - - CfTYOf CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 156 SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: slower response times to calls-far-service; reduction in flexibility to react to changing crime and disorder problems; less police presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time thresholds. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 87 ~l~ -,- _.. ...~ ~ .c;nYOf CHuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 157 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol - Two of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core~ Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information reievant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 88 ~!fc.. -1IlIIi- -0;... _ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 157 .91YO' CHuLA VISTA SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: siower response times to calls-for-service; reduction in f1exibiiity to react to changing crime and disorder problems; less poiice presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time thresholds. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 89 ~\{?- -n- - ~""'+ ~ CITY Of CHUlA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL.: 158 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol - Three of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Services essentiai to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 90 ~!I?- ~......- ...0:. ... ~~ -~ cm'OF CHUIA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl...: 158 SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: slower response times to calls-for-service; reduction in flexibility to react to changing crime and disorder probiems; less police presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time threshoids. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any speciol circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 91 ~\{t;.. ---- ..o;;~~ ~ CITY OF (HULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 159 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol - Four of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Core Services: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential tathe departmentls mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 92 ~!f? -..:....-.- ~~~ ~ ClnOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 159 SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performonce data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: slower response times to calls-for-service; reduction in flexibility to react to changing crime and disorder problems; less police presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time thresholds. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prep ore a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 93 ~v?- ffiltl- ~~ .. City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 160 CtTYOF CHUIA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol- Five of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are niceto have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 94 ~Jf?- -..c1[:-:: --, : CllYQF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl.: 160 SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts nat captured by the above performance data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: slower response times to calls-for-service; reduction in flexibility to react to changing crime and disorder problems; less police presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time thresholds. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this praposal) 8 - 95 ~(ft.- --- _..~-~ ~ (ITIOr CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 161 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of two Peace Officers from Patrol - Six of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide 0 briefjustification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $258,488 $0 ($258,488) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $258,488 $0 ($258,488) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant ta the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 96 ~lft.. -.- -- --::-" City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 161 CITYQF CHULA VISTA SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: siower response times to calls-for-service; reduction in flexibility to react to changing crime and disorder problems; less police presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time thresholds. IMPLEMENTATION: EARliEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any speciai circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 97 ~\{?- ~~- ~ ~ CllYOF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 162 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community Patrol PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of one Peace Officer from Patrol- Seven of Seven SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!J Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Peace Officers provide proactive and reactive responses to citizen calls-for-service. Community Patrol provides essential services to the public and is at the core of all municipal policing agencies. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations.. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $129,244 $0 ($129,244) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $129,244 $0 {$129,2441 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather information relevant to the savings that will resultfrom implementation of this proposal) 8 - 98 ~!f?. --~--= City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 162 Cm'QF CHUlA VISTA SERVICE IMPACTS: Average Calls-for-service per Patrol Officer OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Reducing the number of Peace Officers in Patrol will have several impacts upon the community including: slower response times to calls-for-service; reduction in flexibility to react to changing crime and disorder problems; less police presence in the community and a negative impact to GMOC Priority One and Two response time thresholds. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any speciai circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 99 .::$Ut.- --....-.- -.~-:t~ ~ C1lYQI' (HUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 163 DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations/Special Operations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate One Narcotics Task Force Officer SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (ProVide a briefjustification far the selected service area designation) The Narcotics Task Force Officer works in a multi-jurisdictional narcotics enforcement team which handles mid to high level narcotics trafficking in San Diego County. This differs from the City's NET team, which handles street level narcotics within Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $129,244 $0 ($129,244) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $129,244 $0 ($129,244) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) Could potentially negatively affect the amount of Asset Forfeiture received by the department. SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 - 100 ~u?- -11- ..;; ~ _~fT\'OF CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL:: 163 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description af any service impacts not captured by the abave perfarmance data) This wiii eliminate one officer from the Narcotics Task Force (NTF). NTF is a multi-jurisdictional task force which investigates mid to high ievel narcotics trafficking throughout San Diego County. The City currently has two Officers working in this task force. Elimination of this position wiii weaken the City's ability to obtain critical information regarding mid to high level narcotics trafficking within Chula Vista. The Police Department relies upon this task force for the expertise to handle these often large and very compiex investigations which actually span several cities, counties and foreign soil. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -101 ~\(?- -11- "'" ~ "c;mOF (HuLA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 164 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations/Special Investigations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Eliminate Narcotics Enforcement Team Officer SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service orea designation) The Narcotics Enforcement Team (NET) provides street level narcotics investigations throughout the City of Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential. to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if notall other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Serv;ces: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $129,244 $0 ($129,244) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $129,244 $0 {$129,244} OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare 0 brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) 8 -102 ~!{?- -r- ...;.~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl.: 164 CllYOF CHUlA VISTA This would eiiminate one of the three officers on the Narcotics Enforcement Team which would impair the departments abiiity to address street level narcotic enforcement. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: {Prepare a brief description of any speciai circumstances reiated to implementing this proposal} 8 -103 ~\f?- -ilIII- -:;;~~~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form I?ROI?OSAL: 165 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Community patrol/K-9 Unit PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of One Peace Officer (K-9 Unit) from Patrol SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The K-9 Officer is an essential component to the Community Patrol function. The K-9 Officer provides a less- lethal option for officers and is essential to officer safety in a variety of situations which might otherwise put officers in a significantly more dangerous situation. Most police departments have K-9 officers on staff and there is a community expectation that a modern police agency would deploy a K-9 unit as part of normal patrol operations. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not ail other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $129,244 $0 ($129,244) Supplies & Services $2,439 $0 ($2,439) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $131,683 $0 ($131,683) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 104 ~!ft.. -,,- -~ ~ CITI'OF (HULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 165 SERVICE IMPACTS: Number of High Risk K-9 Requests for Service Handled 720 720 660 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above perfarmance data) Reducing the number of K-9 Officers from 5 to 4 Officers will mean that there will be 40 hours less coverage available for Community Patrol. This will leave a full shift without K-9 coverage all week long. K-9's provide a much safer, less-lethal options for officers who find a suspect hiding in a dangerous area, which would make apprehending the suspect significantly more risky for the officer. Often-times just announcing that a K-9 is being sent in will coax the suspect out of hiding without further incident. K-9's are an effective force multiplier since without K-9, significantly more officers would be needed to clear a building (rather than one dog). IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances reioted to impiementing this proposal) 8 - 105 ~Vt- --~;- ~~ ClTYOF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 166 DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of one Police Agent from the Property Crimes Unit. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Investigations are a core service of any municipal police agency. Although less notorious than homicides, rapes, assaults and other crimes of violence, it is property crimes that actually affect far more people in our community. Property crimes actually shape the quality of iife in the City and affect how safe residents feel in their homes and neighborhoods. Maintaining an effective property crimes unit is important to enhance the actual and perceived safety of Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the communitY. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $134,823 $0 ($134,823) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $134,823 $0 ($134,823) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that wiii result from implementation of this proposal) 8 - 106 ~!ft.. -.- ~-~ ~~=::~ C1TYQF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 166 SERVICE IMPACTS: Average number of property crime Cases Assigned per Agent 518 518 575 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief descriptian of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) A reduction in the property crimes division will have a direct negative service impact to the community and solvability of property crimes. At full staff, there are 10 detectives in Property Crimes who handled 5,177 cases in FY 06-07. Most of these cases are reported with little or no suspect information or evidence. To have an impact on these cases, investigators must follow up on any small leads available, which can be a labor intensive process. Fraud, forgery and identity theft cases often involve a huge amount of energy in pouring through stacks of business records, personal records and other documents in order to develop suspects. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -107 ~\f? -...- -- ~ ~ ~ CHl51:A ~STA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form IJR0IJOSAL: 167 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of one Police Agent from the Property Crimes Unit (Auto Theft Detective). SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions belaw) (!) Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) Investigations are a core service of any municipal police agency. With auto theft and theft from autos comprising nearly 50% of the City's Part 1 crime figures, investigation of auto theft and theft from autos is critical to trying to reduce auto theft. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfili basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $134,823 $0 ($134,823) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $134,823 $0 ($134,823) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) 8 -108 ~!ft- ~-- - - City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form - PROPOSAL: 161f CllYQF CHULA VISTA SERVICE IMPACTS: Number of Auto Theft Cases Assigned OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) The workload of this position (2,165 vehicle thefts assigned to the Auto Theft Detective in FY 06-07) would be distributed amongst existing property crimes detectives who currently working at capacity (5,177 other property crime cases). The overall impact will reduce the number of case follow-ups and as a matter of practicality, the quality of certain investigation will suffer. Citizens will notice a decrease in the amount of investigative follow-up. Currently there are 10 property crime detectives (including the auto theft detective) with a proposed reduction of three positions. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -109 ~\r?- ----- --- ---- ~ (mop (HUlA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 168 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Special Weapons & Tactics PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the propased budget reduction) SWAT Program. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) SWAT provides highly trained officers who provide a tactical response to high risk situations (active shooters, hostage situations, Barricaded suspect, etc.). Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services thatare nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $82,984 $0 ($82,984) Supplies & Services $5,342 $0 ($5,342) Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $88,326 $0 ($88,326) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from Implementation af this proposal) Personnel Services savings is from Overtime. SERVICE IMPACTS: OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service Impacts not captured by the above performance data) Without a City SWAT Team, the department would have to rely upon the County of San Diego's Sheriffs Office for any SWAT responses (as they are the primary mutual aide responder). This would significantly reduce the departments control at any SWAT response within the City and increase the City's liability. Additionally, the SWAT Team assists with high risk search warrants and the elimination of the team would significantly reduce the departments' ability to serve high risk warrants when 8 -110 ~If? -!IIlI- .....;::~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form - PROPOSAl.: 16& CITYQF CHUlA VISTA having to rely on other agencies busy SWAT teams, and thereby increasing the risk of injury or death to officers serving warrants. The SWAT budget is comprised of overtime which is utilized for the Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) mandated 16 hours of monthly training. There are no full-time SWAT team members. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -111 ~w?- ----- ""'- -~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL; 169 CrrvOF (HUlA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Street Crime & Gang Suppression PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the praposed budget reduction) Two Street Team Officers. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions beiow) C!l Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Street Team is a proactive patrol unit which is able to quickly respond to targeted crime problems throughout Chula Vista. This unit is the departments primary tool in addressing serious crime events, especially in western Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $244,874 $0 ($244,874) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $244,874 $0 ($244,874) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposai) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -112 ~lft.. ---- -~ ---- CiT\'Of CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPQSAt= 169 OTHER SERVICE I M PACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Without the Street Team, the department will be unable to send targeted enforcement to areas of the City experiencing increased violent crime activity. In 2005, the department initiated Operation Safe Neighborhood (OSN) in response to significant amounts of violent crime and was conducted primarily through the use of the Street Team. OSN was successful in reducing violent crime by 42% In targeted areas during the project. Without a proactive unit like the Street Team, the department would only be able to reactively respond to crime problems. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 113 ~v(,.. -,- :::;..~~ Cm'OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 170 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Street Crime & Gang Suppression PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Two Street Team Officers. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (ProVide a brief justification far the selected service area designation) The Street Team is a proactive patrol unit which is able to quickly respond to targeted crime problems throughout Chula Vista. This unit is the departments primary tool in addressing serious crime events, especially in western Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Core Services: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond .basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essentiai to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $244,874 $0 ($244,874) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $244,874 $0 ($244,874) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather information relevant to the savings that will resultfrom implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -114 ~!f?- -~- --....:...;:~ -~ CITYQF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl.: 170 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above perfarmance data) Without the Street Team, the department will be unable to send targeted enforcement to areas of the City experiencing increased violent crime activity. In 2005, the department initiated Operation Safe Neighborhood (OSN) in response to significant amounts of violent crime and was conducted primarily through the use of the Street Team. OSN was successful in reducing violent crime by 42% in targeted areas during the project. Without a proactive unit like the Street Team, the department would only be able to reactively respond to crime problems. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -115 ~Nt- -..,--- -.... ~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 171 CITY OF (HULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations/ Street Crime & Gang Suppression PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) One Street Team Officer. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) @ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Street Team is a proactive patrol unit which is able to quickly respond to targeted crime problems throughout Chula Vista. This unit is the departments primary tool in addressing series crime events, especially in western Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other Jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $122,437 $0 ($122,437) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $122,437 $0 ($122,437) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -116 ~Vt.- -.- --......=~...... -~ ~ Cln'OF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form P80POSAL: 1.71 ~ OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the abave perfarmance data) Without the Street Team, the department will be unable to send targeted enforcement to areas of the City experiencing increased violent crime activity. In 2005, the department initiated Operation Safe Neighborhood (OSN) in response to significant amounts of violent crime and was conducted primarily through the use of the Street Team. OSN was successful in reducing violent crime by 42% in targeted areas during the project. Without a proactive unit like the Street Team, the department would only be able to reactively respond to crime problems. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances reloted to implementing this proposal) 8 -117 ~u?- -:-m:: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL.: 172 ~ CI1YOF (HULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Street Crime & Gang Suppression PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Street Team Agent. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Street Team is a proactive patrol unit which is able to quickly respond to targeted crime problems throughout Chula Vista. This unit is the departments primary tool in addressing series crime events, especially in western Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of coreand non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Aiso services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $134,823 $0 ($134,823) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $134,823 $0 ($134,8231 OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather infarmation relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -118 ~Vt- --- ,,"- ~ ~ Cm'OF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 172 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief descriptian of any service impacts not captured by the abave perfarmance data) Without the Street Team, the department will be unable to send targeted enforcement to areas of the City experiencing increased violent crime activity. In 2005, the department Initiated Operation Safe Neighborhood (OSN) in response to significant amounts of violent crime and was conducted primarily through the use of the Street Team. OSN was successful in reducing violent crime by 42% in targeted areas during the project. Without a proactive unit like the Street Team, the department would only be able to reactively respond to crime problems. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 119 ~\(?- -....-.- ..t, ~~ ~ CllYOF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form A ROPOSAl.: 173 DEPARTMENT: Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Patrol Operations / Street Crime & Gang Suppression PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Street Team Sergeant. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The Street Team is a proactive patrol unit which is able to quickly respond to targeted crime problems throughout Chula Vista. This unit is the departments primary tooi in addressing series crime events, especially in western Chula Vista. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher ievels than other jurisdictions or beyond bask expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the departmentls mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $155,086 $0 ($155,086) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-ClP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $155,086 $0 ($155,086) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal} SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -120 ~!f?. ~1;f'- ~- -. : CllYQF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form Cc" PROPOSAL: 173 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) Without the Street Team, the department will be unable to send targeted enforcement to areas of the City experiencing increased violent crime activity. In 2005, the department initiated Operation Safe Neighborhood (OSN) in response to significant amounts of violent crime and was conducted primarily through the use ofthe Street Team. OSN was successful in reducing violent crime by 42% in targeted areas during the project. Without a proactive unit like the Street Team, the department would only be able to reactively respond to crime problems. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 - 121 ~M?- ~ "~- ""'-- CITY Of (HULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 174 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations / Juvenile Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) One School Resource Officer (SRO). SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) GJ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core J USTIFICA TION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) School Resource Officers respond to calls-far-service to the S8 schools in both the (hula Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District. SRO's are at the schools during school hours and respond to about 20,000 calls for service per year, as well as provide a variety of training to students as well as provide a positive roll model to students. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $122,437 $61,218 ($61,219) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $122,437 $61,218 ($61,219) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other infarmation relevant to the savings that will result fram implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -122 ~(f?. -~- ~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 174 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) The SRO program would be reduced by nearly 50% under proposais 53 - S6 combined. This would mean the reduction of one Sergeant, one Agent and five Officers from the program. This would have a significant impact on the program. Currently the program services 58 schools in both the Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista Elementary School District. This would increase the number of schools per officer from 2.9 schools per officer (including the agents) up to 4.1 schools per officer. This will mean that there would be a shift of roughly half of the calls for service from the SRO's to Patrol (-10,000 CFS) which will have a negative impact upon the departments ability to improve priority two response times, and would most likely negatively impact priority one response times. It would also significantly reduce the departments ability to deal with significant school events such as school traffic problems, on-campus school shooter scenarios (SRO's are first responders to school shooting incidents), on campus crime incidents and the wide variety of services that the SRO's provide to the schools (DARE Programs, Stranger/Danger Program, anti-gang programs, etc.) This proposal will be met with stiff opposition from parents, school district officials and teachers/staff from the schools. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -123 ~w?- -,1- ...;:. ~ ~ CfIYOF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl.: 175 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations / Juvenile Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Four School Resource Officers (SRO). SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!i Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) School Resource Officers respond to calls-far-service to the 58 schools in both the Chula Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District. SRO's are at the schools during school hours and respond to about 20,000 calls for service per year, as well as provide a variety of training to students as well as provide a positive roll model to students. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfiil basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher leveis than other jurIsdictions or beyond basic expectations; Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $489,748 $244,874 ($244,874) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $489,748 $244,874 ($244,874) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -124 ~!(t- :-~ -~ (mop CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form ~RR0POSA[: 175 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impocts not coptured by the above performance data) The SRO program would be reduced by nearly SO% under proposals S3 - 56 combined. This would mean the reduction of one Sergeant, one Agent and five Officers from the program. This would have a significant impact on the program. Currently the program services 58 schools in both the Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista Elementary School District. This would increase the number of schools per officer from 2.9 schools per officer (including the agents) up to 4.1 schools per officer. This will mean that there would be a shift of roughly half of the calls for service from the SRO's to Patrol (-10,000 CFS) which will have a negative impact upon the departments ability to improve priority two response times, and would most likely negatively impact priority one response times. It would also significantly reduce the departments ability to deal with significant school events such as school traffic problems, on-campus school shooter scenarios (SRO's are first responders to school shooting incidents), on campus crime incidents and the wide variety of services that the SRO's provide to the schools (DARE Programs, Stranger/Danger Program, anti-gang programs, etc.) This proposal will be met with stiff opposition from parents, school district officials and teachers/staff from the schools. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST I MPLEM ENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSU ES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related ta implementing this proposal) 8 -125 ~Vt.- --- ""- ~ CHOE\'\\'ISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 176 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations / Juvenile Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the propased budget reductian) School Resource Officer (SRO) Agent. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitians below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification far the selected service area designation) School Resource Officers respond to calls-far-service to the S8 schools in both the Chula Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District. SRO's are at the schools during school hours and respond to about 20,000 calls for service per year, as well as provide a variety of training to students as well as provide a positive roll model to students. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the department's mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $134,823 $67,411 ($67,412) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $134,823 $67,411 ($67,412) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other information relevant to the sovings that will result from implementation of this propasal} SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -126 ~!f?. -..:---- _'-c-~ ~ CITY OF CHUlA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl: 176 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief descriptian af any service impacts nat captured by the above performance data) The SRO program would be reduced by nearly 50% under proposals 53 - 56 combined. This would mean the reduction of one Sergeant, one Agent and five Officers from the program. This would have a significant impact on the program. Currently the program services 58 schools in both the Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista Elementary School District. This would increase the number of schools per officer from 2.9 schools per officer (including the agents) up to 4.1 schools per officer. This will mean that there would be a shift of roughly half of the calls for service from the SRO's to Patrol (-10,000 CFS) which will have a negative impact upon the departments ability to improve priority two response times, and would most likely negatively impact priority one response times. It would also significantly reduce the departments ability to deal with significant school events such as school traffic problems, on-campus school shooter scenarios (SRO's are first responders to school shooting incidents), on campus crime incidents and the wide variety of services that the SRO's provide to the schools (DARE Programs, Stranger/Danger Program, anti-gang programs, etc.) This proposal will be met with stiff opposition from parents, school district officials and teachers/staff from the schools. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -127 .:::} 1ft,.. ~.- ~~...... ~ _Q1YOf (HULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form RROROSAL: 177 Police LINE OF BUSINESS: Investigations / Juvenile Services PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) School Resource Officer (SRO) Sergeant. SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) ~ Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) School Resource Officers respond to calls-far-service to the 58 schools in both the Chuia Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District. SRO's are at the schools during school hours and respond to about 20,000 calls for service per year, as well as provide a variety of training to students as well as provide a positive roll model to students. Service Area Designations: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Core Services: Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the departmentls mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: Personnel Services $155,086 $0 ($155,086) Supplies & Services $0 $0 $0 Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-C1P) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $155,086 $0 ($155,086) OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: {Provide any other information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal} SERVICE IMPACTS: 8 -128 ~!f? ~...-.- ~--~ City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL; 177 CITI'OF CHUlA VISTA OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the above performance data) The SRO program would be reduced by nearly 50% under proposals 53 - 56 combined. This would mean the reduction of one Sergeant, one Agent and five Officers from the program. This would have a significant impact on the program. Currently the program services 58 schools in both the Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista Elementary School District. This would increase the number of schools per officer from 2.9 schools per officer (including the agents) up to 4.1 schools per officer. This will mean that there would be a shift of roughly half of the calls for service from the SRO's to Patrol (-10,000 CFS) which will have a negative impact upon the departments ability to improve priority two response times, and would most likely negatively impact priority one response times. It would also significantly reduce the departments ability to deal with significant school events such as school traffic problems, on-campus school shooter scenarios (SRO's are first responders to school shooting incidents), on campus crime incidents and the wide variety of services that the SRO's provide to the schools (DARE Programs, Stranger/Danger Program, anti-gang programs, etc.) This proposal will be met with stiff opposition from parents, school district officials and teachers/staff from the schools. IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of any special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) 8 -129 ~Vt- "'9.- 'S!'" ~ CI1YOf CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT: City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 178 Fire LINE OF BUSINESS: Calls For Service PROPOSED REDUCTION: (Prepare a brief statement describing the proposed budget reduction) Reduction of Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Vehicle Staffing Levels/Closure of a Fire Station SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION: (See definitions below) C!J Core o Semi-Core o Non-Core JUSTIFICATION: (Provide a brief justification for the selected service area designation) The USAR 53 Unit is a 24 hour first responder resource that provides core emergency medical response services and conducts highly specialized rescue operations to the community. The Fire Department uses this unit as a front-line first responder for emergency medical calls. This unit responds to all incidents that have the greatest potential for rescuer and victim fatalities. Service Area Designations: Core Services: Services essential to the department's mission and fulfill basic expectation of the community. Most if not all other cities provide the service. Semi-Core Services Services provided by some jurisdictions or core services provided at higher levels than other jurisdictions or beyond basic expectations. Between the extremes of core and non-core. Non-Core Services Services that are nice to have but not essential to the departmentts mission. Also services not provided by most other jurisdictions. BUDGET IMPACT: TOTAL 6 3 9 o o o Firefighter (112 Hr) Fire Captain (112 Hr) Personnel Services $1,163,466 $0 ($1,163,466) Supplies & Services $56,277 $0 {$56,277} Other Expenses $0 $0 $0 Capital (non-CIP) $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $1,219,743 $0 ($1,219,743) 8 - 130 ~Ut- --.:---- -.,,;:_.~ - City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAl..: 178 CfITOF CHULA VISTA OTHER BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: (Provide any ather information relevant to the savings that will result from implementation of this proposal) Reducing the USAR Staffing by nine positions will result in a violation of the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Grant agreement. Under the terms of the grant agreement, the City must maintain the baseline staffing levels that were in existence prior to accepting the SAFER Grant Funds and must also maintain the grant funded positions filled. The SAFER Grant agreement is not tied specifically to the USAR staffing levels. Any reductions to baseline suppression personnel will void the terms of the agreement. This will further result in the City having to repay the $468k received from the SAFER Grant. The City wili not be eligible to receive federal grant funds until these funds are repaid. Future grant funding opportunities will also be jeopardized due to the City failing to meet the grant requirements. The Fire Department will layoff nine (9) fire fighting personnel (first responders) if this proposal is implemented. The implementation of this proposal is not recommended due to the severe impact to the public safety of the community. SERVICE IMPACTS: % of Emergency Calls Responded to within 7.0 85.2% 85% >80.0% min. (GMOC) Total number of calls first responder calls 0 0 754 shifted to other units Unit requests responded to with full USARS3 1,484 1,528 0 capabilities Rescue calls responded to with full USAR 53 146 150 0 capabilities Number of Fire Stations Closed 0 0 1 OTHER SERVICE IMPACTS: (Prepare a brief description of any service impacts not captured by the obove performance data) The USAR 53 Unit is a 24 hour first responder resource that provides core emergency medical response services and conducts highly specialized rescue operations to the community. The Fire Department uses this unit as a front-line first responder for emergency medical and fire response calls. This unit responds to 750 calls for service as the primary first responder to medical aids and rescue calls. This unit also responds to more than 1,500 emergency calls as an additional resource to assist other city engine companies. Reducing the staffing on the Urban Search and Rescue (USAR 53) vehicle would impact the citizens of the community and fire department operations as follows: Community Impacts: - Eliminating the USAR component of USAR 53 through staffing reductions will cause a fire station to be closed. There will be one less first responding unit available to serve the community. The station that will be closed has not been determined. The most likely candidates are stations 6,8 and 9. - The closing of the station will affect the GMOC fire response standard. The Fire Department will be performing with 2005 staffing levels where 76% of the priority 1 calls for service were responded to 8 -131 ~Jf?- ------ -. ~..... qT)'OF CHULA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 178 within the 7 minute standard. Response times will also increase, as second and third calls for service will take longer to respond to due to one less unit being available for coverage. Service to the community will also be degraded as the 750 yearly emergency calls that are responded to by this unit are shifted to other engine companies. _ There will be no specialized rescue vehicle to respond to emergency rescue calls for service. These are the types of calls that happen less often but have the greatest potential for rescuer and victim fatalities. Truck companies, that are not trained at the same level for rescue calls nor have the specialized tools of the USAR, will be responding to these calls instead. This will result in an increased risk to the community and fire personnel safety. _ Additional fire engine companies will be dispatched to second alarm assignments lessening the amount of coverage for the rest of City. This will result in increased risk to community safety. _ USAR 53 will have its service capability reduced by more than 80% if 75% of the staffing is reduced. The lighting and air supply functions of the USAR vehicle will be left in service if this staffing reduction is implemented. The community will not have the benefit of the rest of the specialized rescue tools that are carried on the USAR vehicle when rescue calls are responded to. Operational Impacts: _ The effective Fire Force will take longer to assemble on the fire ground. In addition, it will take longer for the incident commander to assess the situation and give unit assignments. The effective fire force is comprised of at least 17 personnel assembled at a scene in order to conduct fire suppression operations. Longer assembly times will result in a safety hazard for the public and suppression personnel. _ The Fire Department will have a reduced ability to train personnel in technical rescue functions necessary to address the more severe rescue incidents that have a high potential of victim and rescuer safety. The rescue functions where training will be reduced are as follows: high angle, low angle, heavy objects, shoring, breaching, trench, confined space, vehicle extrication and search capabilities (building collapse). The implementation of this proposal is not recommended due to the severe impact to the public safety of the community. 8 - 132 ~(f? --"---.- ~~ ~ .<;:ITYOF CHuLA VISTA City of Chula Vista Budget Reduction Proposal Form PROPOSAL: 178 IMPLEMENTATION: EARLIEST IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 07/01/2008 SPECIAL ISSUES: (Prepare a brief description of ony special circumstances related to implementing this proposal) Reducing the USAR Staffing by nine positions will result in a violation of the SAFER Grant agreement. This will further result in the City having to repay the $468k received from the SAFER Grant Program. The SAFER Grant agreement will be violated regardless of where fire suppression reductions are made. The City must maintain baseline staffing fire suppression levels that were in existence prior to accepting SAFER Grant funds and must also maintain the grant funded positions. The SAFER Grant funds are not tied specifically to USAR staffing levels. The City will not be eligible to receive federal grant funds until these funds are repaid if the terms of the SAFER Grant are violated. Future grant funding opportunities will also be jeopardized due to the City failing to meet the grant requirements. The Fire Department will layoff nine fire fighting (first responders) positions if this proposal is implemented. The implementation of this proposal is feasible but not recommended due to the severe impact to the public safety of the community that will result from closing a Fire Station if this proposal is implemented. 8 - 133 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ~f:. CITY OF (HULA VISTA APRIL 15, 2008, Item Cj SUBMITTED BY: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista authorizing the elimination of the scheduled fiscal year 2008-2009 cost of living salary increases for management and unclassified hourly employees and authorizing the City Manager to reinstate all or part of the pay raises dependent upon the availability of fundin~ City Manager ~ \ ITEM TITLE: 4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO Ii] SUMMARY Executive, Senior, and Middle managers are scheduled to receive a 4% salary increase in January 2009. Unclassified hourly employees are scheduled to receive a 4% salary increase in July 2008, which was delayed from January 2008, and a 4% salary increase in January 2009. Due to the financial constraints the City is experiencing it is recommended that these scheduled salary adjustments for all management and unclassified hourly employees be eliminated. RECOMMENDA nON That the City Council adopt the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable DISCUSSION The City is experiencing serious financial issues as a result of the downturn in the economy. Through the implementation of the budget reduction plan, $15.5 million of expenditure reductions were made to the fiscal year 2008-2009 budget. Despite these significant reductions, staff is currently projecting a General Fund 9-1 APRIL 15, 2008, Item q Page 2 of 2 budgetary gap of $8.8 million for fiscal year 2008-2009. As part of the solution to help close the budgetary gap, it is recommended that the salary increases scheduled for all management and unclassified hourly employees be eliminated. The budget reduction plan approved by Council in December 2007 included the elimination of the management salary increase scheduled for January 2008. The salary deferral agreement that was reached with the Chula Vista Employees Association delayed the January 2008 salary increase for unclassified hourly employees to July 2008. The elimination of all of the scheduled salary increases for both management and unclassified hourly employees will result in two consecutive years where these employees do not receive a cost of living salary adjustment. As part of the budget-balancing plan before Council, staff is recommending the implementation of an early retirement program and the extension of the hiring freeze. The savings from these two proposals are anticipated to save approximately $1.6 million in fiscal year 2008-2009. However, the actual savings from the early retirement program will not be known until the close of the program window. Staff is recommending that all or part of the salary increases be reinstated if the savings realized through the early retirement incentive program and hiring freeze are larger than anticipated or if revenues exceed projections. The resolution before Council applies only to management employees and unclassified hourly employees - the salary increases scheduled for July 2008 and January 2009 for the Chula Vista Employees Association, International Association of Fire Fighters, Chula Vista Police Officers Association, Western Council of Engineers, and the Confidential employee group will not be impacted by this action. DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site specific and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of Regulations section 18704.2(a)(1) is not applicable to this decision. FISCAL IMPACT The estimated savings from the elimination of the management salary increase are $406,000 and $99,000 from the elimination of the unclassified hourly employee salary increases scheduled for fiscal year 2008-2009. 9-2 RESOLUTION NO. 2008- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ELIMINATION OF THE SCHEDULED FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 COST OF LIVING SALARY INCREASES FOR MANAGEMENT AND UNCLASSIFIED HOURLY EMPLOYEES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO REINSTATE ALL OR PART OF THE PAY RAISES DEPENDENT UPON THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING WHEREAS, Executive, Senior, and Middle managers are scheduled to receive a 4 percent salary increase in January 2009; and WHEREAS, unclassified hourly employees are scheduled to receive a 4% salary increase in July 2008 and a 4 percent salary increase in January 2009; and WHEREAS, the City is experiencing serious financial Issues and staff is currently projecting a general fund budgetary gap of $8.8 million; and WHEREAS, the elimination of the scheduled fiscal year salary increases for all managers and unclassified hourly employees will help close the budgetary gap by saving approximately $505,000; and WHEREAS, the City is offering an early retirement incentive program and extending the hiring freeze, which are anticipated to generate approximately $1.6 million in savings in fiscal year 2008-2009; and WHEREAS, the City Manager will reevaluate the actual savings generated from the early retirement incentive program and hiring freeze mid year to determine whether additional savings are available to reinstate all or part of the management and hourly salary increase. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize the elimination of the scheduled fiscal year 2008-2009 cost of living salary increases for management and unclassified hourly employees. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby authorize the City Manager to reinstate all or part of the pay raises dependent upon the availability of funding. Presented by Approved as to form by David R. Garcia City Manager -~~~\:)\~,. Ann Moore City Attorney J:\Altomey\RESO\FINANCE\Elimination oreOLAs for mgml_04-IS.08.doc 9-3 ".... ITEM 10 THERE IS NO BACK-UP MATERIAL FOR THIS ITEM '~ 'c Resolution No. 2008- ,.. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO ADJUST THE FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 MAYOR'S BUDGET WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista FY07/08 Budget has required mid- year reductions to close budgetary gaps of $15.5 million and $10.6 million; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council have this opportunity to show leadership in budget constraint for FY08/09; and WHEREAS, the Mayor's Office FY08/09 Budget for Personnel and Services and Supplies is $605,116, or nearly equal to all four other Council Offices' FY08/09 Budgets combined; and WHEREAS, each Council Office entire FY08/09 Budget for Personnel and Services and Supplies is $169,804; and WHEREAS, the Mayor's Chief of Staff FY08/09 compensation, including $4,800 car allowance, is $178,182, and is greater than an entire FY08/09 Council Office Budget; and WHEREAS, the Mayor's Constituent Services Manager FY08/09 compensation is $$87,614; and I""" WHEREAS, the Mayor's Coastal Advisor FY08/09 compensation is $106,229 for part-time employment; and WHEREAS, the Mayor's FY08/09 Services and Supplies Budget is $32,648; and WHEREAS, the Mayor is a full-time elected official of the City of Chula Vista; and " WHEREAS, the City Councilmembers are part-time elected officials of the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council embraces the goal of fiscal equity for the policy and decision makers of our City, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby adjust the FY08/09 Budget of the Mayor's Office to two times the 08/09 Budget of a City Council Office. Presented by Approved as to form by - Steve Castaneda Chula Vista City Councilmember Ann Moore City Attorney 12,-1 B()ARI2-Q!'_l!lREi.'I0_~S Edward Plant, Chairman SAN Dllc(;() REFR1GERATION SERV1CES Lee Wilson. Vice Chairman NORHrRlIp GRlJ\lMAN ('()NT1NI;"r,\l, MARITIMI' Ray Ashley MARITlMI' MUSFlIM Mark Bailey CHESAr'FAKE-: FISH COMPANY Chris Barnes GE"FRAI DYNA\lIlS NASSCO Richard Bartell B.-\RTHI. IloTELS Capt. Rill Bartsch S.D. BAY PIUHS Susan Baumann BALI H.-\l RrsTAuRA'\1 Sampson A. Brown, Esq. K"I(;1II & CW\TR * R.A. Carpenter R.E. SnIT[: E,,(jINl:fRING Robert Cartwright SI1ERATON SAN DIE(;O HOTEL & MARI"A Randy Dick FIVI' STAR PARKING Tcd Eldredge Mi\'\(II[STERRESUKIS Urj Feldman SUNROAD ENTERPRISES Victor Fresca DIXII-:II,r: LUMFIER * Rick Ghio A'TIIONY'S FISH GROTTO Barrctt Jung DOLE FRISH FRl:IT Ted Kanatas MANCil ESTER GRAND HYATT RESORT Eric Leslie HARBOR ISLAND WFST MARI'-'A Dick Luthcr DLA PII'LR US LLP Mike McDowell ATI,AS KONA KAI Jack Monger The Monger Company Steve Pagano San Diego Marriott Hotel & Marina * George Palermo San Diego Ilarbor Excursions * H.P. "Sandy" Purdon SIIELTl'R COVE MARINA Todd Roberts MARINI', GROUP [30ATV,-'ORKS Ahmad Solomon SDG&E Gary Sullivan GOODRI(:II Jim Unger HORNIlI.owr:R CRI1ISICS & EVE"TS Bruce \Valton SE,\!'OI{T VIU,AGI', OPI'RATIN(j Co., LLC Perry Wright CONSIDINF&CO"SIDI"J::: Donn Yover BAE SVSTF,MS SA" DIE(jO Sl1lp REPAIR D1BliC:L(lI~ E\1J-:Rln_'s * Arthur E. Engel Tom Fetter Thomas A. Driscoll * Pete Litrenta Douglas Manchester Karen Me Elliott Sii\H S-il-artlll Bernic-Cloward PRESIDLNI Kristin Peterson DIRI,('T()R()FOPFRATIO"S * SDPTA Past Chairmen IIIII ~~~ SAN DIEGO PORT TENANTS ASSOCIATION April 14, 2008 Mayor Cheryl Cox and City of Chula Vista Council members City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mayor Cox and Councilmembers: I am contacting you on behalf of a broad coalition of businesses and organizations including members of the San Diego Port Tenants Association and the Working Waterfront Group, to announce our opposition to the Land Grab being proposed by developers and out of town investors. These developers are circulating an Initiative for the November ballot that requires the Redevelopment of the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal. We believe this Initiative is bad for the region because: . It will replace maritime operations at the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal with hotels, office towers and retail development . it will allow commercial development along the entire length of the Terminal that faces San Diego Bay . it will eliminate thousands of good-paying, waterfront jobs . it will threaten the future of the waterfront businesses and ship repair businesses with gentrification. Further more, there alreadv is a Plan for Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal. In 2004, after much public discussion and debate that included a day-long public workshop, Port Commissioners adopted a policy dedicating the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal exclusively to maritime operations. Since then, the Port has worked painstakingly to develop a Maritime Business Plan for Tenth Avenue. That plan is currently undergoing public outreach with stake holders that include Port Tenants, Working Waterfront businesses, labor, and the 2390 SHELTER IS1,AND DRIVE, SUlTE 210 . SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92106 . (619) 226-6546 . FAX (619) 226-6557 . EMAIL: sharon@sdpta.com, kristin@sdpta.co www.sdpta.com Mayor Cox and City of Chula Vista Council members April 14, 2008 Page 2 Environmental Health Coalition and will result in a long-term Maritime Plan for Tenth Avenue. The Maritime business plan, already in the work, will preserve San Diego's maritime terminal and thousands of waterfront jobs, prevent gentrification, and protect air quality. This developer initiative proposes to scrap those planning efforts. We are calling this initiative a "land grab" because it mandates private development of the Tenth Ave. Terminal in the form of hotels, and other commercial development, most of which is not compatible with waterfront cargo operations. I In summary: . This initiative is bad for the region and upsets the economic diversity of our regional economy by replacing maritime businesses with more hotels and retail businesses . This Initiative is nothing more than a land grab by developers and out-of- town investors . We already have a process for developing a plan for Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal. We vigorously oppose this Land Grab, and we ask that the City of Chula Vista Mayor and City Council do two things: . Consider a resolution to support the Port District's policy, established in 2004, dedicating the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal exclusively to Maritime cargo operations . Consider a resolution opposing the SDCS Initiative Thank you for your concern and for your support of maritime jobs in the San Diego region. Sincerely, Chairman, San Diego Port Tenants Association . Charitable events at city parks face backlash I The San Diego Union-Tribune Page 1 of4 Slgn21J,~~.com (!@ PRINTTHIS Charitable events at city parks face backlash Noise, traffic, overcrowding are taking toll on neighbors By Eleanor Yang Su STAFF WRITER April 12, 2008 It was 7:30 a.m. last Saturday, and people were pouring into Balboa Park to be part of the Walk for Recovery. Ricky Martin's "She Bangs" blasted from a set of speakers. The air smelled of kettle com and gourmet coffee. As with dozens of weekends each year, hordes of walkers and runners descended upon the park that day, sneaker- clad and ready to sweat to raise money for a good cause. But an explosion in the number and size of these charitable events across the country is prompting an unlikely backlash. Cities, struggling to accommodate demand for their park spRce, are raising fees to recoup costs associated with the events. Neighbors, meanwhile, are growing increasingly agitated by early-morning noise, traffic headaches, overcrowded parks and trampled grass. Across the country, the number of nonprofits has ballooned, and many have seized upon walks and races as an ideal fundraiser melding fitness with community. Runners and walkers raised an estimated $714 million in 2006,37 percent more than five years earlier, according to USA Track & Field, the sport's governing body. Next weekend, five walks and races in San Diego County will benefit causes as varied as epilepsy, prematurely born babies and the fight against human trafficking. Officials from Boston to New York City have responded to the huge demand by setting stricter event guidelines, raising fees and urging organizers to use less-crowded suburban parks. 'Jl ;0.;. ":1.JbiJ)' ", . .. .. ,)r.~~~.\)H,"i"', NANCEE E. LEWIS I Union-Tribune About 1,500 people participated in the Walk for Recovery last weekend in Balboa Park, one of a growing number of charitable events in San Diego. NANCEE E. LEWIS / Union-Tribune The growing number of charitable events, such as The Walk for Recovery, has sparked some complaints about noise and traffic congestion from residents living near Balboa Park. The San Diego Unified Port District significantly increased permit fees in January to capture the full cost of special events in its 16 parks. http://signonsandiego.printthis.clickability .comlpt/ cpt?action=cpt&title=Charitable+events... 4/14/2008 Charitable events at city parks face backlash I The San Diego Union-Tribune Page 2 of 4 In the city of San Diego, officials issued a moratorium several years ago on new events in Balboa Park between Memorial Day and Labor Day. But that has only pushed organizers to stack their events in the weeks before and after. From the start of April through the end of September, the number of participants in walks, runs and biking events in Balboa Park has jumped 21 percent in the past three years, according to city records. The number of events has risen from 12 to 17. Some wonder whether the cash-strapped city is missing an opportunity to recover event -related expenses through permit fees, which haven't been raised since 2005. "In the last three to four years, the special events in Balboa Park have gotten out of control," said Vicki Granowitz, chairwoman of the Balboa Park Committee, an advisory panel that considers land-use and planning issues. "There absolutely is not full cost recovery on special events. We basically subsidize them." Different amounts For many of the 1,500 participants in the Walk for Recovery last weekend, it was more than a stroll through the park. Virtnally all the walkers were personally touched by mental illness, alcohol abuse or drug abuse. Chase Jenkins, a former gang member and drug abuser, marveled that morning about how "weird" it was to be sober and walking through the park. "This is cool," said Jenkins, 20. "Typically, I'd be locked up in a jail cell." The walk was small compared with the mega-events that draw tens of thousands of people to Balboa Park. And yet for the organizer, Mental Health Services, it is the main fundraiser of the year. Planners estimate that they raised about $80,000, which will be split with about 50 local nonprofits. Mental Health Services paid $950 in permit fees for the event, considerably less than the $3,450 it would have paid the Port District for a comparable event. The city's fees are lower than those charged for a similar event in Los Angeles, but slightly higher than those in San Francisco and Sacramento. San Diego's fees vary depending on the number of participants, the event's admission charge and whether the organizer is a nonprofit. The San Diego Union-Tribune paid $1,775 in park permit fees for its Race for Literacy weekend in Balboa Park and Pantoja Park downtown. The fees for the May 3-4 races are less than what companies are typically charged because all proceeds benefit the San Diego Council on Literacy. Cities charge vastly different amounts for special events. In New York City, officials use park fees to make money. Charities hosting large walks in Central Park pay about $40,000 a day in fees, while smaller walks, for about 5,000 people, cost about $10,000 a day in fees. In Boston, officials pass direct costs, such as the time for park rangers to attend the events, onto the organizers. http://signonsandiego.printthis.clickabi1ity .comlptlcpt?action=cpt&tit1e=Charitab1e+events... 4/14/2008 Charitable events at city parks face backlash I The San Diego Union-Tribune Page 3 of4 The San Diego Unified Port District analyzed its fees last year and concluded they covered only 18 percent of event costs. Increases put into effect Jan. I factor in long-term costs, such as additional fertilizing and landscaping needed after large events, and part of the salaries of special-event staff. "We offer the parks as an amenity for the whole region to use, but if you want exclusive use, the philosophy of our board is you have to pay that incremental amount," said Jim Hutzelman, assistant director of community services for the Port District. The port received about $150,000 in special-event permit fees last year and hopes to generate an additional $650,000 this year with the fee increases. San Diego officials were unable to provide figures for how much the city draws in permit fees. It's also unclear how much of the city's costs are covered by permit fees, but officials acknowledge there is a gap. "The philosophy behind the special-event fees is to balance costs related to events with the public benefit," said Stacey LoMedico, director of the city's Park and Recreation Department. "You want to support the cause of the nonprofits." The city's last fee analysis was conducted in 2004, but park officials were unable to provide a copy. They note that organizers are responsible for cleaning up after events and are charged for damage to the grass or grounds. Sleeping in the closet When Alexandra Kogan moved into an apartment across from Balboa Park a year ago, she expected it to be lively. But the early-morning noise, closed streets and nonexistent parking because of special events have helped persuade her to move. "The most annoying is the marathon because it shuts down everything," Kogan said, referring to the Rock 'n' Roll race that starts in the park. "I run, too, but I don't need to run on the 163." Some neighbors tell horror stories about getting cars towed because of unclear street closure signs and being woken up at 4 a.m. by sound checks. In the Park View apartment complex across the street from where many races start, one resident has moved his twin bed into his closet to shut out the noise. Another sleeps with earplugs every weekend. Pat Newbacher leaves her apartment for entire weekends about once a month to avoid major events. She recalled only about three to four large events a year when she moved to the neighborhood 10 years ago. "It's gotten excessive," Newbacher said. "The events are making it chaotic. They should spread it out, maybe to Mission Trails and Mission Bay." Despite their complaints, many neighbors say they are grateful for the wide variety of interesting events held daily in the park. Alyssa Wolven, a community organizer who has lived near the park for years, said the large events and the police presence they draw also benefit the community by limiting public intoxication. http://signonsandiego.printthis.clickability .comlptlcpt?action=cpt&title=Charitable+events... 4/14/2008 . Charitable events at city parks face backlash I The San Diego Union-Tribune Page 4 of 4 City officials say the neighborhood input is important, but they feel they are doing a good job providing the right amount, and mix, of programs. "It's a balancing act," said Kathleen Hasenauer, deputy director of the park department. "The special events add to the cultural fabric of the park." .Eleanor Yang Su: (619) 542-4564; eleanor.su@!!niontrib.com >>Next Story>> Find this article at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/200B0412/news_1n12walks.html r Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article. 10 Copyright 2007 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. " A Copley Newspaper Site http://signonsandiego.printthis.clickability .comlpt/ cpt?action=cpt&title=Charitable+events... 4/14/2008 . /'1::'/11 3' .r. MEMORANDUM April 15, 2008 From: Budget Subcommittee (Cox/Rindone:x\~ To: City Council ~ ' Subject: Report to City Council on Proposed Budget in the Department of Mayor/Council for Fiscal Year 2008/09 In the continuing effort to reduce the City's budget, the Council Budget Subcommittee has prepared the attached Department of Mayor and Council proposed budget for City Council consideration. Although City Manager Garcia has indicated that no further budget cuts are necessary, the proposed reductions will allow the City Manager greater fiscal flexibility. The Council Budget Subcommittee recommends that: the 10% reduction made in FY 07/08 be maintained in FY 08/09; reduced spending in the Office of Mayor more greatly reflect actual spending from FY 07/08; pay raises received by Mayor and Council in accordance with the City Charter be balanced by reductions in the Mayor/Council car allowances, until such time as the pay raise for managers is reinstated. The budget is divided into six "Blocked Budget" divisions: Administration, Mayor, and Council Seats 1-4. These divisions are divided into two categories, specifically Personnel and Supplies and Services. Council Budget Subcommittee Recommended Budget Reductions by blocked budget category: DEPARTMENT Proposed Percent Dollar Amount* ADMINISTRATION Reduction Personnel 0 Supplies and Services $24,922 Sub-total 10% $24,922 MAYOR'S OFFICE Personnel $110,429 Supplies and Services $9,338 Sub-total 20% $119,767 COUNCILMEMBER OFFICE Personnel $12,063 Supplies and Services $4,919 Sub-total 10% $16,982 Council X 4 $67,928 Department Reduction 14% $212,617 -Totals may not add due to rounding April 15, 2008 ------ Administration: Other Professional Services, Promotional Expenses, Printing and Binding, Office Supplies, and Travel are recommended to be reduced to reflect actual costs from FY 07/08. The budget amount set for FY 07/08 was based on the experience of fiscal year 2006/07. Based on actual experience during fiscal year 07/08, a new baseline is recommended. The proposed reductions amount to $24,922. The Council Budget Subcommittee discussed realigning the budget for the Constituent Services Manager that currently falls under the Office of the Mayor. Since the duties of that position are conducted on behalf of the department as a whole, future consideration can be given to draw the position's budget from the Department's Administration blocked budget. This budget proposal does not contain this change. Mayor: A 35% reduction in the Mayor's car allowance offsets the pay increase by $4,600 in FY08/09. Freezing the Coastal and Environmental Advisor position results in a reduction of $110,429. Supplies and Services are proposed to be reduced by $9,338, for a total reduction of $119,767 representing 20% reduction from FY 07/08. All or a portion of the Car Allowance reduction may be restored if the 4% managers' raise is restored. Councilmember: The proposed Council Office reduction for FY 08/09 is recommended to be 10%, the same 10% as FY 07/08: $16,982 ($2,310 from the car allowance plus $14,672), to be allocated at each Counci1member's discretion, as described below. All or a portion of the Car Allowance reduction may be restored ifthe 4% managers' raise is restored. Each Councilmember shall submit a memo to the City Manager by June 20, 2008, identifying the line items from his budget from which $14,672 will be taken. Ifthis memo is not received by June 20, 2008, the City Manager shall make adjustments as indicated in the attached proposed Council Budget Subcommittee's proposed Mayor & City Council Department Budget for FY 08/09. If approved, budget reductions will be applied to designated line items, as presented in the attached budget. The City Manager shall have the authority to implement these recommendations if needed. Allocations for the Mayor, Administration, or Council blocked budgets may be redistributed within Supplies and Services at anytime as long as the total budget reduction among each Office's blocked budgets is maintained and budget rules are observed. April 15, 2008 ~ MAYOR & COUNCIL DEPARTMENT: COUNCIL BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE PROPOSAL FY 08-09 % $$$ Reduction Dept Budget with Reduction ReductiQl'lS ADMINISTRATION . .. Executive Secretarv $ - $ 100,659 Receotionist $ - $ 64.473 Overtime $ - $ - Sick-in-lieu $ - $ 547 Hourlv, PARS, and Medicare $ - $ 6,211 MOU Deferral pavment $ - $ 1,828 Worke(s Como $ 5289 Sub-total $ 179,007 siiilDnes and Services Other Professional Services 10% $ 2,000 $ 18 000 Promotional Expenses 55% $ 17,064 $ 13,962 Printina & Blndina 50% $ 3,622 $ 3622 Postaae $ - $ 264 Office suoolies 15% $ 939 $ 5,320 phone Service $ - $ 1444 Travel 25% $ 1,297 $ 3,890 Sub-Total $ 46,521 ADMINISTRATION TOTAL 10% $ 24,922 $ 225,528 MAYOR'S OFFICE Mavor $ 177 865 Mavor Car Allowance 35% $ 4,200 $ . 7800 Chief of Staff $ --c- 173,362 Chief of Staff Car Allowance $ - $ 4,800 Constituent Services Manaaer' $ 87,614 Coastal Advisor 100% $ 106,229 $ - Sick-in-Iieu $ - Worke(s Como $ 1.0 578 Sub-total $ 110,429 $ 462 03ll sUoiifies and Services Cellular Phone 100% $ 500 $ - Printina & Bindina 25% $ 934 $ 2,801 Postane 20% $ 171 $ 685 Other Commodities 45% $ 5,400 $ 6800 Travel 15% $ 2,334 $ 13,224 Sub-Total $ 9,338 $ 23,310 MAYOR TOTAL 20% $ 119,767 $ 485,349 COUNCILMEMBER OFFICE Councilmember $ 60,385 Councilmember Car Allowance 35% $ 2,310 $ 4290 Council Aide 16% $ 9,753 $ 51,202 Worke(s Como $ 5,290 Sub-Total $ 12,063 $ 141,167 sUoiifies and Services Cellular phone Service 100% $ 500 $ - Printina& Bindina 25% $ 467 $ 1,400 postane 20% $ 86 $ 342 Other Commodities 45% $ 2,700 $ 3,300 Travel 15% $ 1,167 $ 6,612 Sub-Total $ 4,919 $ 11,655 COUNCIL SUBTOTAL 10.0% $ 16,982 $ 152,822 COUNCIL SUBTOTAL X 4 10.0% $ 67,928 $ 611,288 DEPARTMENT BUDGET 14% $ 212,617 $ 1,322,165 The proposed Administration, Mayor and Council budget reductions will take effect on July 1, 2008. Each Councilmember shall submit a memo to the City Manager by June 20, 2008 identifying the line items from which $14,672 will be taken ($2,310 will be taken from the Car Allowance. The total budget reduction per Council seat blocked budget is $16,982). If this memo is not received by June 20, 2008, the City Manager shall make adjustments necessary within each Council blocked budget to reach this total. The Car Allowance reduction mav be restored if the 4% manaaers' raise is restored.